Project Frog Princess

-
I have an extra pair of Magnum Force tubular UCA if interested. They are on my old Dart right now, but will be coming off in the next month.
 
They are not adjustable but have positive caster built in. They look like this style. Mine are a gray hammertone powdercoat:

frog 103-1.jpg
 
I may still be interested. I'm looking at the Dillinger stuff and may want the adjustable setup. I have to do more with the modelling clay. I'm not positive it will clear even with custom arms. Wish there were 1 1/2" drop spindles.
 
Did more testing. Looks like the ball joints themselves will not clear the wheel lip. I'm getting some 27" tall tires to match the rears to see how that looks.
 
So you can't adjust the front end any lower than in the picture?
 
That is with no torsion bars in and resting on the LCA bump stops. Surprised me too.
 
WOW, I would have never guessed it would still sit that high. That just doesn't seem right?
 
Idaho said:
Got the K member back in and did a test fit with the front wheels and tires. Not real happy. The pics show full travel without torsion bars installed.

I was hoping the tires would be tucked in a little more but with a fender rolling I think they'll be OK in terms of the backspace. There's a lot of room for more backspace but this was the max I could order in these wheels.

The bigger problem is I would like the tire even with the fender at ride height. I'm not there even at full up travel. I can use a somewhat taller tire but that's not going to be enough. I either need 2" drop spindles (the likely choice due to cost but still not cheap) or go to something like a HemiDenny coil over. :banghead:
Click to expand...

Thats the exact reason I scrapped my K frame ....there was just no way to get as low as I wanted.
 
That's why I went with Denny. That $3500 nut is hard to crack but a better alternative to spending $5000 plus and having to mess with things. I couldn't be happier with my front suspension, as a matter of fact it's so nice I decided to redo the rear to match the level of quality I got from Denny.
 
Well its kinda baffling to me. Looking at a lot of pics of A bodies with stock Ks it seems there are a lot that achieve a lower front stance.

Here's a shot on the bump stops again, with the tire size upped from 225/40/18 to a 225/50/18. It's almost 27" tall, just under the height of the rears. Without the steering box and linkage on it hits the frame rails front and back so I have to put it together to find out if that will be an issue.

I'll likely build the car this way and live with it, perhaps upgrade down the road.

frog 112-1.jpg


frog 112-2.jpg
 
Thats the same thing I was thinking. Trim the bump stops or just get rid of them all together..............Well its kinda baffling to me. Looking at a lot of pics of A bodies with stock Ks it seems there are a lot that achieve a lower front stance.
 
When I first got the scamp it was basically riding on the bumpstops. It was so bad that the rubber was actually beginning to distort. The guy had 17x7" wheels up front and over every bump with the wheel turned it would scrape and bang. I was going to get drop spindles until I started talking to Denny.
 
I kinda think it may be a bump stop issue. I'm putting only light pressure on them in these pics. Below is one from post #30 where it looks like I had more pressure on, with the test wheel somewhat higher. What's interesting is the ball joint angle. I had the boots off since it was assembled just for testing. The angle looks "unhealthy". I wonder if a lot of the lowered cars are running angles like this. Perhaps they survive OK like that I don't know.

There's also a pic showing the wheel at max droop.

The good news is I think I found the upper limit of tire size in terms of height. This is a 225/50/15 which is almost 27" tall. I was surprised a tire this tall is functional. With the steering linkage connected, they do not hit the frame. At max droop there is only 1/4" clearance to the frame with full left turn, and there's also about 1/4" clearance to the front of the fender. The upper fender lip clears with the "light bump stop pressure" position. Going higher not so sure yet. Maybe with fender rolling.

frog 116-1.jpg


frog 116-2.jpg
 
Want to be honest here. That upper ball joint will fail in no time like that if that is your fully raised position. If you stick with stock here is what I had planned. Get the upper control arm inner mounts from rms bill doesn't list them in his store but if you call they sell them. Then I know you already painted the lower arms but you might need to v notch them or remove the frame side bump stops. I would at the bare minimum cut the factory bump stop rubber down to about 1/2".
 
johnparts said:
Scamp.jpg


17" front wheels with 225/50/17
Click to expand...

A 225/50/17 is 26" tall. Seems that the ride height shown, would be compressing the stops and putting major angle on the ball joints. I have noticed shorter bump stops being used. I guess its an option but I can't say I like the idea.
 
Idaho said:
A 225/50/17 is 26" tall. Seems that the ride height shown, would be compressing the stops and putting major angle on the ball joints. I have noticed shorter bump stops being used. I guess its an option but I can't say I like the idea.
Click to expand...

And that sir is why I was going to run drop spindles. Hitting a bump with the car like that felt like the front end was gonna fall off.
 
johnparts said:
Want to be honest here. That upper ball joint will fail in no time like that if that is your fully raised position. If you stick with stock here is what I had planned. Get the upper control arm inner mounts from rms bill doesn't list them in his store but if you call they sell them. Then I know you already painted the lower arms but you might need to v notch them or remove the frame side bump stops. I would at the bare minimum cut the factory bump stop rubber down to about 1/2".
Click to expand...

What are the benefits of those UCAs? I could see a benefit if they provide an improved ball joint angle.

What would be the purpose of V notching the lowers?
 
Idaho said:
What are the benefits of those UCAs? I could see a benefit if they provide an improved ball joint angle.

What would be the purpose of V notching the lowers?
Click to expand...

The mounts would relocate the inner pivot up to help with that ball joint angle the v notch on the lowers would give you more up motion before you bottom the arm.
 
OK I was thinking replacement arms, you are talking mounts. Did not know such a thing was available. I'll check into them.

I have the LCAs reinforced and done in POR 15 but no biggie if they need more work.

Thanks.
 
Time to take a break from the front for a while and move to the rear. I have my cut down axles back from Dutchman.

Just for fun, can anyone guess what I'm doing with these?
John, you already know so don't give it away.

frog 123-1.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've almost got your cluster worked out if you decide on that. Basically now it's trying to get some kind of functionality out of the dummy lights. The turn signal lights won't work, and a lot of other things would be functionless, but the speedo, tach, and everything else would function without a hanging ECU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top