Just curious, struts

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   Has anyone ever tried to adapt mustang struts and spindles into the AMC shock towers?

I do realize there are bolt on systems out there, but I guess I am too cheap to spend 4000.00

I have this Javelin stripped to the shell and have taken some measurements, in tower width. track width and tower drop length they are damn close.

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
Kansas Transit Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/28/2014 Location: Glasco, Kansas Status: Offline Points: 69	Post Options Post Reply Quote Kansas Transit Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Topic: Just curious, struts Posted: Oct/29/2014 at 10:42am
	Has anyone ever tried to adapt mustang struts and spindles into the AMC shock towers? I do realize there are bolt on systems out there, but I guess I am too cheap to spend 4000.00 I have this Javelin stripped to the shell and have taken some measurements, in tower width. track width and tower drop length they are damn close.

farna Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676	Post Options Post Reply Quote farna Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/30/2014 at 6:30am
	I've looked into this. I didn't look at Mustang struts though. Check out Volvo 240 and Nissan 280ZX struts. The Volvo with diesel should have about the right spring rate. I suspect you're looking at 96+ Mustang struts. Fox body struts don't have the spring on them, spring is inboard of the strut on the control arm. If the later models use a strut with integrated spring they should work. Use an adjustable camber plate at the top and you should be set. I might check those measurements on a 62 American I have. I have a Merkur XR4ti for the 2.3L turbo four and five speed, might be able to use the strut front end also... and the IRS...
	Frank Swygert

Kansas Transit Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/28/2014 Location: Glasco, Kansas Status: Offline Points: 69	Post Options Post Reply Quote Kansas Transit Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/30/2014 at 8:26am
	Hello Frank, I was actually looking at the 05-10 mustang, not only is the overall length close the sn-95 spindle has camber adjustment on the spindle/strut where it bolts together. What I am seeing (and I could be all wet) is that you could use the AMC lower control arm and retain the factory strut rod for caster adjustment. I can't believe it would be that hard to adapt a mustang lower ball joint to the AMC arm, the strut would actually just bolt to a bearing plate in the shock tower. I think our shock tower is too small and work need a MAJOR rework to have enough room to handle caster/camber adjust plate on the top of the tower, again, just an observation. Then you could use the spindle/strut adjustment for camber and your strut rod for caster, the spindle is already a true spindle rather than a sealed bearing "hub" AND it has the correct 5x4.5 BC. On top of this the steering arms are forward (unless I am looking at the drawing wrong) as I prefer a forward mount rack to eliminate oil pan clearance concerns. I'm sure that the Ackerman angle on the spindles is close enough so scrubbing should not come into play. The REAL reason that I like this setup is that is saves weight, and it does take a LOT of stress off of the forward lower frame rails where the steering box and idler arm mount and transfers that stress back further into the chassis at the engine crossmember instead of out near the end of the frame rail. I would think the forces on the top of the shock tower would me less than they are now, as you will be loosing some weight off the front of the car. The only reason I will try and stick with mustang parts is just the availability and the aftermarket. I am going to look into this and see how far from reality it would be. Thanks, Stan Edited by Kansas Transit - Oct/30/2014 at 8:31am

Avery08 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Apprentice Joined: Aug/21/2014 Location: Centerville,IA Status: Offline Points: 233	Post Options Post Reply Quote Avery08 Report Post Thanks(1) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/30/2014 at 8:57am
	It's been done more then once.Here is an email to me from a guy that did what you're asking about.I have a couple pics but forgot how to post them to this site. I planned on using a late Mustang subframe but it required too much modifying. I ended up making my own k member out of 1 1/2 in square tubing and duplicating the Mustang geometry. The strut towers were made with the top of late Mustang towers and the rest homemade of sheet metal. After locating the right location for the front wheel, the multiple angles of the strut determined the location and angles of the strut tower top. Getting this and the rest of the geometry right was the toughest part. The a arms were early fox aftermarket (narrower than late ones), the rack was a Mustang II manual, coil over strut kit, and caster camber plates (track was 1 inch narrower than stock Mustang to fit the Rambler better. The rack ends had enough adjustment to work). Lots of planning and measuring. Also a lot of work but it handled really well.

farna Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676	Post Options Post Reply Quote farna Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/30/2014 at 9:24am
	Since the measurements of the Javelin are so close to the Mustang it should work without much effort. If you're going to use the rack as well you shouldn't have any issues with steering. Keep us posted, and take pics as you go!
	Frank Swygert

Red Devil Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Addicted Joined: Jul/10/2007 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 1743	Post Options Post Reply Quote Red Devil Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/31/2014 at 10:59am
	Look at where the structural support is on the Javelin and where the spring load is transferred - at the upper control arm. I wouldn't be comfortable using a strut suspension with the factory engine cross member, lower control arm or strut rod as the primary load paths. Be better to develop a structure to work with the existing Mustang parts. If looking for a pre-engineered front suspension kit, several on here are running the Control Freaks parts. http://www.freakride.com/product-category/make-model/american-motors/javelin/ Hope this helps,RD.

Avery08 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Apprentice Joined: Aug/21/2014 Location: Centerville,IA Status: Offline Points: 233	Post Options Post Reply Quote Avery08 Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/31/2014 at 11:37am
	Fatman fabrications sells strut conversion for mustangs,falcons,chevy II etc. Check out this link... http://www.fatmanfabrications.co/category/products/ifs-kits/page/2/

farna Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676	Post Options Post Reply Quote farna Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/31/2014 at 2:22pm
	The load is all through the spring, in the spring tower. The upper arm does little more than keep the steering knuckle in-line with the spring -- keeps the top from popping out sideways. The upper arm is just a guide, as is the lower arm. Neither carry any real weight, they just guide the steering knuckle in the correct path. That's why the parts are so light on the earlier Ramblers yet they easily carried the Gen-1 V-8, which weighs a bit more than the Gen-2/3 models. On the Javelins with upper ball joints the upper arm is heavier than trunnion models because the spring is offset from the top of the steering knuckle. There is some leverage going on there that isn't present in the upper trunnion design.
	Frank Swygert

70 Donohue 390 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Joined: Jul/11/2007 Location: S. Oregon Status: Offline Points: 4338	Post Options Post Reply Quote 70 Donohue 390 Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/31/2014 at 2:56pm
	Ever consider this? It's on by 2016 want list. http://www.freakride.com/product/amc-front-coil-over-conversion-systems/
	67 Rogue 290 Convert 70 BBO 390 5 Speed Javelin-under construction

Kansas Transit Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/28/2014 Location: Glasco, Kansas Status: Offline Points: 69	Post Options Post Reply Quote Kansas Transit Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/31/2014 at 3:05pm
	Yes, I have looked at Freakride, and it IS nice stuff, I guess I just take a little joy in making something easily attainable (read cheap) and plentiful (read lots of options available)on my own.