Is there somewhere to buy these braces?

wicked93gs

15 Year Member
Sep 30, 2006
1,198
235
93
Nashville TN
87594943_2620184681440886_2604731965185720320_n.jpg


I don't have a foxbody...I have a 66 coupe...but I want to adapt the foxbody coupe rear seat divider braces pictured here to the 66. Is there anywhere to buy these aftermarket? Or am I going to have a grand old time hunting down a coupe to chop up? For that matter...I could care less what car this type of brace actually comes from I guess, I just figured there is a possibility of an easy aftermarket source with a foxbody.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
  • Sponsors (?)


I have to ask why are you replacing those braces? Is this because you are putting fox rear seats in it?

Because the early mustangs don't come with this bracing....and while you can buy panels like this:

100_1199-jpg.jpg


People who do so have reported a SIGNIFICANT increase in torsional rigidity....however, I think with bracing the results would be better...maybe it would give better rigidity than a floppy piece of 18 gauge steel, maybe not, but it would certainly take away the snare drum effect of a large piece of flat metal covering a large opening. I already have a panel like this....but I think it will be more effective in conjunction with foxbody-style bracing...after all, Ford obviously felt it had an effect worth the extra expense in 1979.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
^^^^^ now that could be done!!! Get a hood from the junk er, sorry, salvage yard and cut the under hood braces out and fit them to the area in question.
BUT!!!!! Since you already have that big sheet that covers the hole up, that piece is actually for safety, in the case of a hard rear end collision the fuel tank, that is the trunk floor, can/will rupture and become a fireball inside the car, if you 'dimple' that big sheet of metal in an X in the center that takes the flex out of it and it will not make that drum sound.
Another alternative, they make a piece that covers the top of the tank that isolates the tank from the inside of the trunk, I think it is/was called tank armour, you could possibly cut that piece you have down to cover the tank. Just put some stick on heat shield on the bottom and it should be good.
Just some ideas, either way I would isolate the cabin/trunk area from the fuel tank.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
In a couple months I’ll be cutting mine out of my ‘83 to weld in a tubular bracing.

How much of it are you wanting? I’ll need to keep the package tray upper in my car for seat attachment.

I could be neat and cut it out as one chunk.

You deal with shipping and you can have it. Tennessee isn’t too far from here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
^^^^^ now that could be done!!! Get a hood from the junk er, sorry, salvage yard and cut the under hood braces out and fit them to the area in question.
BUT!!!!! Since you already have that big sheet that covers the hole up, that piece is actually for safety, in the case of a hard rear end collision the fuel tank, that is the trunk floor, can/will rupture and become a fireball inside the car, if you 'dimple' that big sheet of metal in an X in the center that takes the flex out of it and it will not make that drum sound.
Another alternative, they make a piece that covers the top of the tank that isolates the tank from the inside of the trunk, I think it is/was called tank armour, you could possibly cut that piece you have down to cover the tank. Just put some stick on heat shield on the bottom and it should be good.
Just some ideas, either way I would isolate the cabin/trunk area from the fuel tank.


No...it is NOT for safety...tank armor is for safety preventing fuel slosh...a rear seat divider does nothing...fuel would just go through the package tray(easier than the rear seat to begin with). It may be that someone intended the use to be safety...but I am not afraid of fuel going anywhere in the event of a rear end collision...it may have happened once or twice...but its not a common issue....not like say....Fieros with the 2.5L iron duke catching on fire because they sling a rod through the block above the exhaust manifold and oil spilling onto the hot manifold and catching on fire, that is a known and common issue....I doubt anyone can point to a single instance of a rear end collision resulting in fuel all over the cabin in a vintage mustang....at least not with a car with a full interior.

This is strictly for chassis strengthening purposes....its been proven that adding a rear seat divider to a vintage coupe is one of the single most effective mods to increase torsional resistance(more so than subframe connectors and torque boxes, both of which I have already installed)

In a couple months I’ll be cutting mine out of my ‘83 to weld in a tubular bracing.

How much of it are you wanting? I’ll need to keep the package tray upper in my car for seat attachment.

I could be neat and cut it out as one chunk.

You deal with shipping and you can have it. Tennessee isn’t too far from here.

I will take you up on that offer, let me know when you start cutting....the major portion I will be needing is the 2 braces themselves...the center and outer ties would also be nice if you dont need them, but I can do without in a pinch, since I am sure it will need to modified to fit the early chassis anyway...probably significantly.

Yes a fine little fab project.
I have seen the big panel get bead rolled too.

If I were starting from scratch I would just bead roll the big panel...but doing so with an existing panel would shrink the size...likely too much...besides, it would also weaken the plane we care about for this...the "vertical" plane would be reduced with beads...whereas adding braces doesn't reduce that plane at all, it adds to it, while still strengthening the "horizontal" plane(not that the horizontal plane is doing anything with this piece to begin with, but doing so eliminates the snare drum effect)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ok, so I was wrong, just making some suggestions.

I really should italics instead of caps for emphasis, you aren't wrong...that actually is what most people buy them for.

Angle Iron + Welder maybe a grinder and that can be fabricated easily

Very true...I have angle iron...and a welder...fabricated many things....but I have also already added close to 100lbs in metal to the car, so weight is a factor...for this stamped steel is the better choice....besides, I do like to use factory Mustang parts where possible...even if they are from a completely different generation mustang.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Because the early mustangs don't come with this bracing....and while you can buy panels like this:

100_1199-jpg.jpg


People who do so have reported a SIGNIFICANT increase in torsional rigidity....however, I think with bracing the results would be better...maybe it would give better rigidity than a floppy piece of 18 gauge steel, maybe not, but it would certainly take away the snare drum effect of a large piece of flat metal covering a large opening. I already have a panel like this....but I think it will be more effective in conjunction with foxbody-style bracing...after all,
Ford obviously felt it had an effect worth the extra expense in 1979.
Meh, that doesn’t prove anything,..Ford made The Pinto, the Granada, the MII, the myriad of “other than a Mustang” fox bodies,the Probe, and a whole slew of open to interpretation other loser body styles, all now living their new lives as a Coke can, The fact that they did, or didn’t include bracing to the rear package tray on any given model, doesn’t lend any credence to whether or not it was right.
 
Meh, that doesn’t prove anything,..Ford made The Pinto, the Granada, the MII, the myriad of “other than a Mustang” fox bodies,the Probe, and a whole slew of open to interpretation other loser body styles, all now living their new lives as a Coke can, The fact that they did, or didn’t include bracing to the rear package tray on any given model, doesn’t lend any credence to whether or not it was right.

You and I know OEMs are notoriously cheap, they will not include a part that they feel does not do something for the car. Those braces certainly aren't there to aid in the installation of the seats...aside from unibody bracing, why would they install them? I am not talking the Mustang in particular...but ANY unibody car with a trunk(not hatch) and a non fold-down rear seat. I am willing to bet that if I could find pictures that all Ford cars with a trunk past a certain point would have them....but for some reason there isnt a lot of pictures of stripped interiors in say a fairmont....or any basic grocery getters of any era...for obvious reasons...people tend not to make project logs of throwaway cars. A Probe in your example wouldnt have them anyway...no hatchback car would because they are made for space. Frame cars like the crown victoria also probably wouldnt have them because there is little need in a car with a full frame.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You and I know OEMs are notoriously cheap, they will not include a part that they feel does not do something for the car. Those braces certainly aren't there to aid in the installation of the seats...aside from unibody bracing, why would they install them? I am not talking the Mustang in particular...but ANY unibody car with a trunk(not hatch) and a non fold-down rear seat. I am willing to bet that if I could find pictures that all Ford cars with a trunk past a certain point would have them....but for some reason there isnt a lot of pictures of stripped interiors in say a fairmont....or any basic grocery getters of any era...for obvious reasons...people tend not to make project logs of throwaway cars. A Probe in your example wouldnt have them anyway...no hatchback car would because they are made for space. Frame cars like the crown victoria also probably wouldnt have them because there is little need in a car with a full frame.
I’m gonna take a wild stab at this one, but I’m gonna say...to support the front if the rear package tray, and to add some strength to the back seat support.. :shrug:
If there happened to be a side effect of added structural rigidity,...then yea.
 
I’m gonna take a wild stab at this one, but I’m gonna say...to support the front if the rear package tray, and to add some strength to the back seat support.. :shrug:
If there happened to be a side effect of added structural rigidity,...then yea.

Can't be that...the package tray has no significant amount of weight:

20190802_131535_zpsxyaiderv.jpg


this is my 66...vintage mustangs never had any problem with package tray sag without any bracing...and even if that was the purpose the V bracing in the foxbody pic above would attach at the TOP in the center, not the bottom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user