Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

Hello....so those of you that have used a mustang ii style front suspension. I feel my my lower control arms are not at the best level therefore also my tie rod ends are at an extreme angle my mechanic friend noticed. I have more take than I want anyway and it would solve some clearance issues if I could lift it back up a litt.e when we jack the front end up about 2.5 inches it looks way better. I'm currently triying to get info on what exactly my springs are but are longer or stiffer spring smaybe an option.....spacers make me nervous but maybe something like this metal one? Any ideas appreciated.

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

The lower A-arms should be level +/-. It's been a while, did you install the MustII? Have you modified anything?

Is that a Fatman MustII? SS A-arms are in all Fatman kits. I'd ask the manufacturer of the kit. MustII springs are fairly cheap and easy to install

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

Hey I did install the mustang ii. It was a kit from a local shop full tilt street rods. It doesn't say online what the springs are. He said he would trade me for a firmer set and see if it's enough. I see online that they can come in like lbs such as 400 or 700 so maybe the stiffer will work but then that will affect my ride quality too right? I'm just nervous the spacers aren't the safest as far as the spring popping out. But maybe those metal ones encase it better than just rubber spacers. I guess theoretically if I add a spacers it's going to compress my spring making my ride firmer anyways right? Kinda same difference?

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

As Ogre said "Ideal" is with the lower A arms and tie rods on a level plane. I'm going to have to believe that is one the primary reasons for running dropped spindles if you want to go low, You still maintain proper suspension and steering geometery.

The adjustable ride height units are just that, you can dial in your ride heightto exactly where you want it. That may not always jive with perfect suspension geometrey for the best handling but simplifies getting the look or in some cases clearance you want.

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

lower control arms need to be level at ride height. if they are not then you would find yourself bottoming out over bumps where you normally wouldn't. another, stronger, set of springs would be indicated to level the lower control arm when sitting on a level surface. a new set of springs will be stronger right out of the chute so the truck will ride high for a bit until they get their "set". with that said, if those current springs are new then the truck will sag a bit more and make it worse. if you do go with the spacers then you should also check the bump stops to ensure they are set up so they actually work before the springs bottom out so it isn't the coils bottoming and stopping the suspension travel but it is the rubber bump stops limiting travel before that happens.
I would say get the springs out and compare to what they are supposed to be for coil length and wire size. if all good then get another set that is rated for more poundage. if you have a vehicle scale somewhere close you could weigh the unit on the front axle and get springs accordingly.
there is also the air bag route but that is a whole different kettle of fish and requires different lower control arms possibly, as well as a compressor, different shock mounts, etc.
there are also air springs that are made to fit inside the coils. they get filled up as needed to level the truck and, as long as there is no leaks, they stay at that pressure. that also requires the shocks to be moved outboard of the coils.
much better to get a spring set that will work
that style of spring adjuster would be hard to adjust in this scenario due to access

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

Full tilt should have known what springs to send out for a TF 55-59 3100 truck. I'd take them up on the offer of new springs. My springs rode high for a year, don't modify anything until the full weight of your fully assembled truck is on them for at least a year.

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

Agreed 100% there, don't do a bunch of parts swapping until you get a few miles on it. Over the years I have seen a lot of almost new parts for sale because someone jumped the gun and stuck on pieces that they later decided were the wrong pieces.

Sometimes we don't need "perfect" when it comes to front suspension geometry as long as it will align right and drives great. You might loose a few tenths on an autocross course or go though the local twisties a tad slower but you probably won't notice the difference running down the long wide roads at the speed limit.

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

thats a problem but not the biggest reason to set the lower control arms level at ride height.

with an unequal length control arm IFS, the lower is much longer than the upper because it builds in negative camber in compression and extension both. the negative camber helps the outside tire from rolling under in a corner and helps the inside tire keep its contact patch as the body rolls. the arcs of operation of the two arms are vastly different, but the most stable point is when the lower arm is level and the upper is almost level. when you have it set lower than that, the upper arm arc changes much more radically than the lower arm, tipping the spindle in and causing the wheel to camber. depending on the arc of the tie rod it can also pull the steering knuckle leading to toe.

If you have serious camber but stable toe it is not as dramatic to have the front end steering you around (with no steering input), the camber will do a little bit of steering kind of like how a motorcycle turns.

but with just a little toe the handling can go crazy very quickly over bumps/jounces, and the worst thing is when the suspension rebounds, the steering wheel will go wild in your hands.

the solution is taller spindles and longer upper arms. the mustang II cant be built this way though, which was its limitation in the 70s and is still its limitation now, short spindles are known for lots of camber change.

on your spring question, i remember reading that with a small block engine or equivalent that 550-600lbs is about the right spring. if you are happy with the ride now then the adjustable spacer will work.

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

I used qa1 coilovers which are adjustable , and work great, but yes a , heavier spring will work , but when you do extend the shock is it close to bottoming out or you still have a little up and down at level height? I also used 2 in. Drop spindles…..

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

one thing, you may not need a stiffer spring, just one with more turns. sometimes the number of turns increases the spring rate but not always. speedway and jegs both have a huge assortment of coil spring diameters and heights.

Re: Help with mustang 2 and ride height options
 

Weight bias of a Mustang II is 50% on the front and 41 % on the rear.

That puts most Mustang II within about 100 lbs of having the same weight on the front tires as a Chevy 3100. When you discount the I beam, springs and part of the brake drum weight the unsprung weght is real close to the same and an AD with a small block or an lS and aluminum case trans is probably lighter on the front tires by a noticeable amount over a stone stock truck.

I'd have to hit Mike Morris (father of Riley who owns Rocket's Hotrod Garage in Outlook wa ) up on what stock MII springs worked best as he did more MII swaps using the stock MII or Pinto crossmember cut out of donors than anyone around back in the 80's and most of those rigs are still running around.

I've got a 75 Mach 1 crossmember out here that I saved the crossmember out of after we figured out that the whole floor and body substructure was rusted out on. I bought it to put my 4 cylinder in and ended up using parts off it on my Bobcat wagon. It had V6 springs and someone said that they were too heavy.