The use (or non use) of the F,M,J and later B body spindles is an ongoing debate. I don't know much about math, but I am a professional journalist, so I have to defend the Mopar Action crew on that front.
Here's a quote from their article:
"Do not succumb to the temptation to use "lookalike" knuckles from later Mopars, such as 73-up B/R-bodies, F/J/M bodies, etc. These parts, while visually very similar, are taller, altering suspension geometry (camber change, bump steer, etc.), and possibly forcing the ball joints beyond their designed range, a/k/a “over angling”.
According to the writer, this is researched in Chrysler technical and engineering documents and the article is sourced at the end.(also correct journalism)
Can you use the other knuckles? Possibly. Hell, there's probably a FORD part that will work! I really don't know.
However, as a journalist, especially in a major high-dollar automotive publication'tech article, you have to be very careful what you tell people CAN be done! There is a tremendous liability issue!
Imagine some gear head kid misreads your article, modifies his barely-legal car with substandard parts, then plows into a school bus killing several children. He tells the police that the brakes failed because of the modifications that YOU suggested he do!
I'm also not a lawyer, but I can guarantee you that the magazine considers this possibility when they "throw aside the use of F,M,J, and late B body vehicles without any factual proof or real time experience to back up their article"!
A journalist relys on existing Chrysler engineering, not his own research. If something happens, it's Chrysler that bears the liability, not the writer.
You also need to remember this when you post on a site. It may look good, stop the car, work well in your application, but are you willing to put up your personal property in a liability lawsuit when someone gets killed following your advice?
Trust me. magazine editors are NOT!
