Improved Camber during Shelby Drop for a '67

[67-Coupe]

Improved Caster (edited) during Shelby Drop for a '67

I was wondering when you guys did your shelby drop, did you also perform the improved caster mod (setting the UCA 1/8'' back)?

I don't have a lot of clearance between the right tire and the front of the wheel well and was thinking this would help.

Thanks!

 

[BornInAFord]

If it's just the right tire that's causing grief, can you adjust your fender forward a bit? What's your current caster setting and what size/offset tires/wheels are you running? How does the car handle now before the drop?

The reason the 65-66 drop was 1" down and 1/8" back was to improve the rate of negative camber (the 1" drop) and also add a bit of desirable positive caster (the 1/8" back) to go along with shim adjustments. For the 67, the caster is adjusted at the strut rod, so there's no need to move it back. It's possible that somehow the car has too much positive caster (the tire is moved too far forward), but moving the mounting point of the upper arm 1/8" back won't help much with that. You will gain a bit in clearance as the improved camber will help clear the top of the fender when the car is turning.

I'm a little concerned why the clearance is only an issue on the right side, not both sides. Was the car in an accident or is the strut rod bent?
Daniel

 

[Rusty67]

Ok, I'm confused. If you moved the arm toward the rear of the car wouldn't that make it not line up with the spindle properly and cause an akward load on the ball joint of the upper and lower arms ?

 

[Helmantel]

I was wondering when you guys did your shelby drop, did you also perform the improved camber mod (setting the UCA 1/8'' back)?

I don't have a lot of clearance between the right tire and the front of the wheel well and was thinking this would help.

Thanks!

Moving the UCA 1/8" back would increase caster, not camber. It would move the wheel a bit backward, but don't expect too much of it. The spindle pin is much closer to the lower ball joint than to the upper one, so moving the UCA (and the UBJ) 1/8" will move the wheel just 1/32" or so.

Originally, these cars were supposed with about zero caster. These days, we usually shoot for 2-3 degrees of positive caster, so with a little caster already "build in" by moving the UCA backwards, the strut rod needs less adjustment, which may be an advantage. Somebody who owns a 67 or newer Mustang may be able to give better information on this (I have a 65).

Ok, I'm confused. If you moved the arm toward the rear of the car wouldn't that make it not line up with the spindle properly and cause an akward load on the ball joint of the upper and lower arms

The spindle can freely pivot on the lower ball joint in all directions, so you just tilt it backwards and things will line up just fine.

 

[67-Coupe]

If it's just the right tire that's causing grief, can you adjust your fender forward a bit? What's your current caster setting and what size/offset tires/wheels are you running? How does the car handle now before the drop?

The reason the 65-66 drop was 1" down and 1/8" back was to improve the rate of negative camber (the 1" drop) and also add a bit of desirable positive caster (the 1/8" back) to go along with shim adjustments. For the 67, the caster is adjusted at the strut rod, so there's no need to move it back. It's possible that somehow the car has too much positive caster (the tire is moved too far forward), but moving the mounting point of the upper arm 1/8" back won't help much with that. You will gain a bit in clearance as the improved camber will help clear the top of the fender when the car is turning.

I'm a little concerned why the clearance is only an issue on the right side, not both sides. Was the car in an accident or is the strut rod bent?
Daniel

I've been dealing with this since I bought the car but wasn't an issue until I put new tires on it. The panels are aligned properly (and won't move foreward) and the Upper & Lower Control arms appear to be in the correct position and the strut rods look ok. I don't know if the car has even been in a wreck but I can only assume so. One of the things I want to do down the line is to have someone straighten the frame and align the panels. Nothing tells me I have to do this, just assuming I need to. I was looking at the last alignment numbers and they appeared to be within original specs. When I get home I'll update with this info.

*********Updated alignment info**********************
FL
Camber .8
Caster 1.0
Toe .2

FR
Camber .6
Caster 1.1
Toe .4

Cross Camber .2
Cross Caster 0
Total Toe .4

***************************************************

Driving straight and at speed the car handles great. On turns, the car handles like a boat and after reading several threads here, I'm want to perform the shelby drop, put in an export brace and montecarlo bar, and roller spring perchs. While I'm in there and will have everything apart I'll inspect the other parts as well.

Apologies about mis-naming the thread but I'm learning as I go.

 

[bnickel]

the 67-up cars do not need the 1/8" back for improved caster because it's already built into the suspension design unlike the 65-66 cars. if you try to move the arms back 1/8" on the 67-up cars you will be drilling right into the edge of the shock tower reinforcement plate on the engine side of teh firewall. there just is not enough meat there to do that.

 

[BornInAFord]

With the drop (1" straight down), I'd suggest going with more caster (+2 to 3 degrees) and going with 0 to -1 degree camber. Also, get a 1" anti-sway bar if you don't have it already, and check to see if you need any new bushings, rubber and ball joints. It sounds like you may have a bit of slop in your suspension which leads to loose handling like you describe. Although a Mustang will nearly always understeer (plow), you can decrease the amount of plow by changing alignment specs, by dropping the car an inch (or more), by adding a stiffer than stock spring and by adding key suspension improvements (like the roller spring perches, the "Shelby" drop, new rubber and bushings, etc.). You also may want to consider relocating your battery to the back for weight transfer (using a sealed/AGM battery like a Deka, Optima or Odyssey) and adding front end stiffeners like an export brace and monte carlo bar. Step up to a bigger wheel than 14", too, as lower bias and better tires do wonders for handling. It doesn't take much change to make a much better handling car which is more fun to drive.
Daniel

 

[pazur]

the template mentioned in this post is inaccurate, the holes on my 67 do not overlap with this template (2mm shorter) and and even angles on the template are not 90 degrees - should it be like that or not?

 

[Rusty67]

Where did you get your template from ?

 

[67rcks]

With the drop (1" straight down), I'd suggest going with more caster (+2 to 3 degrees) and going with 0 to -1 degree camber. Also, get a 1" anti-sway bar if you don't have it already, and check to see if you need any new bushings, rubber and ball joints. It sounds like you may have a bit of slop in your suspension which leads to loose handling like you describe. Although a Mustang will nearly always understeer (plow), you can decrease the amount of plow by changing alignment specs, by dropping the car an inch (or more), by adding a stiffer than stock spring and by adding key suspension improvements (like the roller spring perches, the "Shelby" drop, new rubber and bushings, etc.). You also may want to consider relocating your battery to the back for weight transfer (using a sealed/AGM battery like a Deka, Optima or Odyssey) and adding front end stiffeners like an export brace and monte carlo bar. Step up to a bigger wheel than 14", too, as lower bias and better tires do wonders for handling. It doesn't take much change to make a much better handling car which is more fun to drive.
Daniel

The drop should be 1" down parallel to centerline between existing holes, not straight down because a-arm is slightly 1-2 degrees rotated to the rear (measured on driver side) - see dazecars web site. He says

"The physical specifications of the UCA drop for Falcons, Cougars and Mustangs 1967-1970 are 1” down perpendicular to the centerline of the original UCA mounting."

Some templates (I got one from other post on this site) are also available on the web. This one appears to me incorrect - first the angles are not perpendicular and second distances between existing holes and newly drilled holes are off by some 1/16 - 1/32". This is not matter of scaling or printing. Print it and measure it if you don't believe