k- members.. Reply #30 – October 24, 2007, 02:55:12 PM speaking of k-members.....here is a very unique one.. just a thought. find you and 81 or 82 mustang with an INLINE 6 take that cross member and install it into a t-bird with a 300 inline 6 cyl. boy i bet that would be a torque monster. but it would be the first one i have ever seen or heard of. ?????? give me you thoughts on the idea...maybe when i finish my 84 i might just go looking for it to try... Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #31 – October 24, 2007, 03:07:28 PM Quote from: badbird;184365HMMM. sorry I don't think you will ever find that...guys let's not get carried away now, we want this to be simple I don't plan on making 100 different RonOk, I'd settle for something that was easy enough for me to replace the motor mounts on in my garage with a small mig welder only... or a grinder and a drill. Just a few questions though... Why is what I asked for such a tough request? You're already looking at covering the 2.3, the 3.8 and the 302/351 if you're doing it for our T'Birds and Cougars. All I'm asking for is an additional set of holes for the 4.6 mounts? I think? Or is this thing going to be like all the other performance stuff out there - applies to 302 equipped cars only? I'm no expert but why couldn't you put a piece of flat plate in the area where the mounts fall and drill holes for each mount? Maybe I just don't know enough about building K members... Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #32 – October 24, 2007, 03:09:30 PM I'll take one... Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #33 – October 24, 2007, 03:15:30 PM How much does it weigh?How much weight savings in there? Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #34 – October 24, 2007, 03:25:03 PM Quote from: EricCoolCats;184320 All the specs for this K-member were taken directly from a 1983 Thunderbird so we're talking Mustang-style motor mounts, and probably stock Fox Mustang/T-Bird/Cougar A-arm lengths.So this would be for the 83-86 crowd, or are the K-members the same for the 87/88? I know the LCAs are different. Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #35 – October 24, 2007, 03:52:15 PM You guys are overthinking this. doodaa, it is not feasible for them to do what you're asking as the K-members are different. The mod motors require more clearance underneath. That's why the steer rack is 1" lower on those cars. The 2.3, 3.8 and 5.0/5.8 already can use the same mounting points.tireshredder- it would work for the 87-88 cars, but yes, you would need to swap to the shorter control arms. Also different motor mounts would be needed if you have an 86-88 car. Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #36 – October 24, 2007, 04:06:46 PM Well shoot, that's not going to work.Aren't the SN95 Mustang arms (for the spindles/brakes off the same car) long like the 87/88s? Most guys willing to swap K-Members are going to be upgrading brakes as well... Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #37 – October 24, 2007, 04:09:03 PM As Chuck said, you can use the Mustang length arms and either use a spacer on the BJ or put in an SN95 BJ. Not a show stopper. Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #38 – October 24, 2007, 04:30:04 PM If it goes and the price stays where it is I'd probably still buy one... if I've got to modify something it's probably still easier to start with a piece like this and considering it's cheaper than the Mustang ones it's almost a no brainer. Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #39 – October 24, 2007, 04:54:16 PM Seems to me 87-88 have alot a work for them to work. Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #40 – October 24, 2007, 05:20:02 PM Quote from: screaming306;184366speaking of k-members.....here is a very unique one.. just a thought. find you and 81 or 82 mustang with an INLINE 6 take that cross member and install it into a t-bird with a 300 inline 6 cyl. boy i bet that would be a torque monster. but it would be the first one i have ever seen or heard of. ?????? give me you thoughts on the idea...maybe when i finish my 84 i might just go looking for it to try...Not really, that motor only put out 145hp and 265lb-ft in its final year in 96. Sure that peak torque is at 1600 rpm, but that motor runs out of steam REALLY fast. Its also really big and heavy. Okay if you want something with a dead reliable motor. Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #41 – October 24, 2007, 05:32:25 PM Quote from: JeremyB;184383As Chuck said, you can use the Mustang length arms and either use a spacer on the BJ or put in an SN95 BJ. Not a show stopper.It is for the classes of racing we're doing. Stock mounting points/lengths is a big deal. Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #42 – October 24, 2007, 05:40:06 PM Quote from: Aerobird Motorsports;184394It is for the classes of racing we're doing. Stock mounting points/lengths is a big deal.You can't update/backdate? Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #43 – October 24, 2007, 05:45:05 PM Quote from: JeremyB;184396You can't update/backdate?Dont worry, with his track record, he'll build the car and itll never see the track :hick: Quote Selected
Tubular K-Member Input Needed! Reply #44 – October 24, 2007, 06:00:19 PM My thoughts were that if you must use "stock mounting locations and lengths", then a SN95 setup would be illegal as well. It modifies the suspension geometry from stock. Quote Selected
Topic: Tubular K-Member Input Needed! (Read 25827 times)
previous topic - next topic
