Front Disc or Mustang II upgrade THAT IS THE QUESTION

[eric n]

Well I've just spent all of my pennies on paint, tires and wheels. So of course I'm looking to the future. My "GO" is pretty good. Now I should be thinking about my WHOA. I'm running drums on all 4 corners and they don't REALLY STOP the car as much as they slow it down some.

I was looking at the MUSTANG DEPOT web site and noticed their Mustang II front end. WOW, looks slick and it comes with nice discs. For 2K it doesn't seem out of line. Hell a good set of Disc Brakes run from 700 (ebay wilwoods) to 1600 (force 10's).

But I admit my ignorance. How exactly would a Mustang II front end help me. Is cornering really dramatically improved? How many hours of labor would I be paying for to install the bastard compared to the disc brake conversion?

Would chicks find me irresistable???? And could I finally play the accordian? These questions and more plague my sleepless hours.

 

[xoxbxfx]

lol... here we go

MII are great b/c you can remove shock tower and have some great aftermarket things like rack and pinion steering, power disc brakes, coil overs and what not. Great stuff...BUT there disadvantages. This suspension is not great for corner carving and stuff along those lines b/c there just isnt enough support on the independent front suspension. The cost is ok from NPD, but I would look into other companies such as Rod adn Custom, Heidts and Rod and Tilt. Great companies that makes kits. Rod and tilt has the best prices but are backed up and will take over a month to recieve. You can add coilovers to any kit but they are not cheap. You can also upgrade to granada rotors and GM calipers for just about nothing (11" brakes vs. 9")

LABOR: its gonna KILL you. Im guessing atleast $1000 to install. THey have to cutout the shock towers, prep the frame, weld in patch panels, weld in the crossbrace, re-enforce the crossmember, set up the suspension, paint everything, alignment, brakes.. LOTS of work.

 

[bnickel]

unless you're going to try to drop a 460 in a 65-66 car the M II isn't worth it in my opinion, too much work for not enough gain

 

[jim7485]

M II

I've done quite a bit of research on the MII conversion and have decided against it. Have you ever seen a vintage stang for sale after the conversion? It may be a great set-up but seems to kill the value. I've followed a few on e-bay and two locally. There are many purists out there who would pass on a converted car -at any price. The labor for my conversion would have been $1000, and the engine is already out of the car. Although it will be more money, I'm converting to pwr rack, etc for improved feel that could easily be converted back to stock.

Best of luck to you.
jim-

 

[xoxbxfx]

I've done quite a bit of research on the MII conversion and have decided against it. Have you ever seen a vintage stang for sale after the conversion? It may be a great set-up but seems to kill the value. I've followed a few on e-bay and two locally. There are many purists out there who would pass on a converted car -at any price. The labor for my conversion would have been $1000, and the engine is already out of the car. Although it will be more money, I'm converting to pwr rack, etc for improved feel that could easily be converted back to stock.

Best of luck to you.
jim-

the value of the car will depend on waht its setup for. If you do a MII for a little 289 car the value will drop. If you installed it to drop in a stock 4.6 that has teh same power, the value will go up. There is no sense in it if you dont use the suspension setup for the extra space.

On my 69 stang, Im probably going MII just becasue I need the space. I should be building a twin turbo 347/331 and could use the space for header clearance...

It just depends

 

[Hack]

MII is really good for a cruiser that is driven gently on the street with a small block. The MII suspension is NOT designed for a big block. As stated above, the MII is also not for handling, even with a small block. Remember the MII was a tiny lil thing. Now, some company may sell MII style suspension with stronger control arms and a beefier R&P. But the stock MII is fragile.

The main advantage of a MII is "gee wiz" factor, IMO. It looks cool all shined up and polished at a car show, on a trailer queen.

The factory Mustang suspension is by far superior to a MII setup. I recommend modifying the factory suspension, rather than going MII. Or, if you just have to spend a bunch of money, buy something custom made to upgrade the factory suspension.

edit: I went Granada discs. They aren't the greatest ever, but they work just fine. They are a huge step up from the factory drums.

 

[xoxbxfx]

MII is really good for a cruiser that is driven gently on the street with a small block. The MII suspension is NOT designed for a big block. As stated above, the MII is also not for handling, even with a small block. Remember the MII was a tiny lil thing. Now, some company may sell MII style suspension with stronger control arms and a beefier R&P. But the stock MII is fragile.

The main advantage of a MII is "gee wiz" factor, IMO. It looks cool all shined up and polished at a car show, on a trailer queen.

The factory Mustang suspension is by far superior to a MII setup. I recommend modifying the factory suspension, rather than going MII. Or, if you just have to spend a bunch of money, buy something custom made to upgrade the factory suspension.

The main reason its weak is because it doesnt run struts. Origional MII cars did have struts. THe aftermarket took over and copied the MII front suspension BUT they went to a strutless design which weakened the integrity of the front suspension. Origional MII cars did have shock towers

 

[1970 slantroof]

MII is really good for a cruiser that is driven gently on the street with a small block. The MII suspension is NOT designed for a big block. As stated above, the MII is also not for handling, even with a small block. Remember the MII was a tiny lil thing. Now, some company may sell MII style suspension with stronger control arms and a beefier R&P. But the stock MII is fragile.

The main advantage of a MII is "gee wiz" factor, IMO. It looks cool all shined up and polished at a car show, on a trailer queen.

The factory Mustang suspension is by far superior to a MII setup. I recommend modifying the factory suspension, rather than going MII. Or, if you just have to spend a bunch of money, buy something custom made to upgrade the factory suspension.

edit: I went Granada discs. They aren't the greatest ever, but they work just fine. They are a huge step up from the factory drums.

The Mustang II weighed over 3000 lbs. with the V8. About the same as the 67-70 Mustangs. Where did you get the information that the old Mustang suspension is superior? I challenge that OPINION of yours. It must be opinion because it is not fact.
I don't want to get in a big harrangue (sp) but let's voice these statements as opinions unless you have the engineering expertise and data to back it up.
Not chapped, just trying to keep things straight.
Howard

 

[eric n]

wow, great information. Guess everyone is pretty much unanimous in that it's not a great idea for me. THANKS

 

[fastcoupe68]

There are quite a bit of mis informed folks on this site and quite opionated. I would also like to see the facts on the stock front suspension being that much better. Just for cruisers and trailer queens tell that to the guys at Martz chassis.

 

[Ronstang]

The main reason its weak is because it doesnt run struts. Origional MII cars did have struts. THe aftermarket took over and copied the MII front suspension BUT they went to a strutless design which weakened the integrity of the front suspension. Origional MII cars did have shock towers

Where did you get that bundle of misinfomation? The Mustang IIs never had MacPherson struts.....NEVER.

 

[Mstng2]

Where did you get that bundle of misinfomation? The Mustang IIs never had MacPherson struts.....NEVER.

Yup, Yup, Yup, Never, Never, Never, Trust me I know II's

 

[SnakeStang65]

With Granada front disks, the Versailles rear disks, SVO master cylinder, adjustable proportioning valve, and Mustang Steve power brake conversion my 65 stops like you would not believe. I can stab the brakes at 40, the car stops so quick with no tire spin, that everything in the back of the car is now in the front. I really need shoulder harnesses to keep from having to support myself during braking.

With the money that you are looking at spending, you can get better brakes, or at least match what I have setup.

John

 

[Hack]

The Mustang II weighed over 3000 lbs. with the V8. About the same as the 67-70 Mustangs. Where did you get the information that the old Mustang suspension is superior? I challenge that OPINION of yours. It must be opinion because it is not fact.
I don't want to get in a big harrangue (sp) but let's voice these statements as opinions unless you have the engineering expertise and data to back it up.
Not chapped, just trying to keep things straight.
Howard

The 69 and 70 Mustang weighed 3000 pounds? That didn't sound right to me, so I did a quick search and found 4230 for the 69 Shelby, as an example. That's 40% more weight than your number. I would wager that my 70 vert with an I6 weighs significantly more than 3000.

I haven't put MII in a car and tried to drive it and had it break. My statement above was based on things I've read on the internet. I like to hang out at corner-carvers forums. I think the posts there are pretty good, as you can get crucified if you don't know what you're talking about.

So, it's fine you can criticize my post. And it's a fair criticism, I don't have any numbers or direct knowledge of the MII in my own car. However, your post doesn't have engineering data either. You actually posted quite incorrect numbers. I just think that it's a bad idea to paint a completely rosey picture of the capabilities of the MII.

IMO, anyone considering the MII suspension should very carefully consider how they are going to use the car and do their own research.

 

[TheWolf]

www.fatmanfab.com has a kit that looks interesting. It keeps the weight where it belongs (firewall and shock towers) not like the MII. Its expensive though and I cant seem to find anyone who has installed one yet

 

[ashford]

i have issues with these aftermarket suspension setups. for example the upper control arms are mounted parellel to the lower which gives a constant camber. the stock ones the upper is tilted so that caster changeswithride height and also serves for no nose drop when hitting the brakes. their crosmembers wrap the frame and then are welded. it only takes about a foot of bead to weld the entire thing in, i used almost 2 5 pound rolls of wire in my conversion. the mouter towers look cheap and week.

just my $.02

 

[fastcoupe68]

i have issues with these aftermarket suspension setups. for example the upper control arms are mounted parellel to the lower which gives a constant camber. the stock ones the upper is tilted so that caster changeswithride height and also serves for no nose drop when hitting the brakes. their crosmembers wrap the frame and then are welded. it only takes about a foot of bead to weld the entire thing in, i used almost 2 5 pound rolls of wire in my conversion. the mouter towers look cheap and week.

just my $.02

What?

 

[ashford]

The main reason its weak is because it doesnt run struts. Origional MII cars did have struts. THe aftermarket took over and copied the MII front suspension BUT they went to a strutless design which weakened the integrity of the front suspension. Origional MII cars did have shock towers

hes not referring to macpherson struts, he meant strut rods. the mII strut rods are on the rear end of the crossmember not the front, and the buggers really get in the way. what the aftermarket did was sell a lower that is more like a wishbone and extends the pivotbolt hole either forward backward or both with a gusset.
control arms for MII