68 Barracuda Front Suspension Rebuild Kit

-
A few more picture.

IMG_3978.jpg


IMG_3980.jpg


IMG_3981.jpg


IMG_3979.jpg
 
That’s a:

  • 67 K-member
  • 67-72 centerlink
  • 67 only idler arm (looks newish)
  • 67-72 pitman arm (looks newish)
  • 73-76 disk brake conversion with rear mounted calipers **
  • 73-76 lower ball joints
  • 73-76 upper ball joints

** looks like Slider Type Calipers. Need pic of end of caliper to ID

You need to check if caliper hits upper control arm when turning lock to lock. If it’s a Pin Type Caliper; it will hit when mounted in rear. But I’m not sure about slider types

Like was said before, with these 50 year old cars and especially with motor and brake conversions…. You can’t make assumptions. Pictures to ID everything!
 
Last edited:
autoxcuda said:
That’s a:

  • 67 K-member
  • 67-72 centerlink
  • 67 only idler arm (looks newish)
  • 67-72 pitman arm (looks newish)
  • 73-76 disk brake conversion with rear mounted calipers **
  • 73-76 lower ball joints
  • 73-76 upper ball joints

** looks like Slider Type Calipers. Need pic of end of caliper to ID

You need to check if caliper hits upper control arm when turning lock to lock. If it’s a Pin Type Caliper; it will hit when mounted in rear. But I’m not sure about slider types

Like was said before, with these 50 year old cars and especially with motor and brake conversions…. You can’t make assumptions. Pictures to ID everything!
Click to expand...
Appreciate all this info. What about the bracket the idler arm is bolted to? Shouldn't it be something along the line of this picture on this Moog instruction manual? Where it sits between two ears?
 

Attachments

  • MOOG Idler Arm Isstructions.pdf
    377.2 KB · Views: 27
Mcfarlrm said:
Appreciate all this info. What about the bracket the idler arm is bolted to? Shouldn't it be something along the line of this picture on this Moog instruction manual? Where it sits between two ears?
Click to expand...

No.

That is a 67 only stud mounted idler arm. It just has that single flange with a machined tapered insert that a tapered idler stud wedges into.

That’s because you have a 1967 only K-member. Yes it’s a little inferior to the U-shaped bracket with through bolt idler design they used in 68-72 and 73-76 A-body K-members.

This is a B-body K-frame, but same idea
IMG_8062.jpeg




Check for up and down movement like any other idler. Looks very new, should be good. But don’t assume anything.

The 60-66 A-bodies and 62-67 B-bodies also used that stud mounted design.
 
Last edited:
+1 to the rundown from Mr. Wall

you've got a hodge-podge of parts there, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. the aftermarket adjustable(?) upper control arms are a nice touch and evidently somebody put some money and effort in on that.

besides the annoyance factor of having to piece together the rebuild bits all the stuff there is functionally decent items.

don't beat on the idler arm. if it's in good condition reuse it. thems be expensive and difficult to source good quality these days!
 
You need to check if caliper hits upper control arm when turning lock to lock. If it’s a Pin Type Caliper; it will hit when mounted in rear. But I’m not sure about slider types.

** Must check at ride height with wheels on ground **

Could limit turning radius and even cause the caliper to compress the disk like pressing on brakes.

IMG_8063.jpeg
 
Last edited:
steve, you're more johnny snake eye than i am, but is that the tip of the slider caliper adapter bracket and the shadow from the anti-rattle clip?

IMG_3971-1.jpg
 
junkyardhero said:
steve, you're more johnny snake eye than i am, but is that the tip of the slider caliper adapter bracket and the shadow from the anti-rattle clip?

View attachment 1716202520
Click to expand...

Yes. It looks like a slider. And the piston housing looks like a slider. So need to check clearance. I see those marks, but don’t know what they are from

I tried to put pin type calipers on the rear and it DID NOT work with those upper control arms. Interference
 
autoxcuda said:
No.

That is a 67 only stud mounted idler arm. It just has that single flange with a machined tapered insert that a tapered idler stud wedges into.

That’s because you have a 1967 only K-member. Yes it’s a little inferior to the U-shaped bracket with through bolt idler design they used in 68-72 and 73-76 A-body K-members.

This is a B-body K-frame, but same idea
View attachment 1716202518



Check for up and down movement like any other idler. Looks very new, should be good. But don’t assume anything.

The 60-66 A-bodies and 62-67 B-bodies also used that stud mounted design.
Click to expand...
There is up and down movement in the idler. This pretty much the reason for starting the rebuild process. Unfortunately, I purchased a 68 idler arm from Moog (K7042), which looks identical to a 67 but has a bolt through pattern. Any good suggestions on a 67? I really didn't see many options out there with the exception of this from Andersen Restoration.
1967 Plymouth Barracuda New Idler Arm
 
junkyardhero said:
+1 to the rundown from Mr. Wall

you've got a hodge-podge of parts there, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. the aftermarket adjustable(?) upper control arms are a nice touch and evidently somebody put some money and effort in on that.

besides the annoyance factor of having to piece together the rebuild bits all the stuff there is functionally decent items.

don't beat on the idler arm. if it's in good condition reuse it. thems be expensive and difficult to source good quality these days!
Click to expand...
Yes, the UCA's are adjustable but a bit a b**** to adjust since they have to come off completely. They look to be Hotchkis per the following link. The idler needs replaced.
HOTCHKIS SPORT SUSPENSION SYSTEMS, PARTS, AND COMPLETE BOLT-IN PACKAGES » Blog Archive » Geometry Corrected Tubular Control Arms 67-76 Dodge A-Body
 
autoxcuda said:
You need to check if caliper hits upper control arm when turning lock to lock. If it’s a Pin Type Caliper; it will hit when mounted in rear. But I’m not sure about slider types.

** Must check at ride height with wheels on ground **

Could limit turning radius and even cause the caliper to compress the disk like pressing on brakes.

View attachment 1716202519
Click to expand...
Will check clearance on these.
 
Is the idler loose or the bracket worn? The bracket should have a machined tapered hole that fits the tapered stud on the idler arm locking it in position. Your idler looks pretty new.
 
66fs said:
Is the idler loose or the bracket worn? The bracket should have a machined tapered hole that fits the tapered stud on the idler arm locking it in position. Your idler looks pretty new.
Click to expand...
Good question. I didn't get around to fully removing the idler until I have more info from this thread. And yes, the idler arm is fairly new and about 1yr old. I called the guy who sourced/installed it for me and he can't remember where he got it from.
 
Mcfarlrm said:
How would I tell if the bracket is worn?
Click to expand...
if the fit is all sloppy in the hole or the action is all wobbly bobbly. like 66fs said, it's a machined hole that matches the stud taper, so it should be toit.

you mentioned earlier that you had the nut off and were giving it a little juice with the hammer. if it didn't pop out, then it's likely okay.
 
66fs said:
Is the idler loose or the bracket worn? The bracket should have a machined tapered hole that fits the tapered stud on the idler arm locking it in position. Your idler looks pretty new.
Click to expand...
How would I tell if the bracket is worn?
 
Little off topic but in case you dont know those biscuit mounts break really easy then fan smacks fan shroud air cleaner hits hood ect. I run Schumaker Torque Strap on mine but used a chain decades back that worked too.
 
66fs said:
I would first try to tighten the arm to the proper torque. Sometimes you need to clean up the threads on the stud. Then see if there is any movement in the arm.
Click to expand...
I did that and there is still play.
 
Another thought here. Would I be able to replace the 67 bracket with a 68-69 version? Seems like that would add more rigidity.
 
K frame is different. To big a project for you maybe but I like the 73 K frame with the spool motor mounts. I would wait until I could score a K frame with mounts and sway bar and change it. That's just me and it is not necessary and a big undertaking.
1707321574328.png
 
Mcfarlrm said:
Another thought here. Would I be able to replace the 67 bracket with a 68-69 version? Seems like that would add more rigidity.
Click to expand...

You could, but I would not bother. There is nothing inherently wrong or weak with the 67 down idler cantilevered beam design. Your problem is the cheap or worn out idler arm. I run that design on my 66 Barracuda and on my 67 383 K Frame, but I use a kit to make it a Roller bearing instead of a rubber bushing. I've run this roller type idler arm since the 70's and it is still good.

[/URL]
 
Last edited:
66fs said:
You could, but I would not bother. There is nothing inherently wrong or weak with the 67 down idler cantilevered beam design. Your problem is the cheap or worn out idler arm. I run that design on my 66 Barracuda and on my 67 383 K Frame, but use a kit to make it a Roller bearing instead of a rubber bushing. I've run this roller type idler arm since the 70's and it is still good.

[/URL]
Click to expand...

Both of the things you mentioned are in fact inherent problems with the '67 down design. A cantilevered beam design is an inherently weaker design, its engineering 101. That is not to say they can't be used or that they're dangerous, but in this case the '68+ version is a better design.

And sourcing the idler arm is a problem too. The '67 only version is expensive, and if the quality of the reproduction arms has dropped then the steering will suffer.
 
72bluNblu said:
Both of the things you mentioned are in fact inherent problems with the '67 down design. A cantilevered beam design is an inherently weaker design, its engineering 101. That is not to say they can't be used or that they're dangerous, but in this case the '68+ version is a better design.

And sourcing the idler arm is a problem too. The '67 only version is expensive, and if the quality of the reproduction arms has dropped then the steering will suffer.
Click to expand...

As usual we will disagree, glad to hear you stopped referring to the 67 design incorrectly as a single shear design. As you said Engineering statics. Have you done FEA? Agreed, 67 is harder to source a quality piece. But I will not cut off and weld a 68 up Idler mount on a 67 K Frame, sounds like a disaster to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top