Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: differances in "K" members (Read 8190 times) previous topic - next topic

differances in "K" members

Reply #60 –
well, i cant speak for sure about the 86 because ive never owned anything other than an 87 or 88. it makes more sense that as it has an 87-88 k member, it would have the same arms as well. im confident with that being so. obviously if it has the earliier arms and the later k member than this would be the only tbird/cougar with a unique track width.
:america: 1988 Thunderbird Sport, Former 4.6 DOHC T56 conversion project.

Rest of the country, Welcome to Massachusettes. Enjoy your stay.

 
Halfbreed... Mango Orange Y2K Mustang GT
FRPP complete 2000 Cobra engine swap, T56 n' junk...
~John~

differances in "K" members

Reply #61 –
Well, there are other oddities related to this that confuse me. Che (Energy Suspension) has different listings for the front LCA bushings, 83-86 and 87-88. As I don't have access to an 83-85 or 87-88, only the 86, I sure would like for someone with the knowledge to clear up this discrepency.  Thanks.

differances in "K" members

Reply #62 –
The 86 Tbirds/Cougar has the shorter Mustang lower control arms. Most, if not all, of the 86's also have the hydraulic engine mounts and the resulting perches welded to the K-member to utilize the hydraulic mounts. Ford most likely did this as a run-up in antition of using the hydraulic mounts on all of the 87-8 Birds and Cougars.   
    The difference in K-member widths and control arm with the 87-8 cars stems partly from the added width of the cars rear track when the disc brakes were used on the 87-8 T/C's. But most of it was probably for ride quality and geometry concerns on the front suspension of the car as it relates to slowing down the arc and somewhat reducing camber loss when the car is loaded hard in turns.
      As far as differences in Energy Suspensions part #'s for the front LCA's, I dont know for sure, but since the sizing is the same from the 87-8 arms to the older ones as far as bushings are concerned, I'd hafta guess that the difference is probably in the durometer or hardness of the bushings and not in their dimensions.
      You can review some of my earlier posts in this thread as to what my reasons and methods were for modifying my stock 87 K-member but most of it was to keep an 18x9 wheel tucked nicely inside the front wheel well without any fear of rubbing when going over bumps or dips in the road.
      Hope some of this nonsense I wrote helps.
 

differances in "K" members

Reply #63 –
Sorry to ressurrect an old thread. But I've had the opportunity to compare two '86 Turbo Coupe K members and A arms with an '88 TC. The '86s had wider K members and shorter A arms than the '88. I don't know if the '86s match up with '85 and earlier but it contradicts some of the information in this thread.