differances in "K" members

Topic: differances in "K" members (Read 7930 times) previous topic - next topic

differances in "K" members

Reply #30 – December 29, 2005, 02:04:59 PM

sumthin nuu....nice post, thanks and welcome! id be alright if it was a 5.0 i was swapping in but im not sure exactly how much room im gonna need down there for the 4.6. the sway bar may even be in the way. not sure till everything comes together.

Quote

I put a D&D tubular k-member and a-arms in my 84 tbird and everything lined up just like factory. you will be glad you made the switch to tubular after the first time you pick it up and notice how light it is.

your 84 basically has a mustang width k member unlike the 87-88 k. i cant wait till it gets here though. hopefully the wheels dont stick out too far with the arms i have. ill deal with it if they do but im still crossing my fingers...

differances in "K" members

Reply #31 – January 01, 2006, 06:32:18 PM

That is the problem I am having. I am trying to decide which parts to use for my conversion. I already have '88 Stang k member and a arms. I have Stang 11"rotor spindles, and Mark 7 rotors. I am wanting to upgrade to SN95 spindles and brakes. I also have a pair of fairly new 94-04 stang a arms. I don't know whether to get 94-95 spindles, or 96-98 spindles, or what a arms to use. I would like to be able to figure this out pretty soon, becuase I need to get the car back on the road. I am tired of it sitting in my driveway for the past 2 years.

*Edit* I forgot to mention that it is not done now, but I would like to lower the car 1 -1.5" in the future. Also, when I swapped in my stang k member and stang urethane mounts, my ac bracket popped a dent in my hood, which suggests the block was raised. Cant figure this one out either.

differances in "K" members

Reply #32 – January 03, 2006, 03:49:27 PM

so whats the deal with the 86 k member? is it like the 83-85 or the 87-88?

differances in "K" members

Reply #33 – January 03, 2006, 04:18:39 PM

slowfoxbird - use the 94-95 spindles

fordguy - the 86 is like the 87-88

differances in "K" members

Reply #34 – January 03, 2006, 11:43:57 PM

Thanks for the reply Chuck, but would you mind explaining to me why? I am trying to figure out why for my own personal knowledge, so that I can understand the way that the suspension geometry works.

differances in "K" members

Reply #35 – January 03, 2006, 11:50:07 PM

You want to use the 94-95 spindles primarily of the location of the tie rod attachment. IN 96 when they went to the 4.6, they had to drop the rack down 1" to allow for engine room. In turn, they dropped the outer tie rod attachment point at the spindle. You can run into weird bumpsteer issues if you use the others on a Fox car. Not all the time, but if you're going to go with a Mustang K-member, the 94-95 route is the best. I've used the 94-95 spindles on my 3 Fox cars I have converted to SN-95 brakes, and have had nil bumpsteer issues.

differances in "K" members

Reply #36 – January 04, 2006, 10:46:43 AM

I agree with Chuck. The only downside to using 1994-95 spindles is if you're going to also run the 13" Cobra brakes...the spindles need ground down to allow those larger calipers to bolt up. Otherwise, for stock 10" or 11" brakes, they are the perfect solution for a Fox car. If you are going to run caster/camber plates then most of the issues with the 1996+ spindles can be negated, but you also have to have the rest of the suspension in order too. Best to stick with 1994-95 spindles.

differances in "K" members

Reply #37 – January 04, 2006, 10:56:31 AM

I forgot to mention the grinding part. It's just a little bit around the mounting ears for the caliper brackets, nothing major. You also have to do the grinding if you're going to use the 99-04 GT 11" PBRs as well. I just did a set on the front of my '80 Zephyr Z7

differances in "K" members

Reply #38 – January 04, 2006, 11:51:25 AM

Sorry to beat a dead horse but if I am going to be running a 99+ front brake system should I still use the 94-95 spindles then?I am going to be running 96-04 tubular a-arms or should I just get the 94-95 a-arms in the tubular k-member kit?
Thanks,
Chris

differances in "K" members

Reply #39 – January 04, 2006, 01:08:22 PM

Is the Kmember set up for a 5.0 or 4.6?

For 5.0, use the 94-95, for 4.6 use 96+ spindles.

The arms won't matter really...do they even offer a different set of arms?

differances in "K" members

Reply #40 – January 04, 2006, 01:26:39 PM

Quote from: Chuck W

Is the Kmember set up for a 5.0 or 4.6?

For 5.0, use the 94-95, for 4.6 use 96+ spindles.

The arms won't matter really...do they even offer a different set of arms?

The k-member I am getting is for a 79-93 Mustang and the a-arms I was going to get for a 96-2004 GT due to the fact I wanted to use the 99+ PBRs.
The arms for 79-93 Mustang are shorter then the 94+, right?
Thanks,
Chris

differances in "K" members

Reply #41 – January 04, 2006, 01:30:55 PM

Yes the Fox Mustang arms are shorter than the 94+.

You can use the SN-95 spindes on the Fox ball joints, you just need a spacer under the castle nut.

The longer arms "might" cause you fender clearance issues depending on your wheel/tire set-up.

differances in "K" members

Reply #42 – January 04, 2006, 08:03:38 PM

So arent the 94+ arms the same as the Thunderbird ones? I thought that the 93 and down were to short for the birds.
Thanks,
Chris

differances in "K" members

Reply #43 – January 04, 2006, 11:11:06 PM

Quote from: Lx-tasy

So arent the 94+ arms the same as the Thunderbird ones? I thought that the 93 and down were to short for the birds.
Thanks,
Chris

Yes, they are the same length, but the balljoints are different. The 93> arms are shorter, BUT since you are going with a Fox K-member you might want the shorter arms depending on wheels/tires. The 83-86 Tbirds used the shorter arms....like the Fox Mustangs.

differances in "K" members

Reply #44 – January 05, 2006, 12:05:05 AM

Ok, should I just go with the 94-95 k-member then? This is way to confusing,lol.