Progress Thread Nasty Ninety Notch
- Thread starter joetrainer31
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
Have you noticed my build being eerily quiet lately? Hahaha I can't even finance an explorer top end.
That stinks! I'm blessed to work at a shop. That alone helps a great deal. Although, things take longer because I'm not a "real customer." I take a back seat, and understandably so, to the daily flow of business.
I've got some parts I'm willing to let go for cheap. I've got a lower GT40 $45, 24lbs injectors $50, T5 bell housing, LX tail pipes, lowering springs, etc. Let me know.
UPDATE: I've Got a Spare Tire
Yes, I'm in my 40s and have a bit of a spare tire, but I'm not talking about that one. I'm talking about the one in the Not as Nasty Notch.
It may seem silly to some, but I go for restoration with tasteful mods when I rebuild a car. My opinion is that there are some things I must have factory. The spare tire assy is one of those things. I scored the whole assy (e.g., wheel, tire, jack, J-hook, wrench, and wing nut), shipped for $100.
Yes, I'm in my 40s and have a bit of a spare tire, but I'm not talking about that one. I'm talking about the one in the Not as Nasty Notch.
It may seem silly to some, but I go for restoration with tasteful mods when I rebuild a car. My opinion is that there are some things I must have factory. The spare tire assy is one of those things. I scored the whole assy (e.g., wheel, tire, jack, J-hook, wrench, and wing nut), shipped for $100.
Update: The Nasty Notch Strikes Back
Continuing the trend of refusing to be finished the Nasty Ninety Notch punched us in the face.
After much research I had purchased a UPR K Member with Chrome Moly A-arms and coil overs (12-250 springs). I went with this combo because UPR makes a good product and QA1 is known for pushing the front tires fwd. I didn't want to deal with that whole issue (QA1).
However, we found out post installation, according to UPR rep Steve G, 2 out of 10,000 of their K Member/ A arm set ups do the same exact thing. Guess which car was one of the 2 out of 10,000. Yep, the Nasty Ninety.
Behold the foolishness:
Space @ rear of frt tire...
space @ frt of frt tire... not turning friendly!
Again...
Once more...
Yes, UPR, it rubs!
Yes, it can happen even with a UPR K Member...
Yes, the arms & member are installed correctly
Yes, this is only here cause it looks cool
Tires clear coilovers no problem.
Steps have been taken to correct the issue. Pics coming. UPR did switch out the A arms at no charge, but they did assess us shipping fees. I'm neutral about UPR right now; not as excited as before becoming one of two in 10,000.
Continuing the trend of refusing to be finished the Nasty Ninety Notch punched us in the face.
After much research I had purchased a UPR K Member with Chrome Moly A-arms and coil overs (12-250 springs). I went with this combo because UPR makes a good product and QA1 is known for pushing the front tires fwd. I didn't want to deal with that whole issue (QA1).
However, we found out post installation, according to UPR rep Steve G, 2 out of 10,000 of their K Member/ A arm set ups do the same exact thing. Guess which car was one of the 2 out of 10,000. Yep, the Nasty Ninety.
Behold the foolishness:
Space @ rear of frt tire...
space @ frt of frt tire... not turning friendly!
Again...
Once more...
Yes, UPR, it rubs!
Yes, it can happen even with a UPR K Member...
Yes, the arms & member are installed correctly
Yes, this is only here cause it looks cool
Tires clear coilovers no problem.
Steps have been taken to correct the issue. Pics coming. UPR did switch out the A arms at no charge, but they did assess us shipping fees. I'm neutral about UPR right now; not as excited as before becoming one of two in 10,000.
Update: A Arms Fixed
UPR sent us a pair of offset A arms that they normally use with QA1 K members. These did do the trick in moving the tire back to a stock position.
There are a few things we observed when fixing the issue:
1) Do not rely on UPR's instructs for installation. Even though they do not indicate ANYWHERE on the page, they are not for use with the UPR K member. They are only for the QA1 K member. If followed they will bend a mounting arm on the K member.
2) UPR's tech will go ahead and advise you to follow the instructions via phone consult even though they are wrong. Do not listen to them. Do not use the washer/spacer at the front of the A arm.
3) UPR was unaware of #1. How???
4) UPR is now aware of #1.
Off set A arm fix. Rear looking fwd.
Springs changed to 14-200 units while we were in there
Wheel centered again
On to the next adventure...
UPR sent us a pair of offset A arms that they normally use with QA1 K members. These did do the trick in moving the tire back to a stock position.
There are a few things we observed when fixing the issue:
1) Do not rely on UPR's instructs for installation. Even though they do not indicate ANYWHERE on the page, they are not for use with the UPR K member. They are only for the QA1 K member. If followed they will bend a mounting arm on the K member.
2) UPR's tech will go ahead and advise you to follow the instructions via phone consult even though they are wrong. Do not listen to them. Do not use the washer/spacer at the front of the A arm.
3) UPR was unaware of #1. How???
4) UPR is now aware of #1.
Off set A arm fix. Rear looking fwd.
Springs changed to 14-200 units while we were in there
Wheel centered again
On to the next adventure...
Hmm. That's odd. I've dealt with UPR for 5 years now and have never had anything less than stellar service.
But everyone will have different experiences I guess
But everyone will have different experiences I guess
Start here, skim the pics to the end to get the gist
Build Thread - The Hoopty V2.0 | Page 35 | Mustang Forums at StangNet
Build Thread - The Hoopty V2.0 | Page 35 | Mustang Forums at StangNet
- Dec 19, 2010
- 5,719
- 4,238
- 224
I'm late to the party here, @joetrainer31 . I understand not wanting tires to rub, but that aside, why the dislike for the forward shifted wheel centers? It's my understanding this is a very desirable suspension mod, (see: maximum motorsports k member) that actually improves handling on a fox. Heck, when I switch to a tubular k, it's going to be the MM unit just so I CAN improve handling. Wouldn't a minor fender modification have saved time and netted superior drivability? And at a much lower cost than a MM k member at that? Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious here, but I can't help but wonder..
the problem here is that unless you cut/bend the fenders, the tire will rub (and usually more than just rub) the fenders. especially with a wider wheel, or anything that pushes the wheel out (sn95 spindles, lower backspace wheels, spacers to clear brakes or c/o's, etc).
- Dec 19, 2010
- 5,719
- 4,238
- 224
I wanted the tire moved back to its stock position because it was doing more than rubbing. It was folding the fenders in when trying to turn. I didn't want to cut the fenders. My idea is that the parts need to fit as advertised.
Clearly, its a preference issue because the fenders CAN be cut. It just wasn't the option I chose.
One other thought about offset A arms: they move the A arm away from the frt sway bar. This makes it more difficult to re-attach the sway bar. We made use of a screw jack and pry bar. That may not be an option at home.
