Had to do this to my 72' Duster just for this reason....has factory front Swaybar!
SOS! FMJ Swap issues
- Thread starter ultanium
- Start date
-
Had to do this to my 72' Duster just for this reason....has factory front Swaybar!
Oklacarcollecto
Life is an experiment
66plyValiant
Well-Known Member
complete and utter BS, comes from a tech archive where people guess whats going to happen and have no understanding if it will or won't work
Sedanman
67-9 Valiant specialist
slider calipers
Oklacarcollecto
Life is an experiment
Front mounted with no sway bar.... but the op has his rear mounted and has sway bar tabs.
slickchick
pedal cars only
***** Note: Please take the time to read, and understand, what I have outlined, for this project, and Please follow the instructions, this will make your job alot easier, safe, and complete. While we are on the subject of the Braking system, Please inspect the Rear Brakes, and Hardware, Hoses and Brake Lines, and don't forget the rubber brake line, hat attaches to the rear end housing, and wheel cylinders. This is the best time, to completely beed the entire brake system, until all the rust, and dirt, isn't present in the brake fluid.
I am a MOPAR ENGINE BUILDER.
Thanks: Mopar Charlie I can be reached @ 727-271-5068 after 7 PM evenings please E-Mail [email protected]
Why not ask the guy that wrote that BS about 25 years ago in a mopar action article along with exploding ball joints from over angling... LOL.
There are a lot of people that run FMJ spindles without issue every day!
There are a lot of people that run FMJ spindles without issue every day!
Sedanman
67-9 Valiant specialist
Mine is a 73-6 k frame with a body brakes and sway bar
Oklacarcollecto
Life is an experiment
Then you wouldn't have the sway bar issue that the 72 back did.
3plymouths
Member
this clearance issue is only at full droop of the suspension is it not, i think at ride height this is a non issue. will have to really check my car but i don't believe mine hits but it is lowered also.
66Dvert
Working on my custom car parts again!
????? seriously? do you still believe in that outdated article? just asking is all I'm not trying to start a war here, but I think that's one article that has been busted.
Complete BS. :wack:
Yes exactly, and it actually HAS been busted. Everything is right here in black and white...
http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/techarticles/suspension/mopp_0503_swapping_a_and_b_disc_brake_spindles/
Mopar Muscle did an actual analysis of the geometry changes (vs. the BS from the original article). Did you notice the author? Bill Reilly. Yes, that one. Turns out that the geometry changes from using FMJ spindles are minimal at best. And, if anything, are actually beneficial. Especially on cars with wider, more modern tires/compounds, where the ridiculously small increase in toe change will be minimized even further, while the larger improvement in camber gain will be accentuated. Running big torsion bars? You guessed it, even less of an effect. Bigger torsion bars = less dive/travel = less toe change.
So, please, all the FMJ deniers, take the time to read the Mopar Muscle article posted above. Maybe take a look at a chassis/suspension design book.
Or even look at the ACTUAL numbers (from the MM article).
'73-'76 A-body Spindle
Static alignment - 0 camber, 1.18 caster, 0.059 toe-in
Dive Caster Camber Roll Ctr. Toe-In
2.25 4.892 -1.226 5.608 0.041
2.00 4.502 -1.020 5.756 0.042
1.75 4.108 -0.830 5.901 0.042
1.50 3.707 -0.657 6.043 0.043
1.25 3.302 -0.500 6.180 0.045
1.00 2.890 -0.361 6.312 0.047
0.75 2.473 -0.241 6.435 0.049
0.50 2.048 -0.140 6.549 0.052
0.25 1.617 -0.059 6.650 0.055
0.00 1.177 0.000 6.735 0.059
-0.25 0.730 0.036 6.800 0.064
-0.50 0.273 0.046 6.840 0.069
-0.75 -0.194 0.028 6.849 0.075
-1.00 -0.672 -0.020 6.816 0.081
-1.25 -1.163 -0.103 6.730 0.089
-1.50 -1.669 -0.225 6.574 0.096
-1.75 -2.191 -0.392 6.323 0.105
-2.00 -2.734 -0.612 5.94 0.113
-2.25 -3.300 -0.895 5.366 0.122
'73-and-up B-Body Spindle
Static alignment - 0 camber, 1.32 caster, 0.059 toe-in
Dive Caster Camber Roll Ctr. Toe-In
2.25 4.77 -1.697 6.678 -0.013
2.00 4.407 -1.448 6.848 -0.007
1.75 4.039 -1.213 7.017 0.000
1.50 3.666 -0.993 7.187 0.007
1.25 3.289 -0.787 7.355 0.014
1.00 2.906 -0.597 7.521 0.022
0.75 2.518 -0.422 7.684 0.031
0.50 2.125 -0.264 7.843 0.039
0.25 1.725 -0.123 7.995 0.049
0.00 1.319 0.000 8.141 0.059
-0.25 0.906 0.104 8.276 0.070
-0.50 0.486 0.188 8.399 0.081
-0.75 0.057 0.250 8.505 0.094
-1.00 -0.380 0.288 8.591 0.107
-1.25 -0.827 0.300 8.651 0.121
-1.50 -1.284 0.284 8.677 0.136
-1.75 -1.754 0.236 8.658 0.151
-2.00 -2.237 0.151 8.580 0.168
-2.25 -2.737 0.025 8.421 0.186
Read more: http://www.moparmusclemagazine.com/...isc_brake_spindles/viewall.html#ixzz2XOjHXMRj
That's in the link I posted earlier from BBD. Good info and actual measurements not unsubstantiated fodder.
They should have never mentioned the FMJ's in the original MA article. Then they wouldn't have to do a huge CYA journalism, put the fear of running off the road or breaking ball joints (over angling = absolute BS), effort to make the attorneys happy.
They should have never mentioned the FMJ's in the original MA article. Then they wouldn't have to do a huge CYA journalism, put the fear of running off the road or breaking ball joints (over angling = absolute BS), effort to make the attorneys happy.
-
