Search results for query: *

I never said that the coil over systems won't hold up. I said that the cars were not designed for them. I also said that if 'I' were to use one, I would look to implement added structure to the car - exactly what I don't now know, because I have no intention of doing such a thing and so have not...

Okay, so you agree with me completely not. Got it. What you are really saying, probably without realizing it, is that a brand new coil over - without adding any structural additions to the front end - is superior to doing nothing to a 40+ year old car. Okay, I can 'agree' with that. Of course...

Surely, if you drive it hard anyway. But it is a question of how much more stress. The rear anchoring points for the T-bars are a well known area of stress and are prone to rust. But they are better engineered to take stress than the front end is.

Nope not what I'm saying. 1. The cars were made for T-bars. 2. They might be okay with coil overs, then again they might no over the long haul; 3. Any car that is that old (read: used) is not like a new car; 4. especially if it is driven hard; 5. I was advising the OP, not someone who is not...

All the more reason not to add more stress to it. Race cars are designed differently than jeeps, than pickup trucks, than street sedans. If you want to make something something that it was not designed to do, you have to do the homework.

Yeah you must live in NY, NJ or CA ... like I do.

Well, a competent engineer would really have to weigh in to provide details on stresses and loads, metal fatigue details and all kinds of other things. You can be that they did this at the factory at the time. They might well have built into the unibody enough added strength. But without knowing...

Yeah, well, that's the kind of thing I was referring to; but exactly what to do I have no clue, other than to look at the cars set up for rallies and other types of racing, and speak with those who have set them up. If I were ever thinking of doing such a thing I'd do a lot of homework on it first.

The Mopar front suspension was designed as part of the unibody package of the Mopar. It places a lot of the stress under the firewall area, away from the front end. Whether the front end can withstand the added stresses of having all the duty of supporting the front half of the car is a question...

Oh, okay.

Pete, That is interesting. I've tried to find out what vehicles, such as Corvettes or the newer Chrysler RRD vehicles use in the rear - as opposed to 6-cylinder 1964 Falcons - and just could not obtain definitive data. If you know that these newer cars use sealed BALL bearings, then that is...

Thanks.

I'm not sure I follow you. I know you're being sarcastic, but it's difficult to read without proper punctuation. Are you saying that Rick E. started this debate? He didn't, he just made his thoughts known on the subject. I'm not his lawyer, but I think he's allowed to do that. I don't think that...

Do you think it would be wise for me to upgrade from the older type to the newer type of 'green' bearings? And can you tell me what would need to change - if anything?

Since my 'green' bearings were installed at least 15 years ago (though probably have fewer than 3K miles on them) I suppose I have the early design and should at least upgrade to the newer design?

Summit Racing carries both, and oddly enough the older ones are literally 2X the price (well maybe not too odd, since Mopar is the distributor).

Okay, thank you. I've done a little more looking around and I found this and it appears to coincide with what you (and some others) are saying. http://www.doctordiff.com/blog/tech-info/why-green-bearings/

I took a read at the engineersedge post, above. But my question remains - since I've never seen a cutaway (nor an adequate description) of the 'green' bearings, what type of ball bearing are they? According to the chart in that link 'deep groove' ball bearing look like they would work well. But...

Okay. Any particular reason? Just on this point or do you generally disagree?

And is he not a well respected Mopar technician?

This is what I found out from my own research, as I mentioned in my post from yesterday. What I still don't know though, is ... are the greenies the same on the inside as the ball bearings that were standard decades ago in some Ford and Mopar rears? And if so, how often did the old ones fail?

Didn't want to open a new topic on this as there are already several on the subject of Green bearing safety. After doing some research on this I've found that, while most (all???) new cars use rear ball bearings, they usually (always???) use a double row of them ... that is, two separate rows of...

True, that's not really the part shops are "scared" of. When I try to explain that there's a measurement for end play involved, and that they need the tool for it, they're like ... hmmm, okay, if you have the manual I might be able to help you out ... not too confidence inspiring. What I want to...

The trouble with going back to the factory rear tapered roller bearings, I have found, is finding a shop that can do it. I don't have the correct tools or for that matter the time to do it. If anyone knows of a shop that is confident in doing this in Nassau County Long Island, let me know. It's...

Interesting that just yesterday I got my "Mopar Action" issue and R.E. did an parallel article on this subject. I didn't read it - just skimmed it, but from what I got out of that skim, it sounded better and cheaper than what you describe. CC and HR used to be just Chevy steak with ford salt and...

But are all the sealed bearings of the ball type on newer vehicles?

No it wouldn't would it. I restate that I'd only seen/heard of it where folks also cut of EVERYTHING from the old suspension. Apparently I was wrong in thinking it was required to do so.

If that's true, then my bad - I'd only seen demos/instructions wherein the installer was cutting off all the old mountings. Was this only done for a clean look, and not for clearance ... I don't know. As to driving a car with rms (your suspension?) ... I'd like that.

Hey Pete, I know you run top shelf stuff and have very hi aspirations - probably beyond what most of us feel is needed. But that said, 3.5 turns L-2-L is what we have, and that's what BMW ran in the early 90s IIRC. It's what my '93 Chrysler Concorde had too. I too think 2.5 turns would be...

Someone mentioned that the Mustang II front end is wider. Didn't sound right to me. I just checked specs and the front track on that car was/is 57.5 in. the front track on the Duster is 59.1. OP, I strongly suggest you read Mopar Actions series of articles on brake and steering upgrades. Go to...