Front suspension questions

[bdepedro]

So, I'm getting ready to do some front end work on my car and have a few questions. I'm going to drop my UCAs and install new strut rod bushings, then have a shop make and install sub frame connectors before doing an alignment.

My questions are:

1) When I reinstall the control arms, should I make any changes to the quantity of alignment shims or leave as they are until the alignment?

2) I bought polyurethane strut rod bushings. I was doing a search and noticed a note about poly bushings causing rod problems. Can anybody confirm or explain this?

3) I live about 100 miles from the shop that is doing the subframes and alignment. Is this too far to drive the car without a proper alignment?

Thanks for the help!

 

[j69302]

1) When I reinstall the control arms, should I make any changes to the quantity of alignment shims or leave as they are until the alignment?

Is this for the 70 in your signature? If so they dont use shims, camber is normally done by the eccentric bolt on the lower control arm, moving the lower arm in/out to adjust camber. You should buy some eccentric eliminator kits from TCP or I think global west makes some. I have had a properly torque eccentric bolt turn and screw up the alignment while driving.

2) I bought polyurethane strut rod bushings. I was doing a search and noticed a note about poly bushings causing rod problems. Can anybody confirm or explain this?

The bushing in this area was not only designed to flex, but must flex to allow free movement of the lower control arm. If you want a upgrade from the stock rubber, get an adjustable strut rod with a rod end in place of the bushing, There wont be any flex, but the rod end will allow free movement of the control am.

3) I live about 100 miles from the shop that is doing the subframes and alignment. Is this too far to drive the car without a proper alignment?

This really all depends on how close you can get it. You should not have a need to mess with your tie rods, so your toe should remain the same.

Assuming your existing alignment is good, the Shelby drop should not affect the camber too much to make it undriveable.

You can measure from the strut rod mount on the frame, along the strut rod to the center of one of the bolts that bolt it to the lower arm. If all the measurements are good then you should not have any problem with the drive.

Obviously, drive it around your neighborhood first.. Start out slow and try some hard braking to see if it will pull from side to side. As your get confident, gradually increase the speed (in a safe manner) until you are confident that everything works good. Only after driving it will you know if you can make it or not.

 

[2+2GT]

1) When I reinstall the control arms, should I make any changes to the quantity of alignment shims or leave as they are until the alignment?
True, as above, shims on a 67-73 are a real bad sign. Install an export brace at this time.

2) I bought polyurethane strut rod bushings. I was doing a search and noticed a note about poly bushings causing rod problems. Can anybody confirm or explain this?
He's right, the purpose of polyurethane is to be stiff. Unfortunately, the suspension was designed with the strut bushing as the pivot. With urethane, the bushing is pretty solid, so the strut rod has to do the pivoting, for which it was not designed. The results are unfortunate.

3) I live about 100 miles from the shop that is doing the subframes and alignment. Is this too far to drive the car without a proper alignment?
Use your eyeball and compare the sidewall of the front tires to the rear. If the front appears to be a matching vertical, and the front sidewall of each tire seems to be about 1/16" in compared to the rear of the front tire (when looking toward the rear tire) you should be able to get away with it. You can't find a shop closer?

 

[Fstbk]

He's right, the purpose of polyurethane is to be stiff. Unfortunately, the suspension was designed with the strut bushing as the pivot. With urethane, the bushing is pretty solid, so the strut rod has to do the pivoting, for which it was not designed. The results are unfortunate.

[/B]

Why do people post that pic over and over again and not realize that it is an incorrect installation? Those cup washers are backwards and that prevented the rod from moving. The hard polyurethane bushings, when properly installed prevent movement "in & out" and do not prevent movement "up & down".

People have run those for decades thats right,"DECADES", a few idiots install them wrong and over tighten them and have issues and somehow it's the materials fault?

 

[2+2GT]

Why do people post that pic over and over again and not realize that it is an incorrect installation? Those cup washers are backwards and that prevented the rod from moving. The hard polyurethane bushings, when properly installed prevent movement "in & out" and do not prevent movement "up & down".

People have run those for decades thats right,"DECADES", a few idiots install them wrong and over tighten them and have issues and somehow it's the materials fault?

It probably wouldn't matter which way the washer was installed. The point of using urethane instead of neoprene is urethane has far less flex, or give. This is suicidally stupid with a strut bushing. If you really feel the need to tighten up the struts, and don't want to die, convert to heim joints.

 

[Fstbk]

Well, lets say someone with a 65/66 does that, without modifying the LCA...now, someone will try to align the car with it and bind the LCA bushing.

And it absolutely does matter what way the washer is installed, thats why it is a "Cupped" washer in the first place, if it did not matter then it would just use a flat washer. Even the factory units are clearly marked to point that out. The contact area, when using the cupped washer correctly is massively different then if it is installed wrong and causes bind.

For the record, the photo above is showing what looks like a rubber bushing with the washer on backwards and over tightened! Most poly bushings have a conical shape to avoid exactly what we are discussing.

I am not saying that these things are the best way to go, but I am saying that many sets of expensive strut rods have been sold by using that one single photo of an incorrectly installed strut rod with an unknown bushing.

 

[2+2GT]

Let's just agree to disagree on this one- You think hard bushings on the strut are hunky-dory, and I think they are a deathtrap.

As for the OEM configuration…

 

[Fstbk]

Sorry, Im not arguing to argue,and I never said I think they are "Hunky dory" so please do not put words in my mouth...but I think some of this needs resolution for future reference, especially for 65/66 car owners that insist on either installing things backwards or being told that hard bushings are the devil based on information propagated by incorrect installs.

Either that last photo is showing an incorrect installation or my original 65 "C code" washers are mislabeled or are not original? Both of mine clearly state "This side toward rubber" and are installed with the dish outward to allow the rod to pivot and articulate.
From what I read on line the markings on my parts are correct for that year.

This is a photo I found on line of some MOOG parts that have washers that resembles mine.

I can see that the car in the GN pic must be a 65/66, and with the diameter of the sway, and that big harmonic with a T-pan it must be a K code,this is curious? Did K code cars switch those around for some reason?

 

[skywalker]

Assuming your existing alignment is good, the Shelby drop should not affect the camber too much to make it undriveable.

eww I dunno, when I did it on the '68 I had, the camber was JACKED. Now, it was driveable enough to get to an alignment shop but that was about all.

 

[bdepedro]

I talked w/ the folks at Mustangs Plus about the poly strut bushings and they say that the difference is in how the washers are mounted. They say the washers are supposed to "cup" the rubber bushings giving the unit more stiffness but should be installed with the cup facing away from poly bushings so it's not so stiff to break the rods. They say they've run their cars with this setup for years without issue.

 

[Realmongo]

Just for the record, I went out and looked at the original factory-installed bushings on my 65 and the cups are facing away from the bushings.

 

[68RCodeConv]

The Moog (rubber) ones I installed had the cup facing away on the back and inward on the front.

BTW, I put a set of Midolyne strut rod bushings on my 73 vert. They are stiffer than stock. Luckily for me they shredded (and I mean shredded) instead of the strut rod breaking. Only took 50 miles of driving. Now I have Moog rubber.

 

[2+2GT]

Sorry, Im not arguing to argue,and I never said I think they are "Hunky dory" so please do not put words in my mouth...but I think some of this needs resolution for future reference, especially for 65/66 car owners that insist on either installing things backwards or being told that hard bushings are the devil based on information propagated by incorrect installs.

Either that last photo is showing an incorrect installation or my original 65 "C code" washers are mislabeled or are not original? Both of mine clearly state "This side toward rubber" and are installed with the dish outward to allow the rod to pivot and articulate.
From what I the markings on my parts are correct for that year.

This is a photo I found on line of some MOOG parts that have washers that resembles mine.[/IMG]

I can see that the car in the GN pic must be a 65/66, and with the diameter of the sway, and that big harmonic with a T-pan it must be a K code,this is curious? Did K code cars switch those around for some reason?

Your washers are not Ford factory original, Ford washers were not marked. The below photo is a brand-new 65 Shelby taken in 1965.

 

[2+2GT]

Here's another shot. This one-owner car is a national MCA and AACA show winner, restored by one of the original MCA Gold Card judges.

 

[Rusty67]

I've heard the arguement go both ways on poly vs rubber. I ran poly on mine while I still had strut rods and didn't have a problem but I didn't put too many miles on it. The miles I did put down were hard miles tho.

One thing I've heard done as a compromise is to put rubber on one side and poly on the other. It matters which side you put them on and I can't remember which is the correct side to put the rubber on but it is supposed to be the best of both worlds and be completely safe.

An upgraded strut rod is significantly more expensive then a few pairs of strut rod bushings so telling someone to upgrade to the adjustable/heim joint strut rods isn't really a fair bit of advise unless the person is looking to dump quite a bit of money into their suspension.

 

[tx65coupe]

I am interested to know which side each goes on for the poly/rubber mix. I would bet that poly goes on the front and rubber on the back. I still think the adjustable heim joint strut rods are the way to go though.

 

[v8only]

this thread is interesting...I have 2 66 mustangs and one has been sitting for at least 20 years when I bought it, and i'm still restoring it.

The other had original strut rod bushings too. The both are installed just like the picture above. I know for a fact the bushings are original too, lol as they're just about 90% rotted out.

On my blue 66, when I replace the strut rod bushings, I did notice that the instructions had me turn the cups around the opposite way the factory had them....even though I replaced them with rubber bushings.

Of interest also...I was trying to trace down a clunk in my front end, which I found, but in the process I was watching my front end while having a friend drive it down the street and brake hard. I watched my brand new strut rod rubber bushings compress an enormous amount absorbing the impact of the braking.

It's my personal opinion that the factory strut bars aren't strong enough to handle the poly bushings. After watching how much force gets exerted in that area, if there was little to no compression, it's going to cause all that force to be put directly on 45 year old steel bars not designed to take that kind of force.

FSTBK....your bushing cups aren't original...the aftermarket ones I replaced said this side toward rubber, and my OEM ones did not.

 

[Fstbk]

Look at the bushing, it has a cone shape to the outside, why would you want to mash that down and trap it inside the curve of the washers?

Tell ya what, just go out and do a simple test,install one side and turn the cup out and tighten the end nut to spec, then use your hand to see how well it moves up and down without binding.
Then, install the other side as shown in the first pic and do the same thing, then use your own common sense to make the decision.

Now, you can buy some nice adjustable ones, but remember that the 65/66 cars do not use the LCA for alignment and if you use the rods to push or pull you will bind or damage the bushing in the LCA, or worse.

If you look at the sheer number of Falcon based cars that have run these bushings over the last 30 years you would understand why it's just not going to "jump up and kill you." Where is Ralph Nader if this is such a huge deal

Check your own car for a bind and ask yourself if you would rather have some articulation in the front end? People pay big money for rollerized this and that and then lock the front end in place with neoprene and washers that are installed bass ackwards?

 

[67rcks]

Do you agree on this installation or is it wrong too?
http://www.virginiaclassicmustang.com/howto/instructions/su10.pdf
(in case of PU busihing, one on the link is rubber)