TCCoA Forums banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
1995 40th Anniversary Edition 4.6L
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So, I'm up to my eyeballs into this Coyote swap and what was supposed to be easy part becomes a stopper.
Engine mounts/plates from 4.6 do not bolt up to Coyote. Pattern on plates the same but the TBird plates have bumps and turns and will not mount flat on Coyote block. Halfway into making new engine mounts, the Coyote will not go into TBird K-member. Rear sump of oil pan is too far forward, and I replaced oil pan with a Moroso pan that's more friendly as sump is back farther. Still need to come forward 1-2" to get engine in same spot as 4.6.
I see other MN12's with a Coyote swap but they all used an aftermarket tubular K-member. I know there are none made now but before I go and start cutting the stock K-member, I am wondering if there are any out there that might be available? Complete?
Most I see are AJE, but just wondering if there were any others, and only be used ones?
Everything else, and there's a lot, is shaping up nicely, really enjoying this project but this hit is kind of hard.
Any thoughts would be appreciatted..... Andy
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,383 Posts
I’m pretty sure AJE was the only tubular K-member ever made for our cars. My advice would be to start cutting up the stock one. That area where the oil pan hits can be cut out and boxed in, and should give you enough clearance without losing any strength.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Haynmerc and Zep5.0

·
Registered
1995 40th Anniversary Edition 4.6L
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I’m pretty sure AJE was the only tubular K-member ever made for our cars. My advice would be to start cutting up the stock one. That area where the oil pan hits can be cut out and boxed in, and should give you enough clearance without losing any strength.
I think you're right and you just confirmed my thoughts...... will start cutting and boxing LOL.
Thanks
 

·
SuperNewbie
1995 Thunderbird LX 4.6 red
Joined
·
3,787 Posts
I think you're right and you just confirmed my thoughts...... will start cutting and boxing LOL.
Thanks
Hey, look on the bright side. After all your hard work you can write up a Coyote swap tech article!
 

·
Registered
1995 40th Anniversary Edition 4.6L
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
For an update, and since all other TBird swaps were with older TBirds and aftermarket K-members, I've accepted the fact I'm pretty much on my own LOL. Which is not a bad thing and makes me different.
I cut a dog house shape out of stock K-member and got engine forward enough. I still need to get engine down 1" more to be where the stock 4.6 was. I will cut a notch and box the top of K-member and lower the steering rack with off-set bushings. I'm not sure if there will be an adverse effect in lowering the rack.
On other issues I was able to make brackets and mount the Supercharger coolant tank (behind/lower of left headlight) and heat exchanger, as well as the trans cooler (behind/lower of right headlight). Also moved the Airbag sensors a little. Needed to make all brackets, use rivnuts etc. since nothing is available. Now will take all out, treat and paint all brackets and then reinstall finally.
After all this it will be nice to see if engine fits LOL.
BTW, you can laugh but not too hard at my welds...they penetrated well and are strong.....













 

·
Registered
1991 Mercury Cougar LS 5.0 in restoration
Joined
·
1,659 Posts
There is an easier way. Just shim the K down with 1" thick aluminum plates. There is a small effect on geometry, but ride height is not affected.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,948 Posts
Relocating the rack is going to change the steering geometry, and it could have issues like bump steering itself. :) . Check it thru its full range of motion with the front socks off so you can move the spindles around. if it binds up anywhere in its range of motion, you'll have to fix that before you drive it. You wont know about issues until you drive it, but I'd expect the handling to be different.
 

·
Administrator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
·
21,713 Posts
Yeah if you lower the rack you should ideally lower the outer tie rods by the same amount, the tie rods should be parallel to the LCAs through the range of motion. The aftermarket sells them as bumpsteer kits for Mustangs

Something I’ve been thinking of with the Coyote swap is lengthening the front of a mark VIII oil pan, the only real difference between pan mounting between modulars and Coyotes as far as I can tell is the longer timing cover, though I’m unsure about the oil pickup/pump interchange.
 

·
Registered
1995 40th Anniversary Edition 4.6L
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Relocating the rack is going to change the steering geometry, and it could have issues like bump steering itself. :) . Check it thru its full range of motion with the front socks off so you can move the spindles around. if it binds up anywhere in its range of motion, you'll have to fix that before you drive it. You wont know about issues until you drive it, but I'd expect the handling to be different.
I am definitely worried about lowering rack for reasons you and Matt stated, prolly cause I'm not sure what bump steer really is, or if I'll know it when it happens.
Also not sure how to lower tie rod ends, but think I have to commit to lowering the rack.
 

·
SuperNewbie
1995 Thunderbird LX 4.6 red
Joined
·
3,787 Posts
I am definitely worried about lowering rack for reasons you and Matt stated, prolly cause I'm not sure what bump steer really is, or if I'll know it when it happens.
Also not sure how to lower tie rod ends, but think I have to commit to lowering the rack.
I just installed rack offset bushings on a Supercoupe just a couple months ago. Chris_Murder got them to get the steering shaft to clear the headers we installed without banging up the headers. The car aligned nicely afterwards and drives very well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Haynmerc

·
Administrator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
·
21,713 Posts
Bumpsteer is when you hit a bump the car darts. Control arms effectively lengthen and shorten through their travel, moving the wheel/tire inboard and outboard a little bit as the suspension travels. The LCA and tie rods ideally should be roughly the same length and roughly parallel to each other to maintain spindle placement through travel, otherwise they’re lengthening and shortening at different rates, which in effect will “steer” the spindle

The aftermarket sells bumpsteer kits to cure and/or refine this condition, it’s more common on Fox/SN95 Mustangs since their suspension geometry is kind of a mess after you lower them, as you can see they space down the tie rod end from the spindle to make it parallel with the LCA

 

·
Registered
1991 Mercury Cougar LS 5.0 in restoration
Joined
·
1,659 Posts
Wouldn't lowering the K member an inch move the control arms and rack in a similar manner, making this a mute point? Or is there a reason that wouldn't be done?

And then to compensate raise the engine mounts up an inch.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,383 Posts
Wouldn't lowering the K member an inch move the control arms and rack in a similar manner, making this a mute point? Or is there a reason that wouldn't be done?

And then to compensate raise the engine mounts up an inch.
Yes, this would be a much preferable method compared to lowering just the rack. Doing this does slightly alter the suspension geometry as you changed the distance between the upper and lower control arm mounts, but this is far less detrimental to handling than moving just the rack, and if it really bothered you, you could drill new holes lower down to lower the UCA inner mounting points by the same amount as you shimmed the K-member, which would bring all the suspension geometry back to factory.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,948 Posts
Wouldn't lowering the K member an inch move the control arms and rack in a similar manner, making this a mute point? Or is there a reason that wouldn't be done?
No, enerything is mounted to the K member;it just makes the body an inch higher.
 

·
Registered
1991 Mercury Cougar LS 5.0 in restoration
Joined
·
1,659 Posts
No, enerything is mounted to the K member;it just makes the body an inch higher.
The body would be an inch higher than the k member, but the height of the car is the LCA plus the shock/spring height which wouldn't change. I'm thinking this would be the preferred method.
 

·
Registered
1995 40th Anniversary Edition 4.6L
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Bumpsteer is when you hit a bump the car darts. Control arms effectively lengthen and shorten through their travel, moving the wheel/tire inboard and outboard a little bit as the suspension travels. The LCA and tie rods ideally should be roughly the same length and roughly parallel to each other to maintain spindle placement through travel, otherwise they’re lengthening and shortening at different rates, which in effect will “steer” the spindle

The aftermarket sells bumpsteer kits to cure and/or refine this condition, it’s more common on Fox/SN95 Mustangs since their suspension geometry is kind of a mess after you lower them, as you can see they space down the tie rod end from the spindle to make it parallel with the LCA

View attachment 50070
Thank you for explaining this and with the picture I can understand how to address it.
Is that Hime joint in a kit or do I piece meal it all together if needed?
 

·
Registered
1995 40th Anniversary Edition 4.6L
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
I don't see any adverse effects with K-member shims on my FN-10s either.

The K-member box cut doesn't look much different than these...

View attachment 50075

View attachment 50076
This looks exactly like where I'm going. Maybe I should notch/box the K-member and use shims on K-member. If it's actually a body lift will fender gap change?
Do appreciate all the input here.
 

·
Registered
1991 Mercury Cougar LS 5.0 in restoration
Joined
·
1,659 Posts
This looks exactly like where I'm going. Maybe I should notch/box the K-member and use shims on K-member. If it's actually a body lift will fender gap change?
Do appreciate all the input here.
Ride height will not change as the distance from the LCA to the shock mount is still the same. The K will be lower than the body, but if you think about the spindle, and how the LCA is fixed to the bottom of it, you'll see that ride height isn't changed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Haynmerc
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top