Kirk! We're under attack!! Suspension help.

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by rbgray1

One last item. If you were just starting this project, would you use the Heidts stuff again? Reason is, I called them on Friday on this narrower geometry issue and they said they talk with their engineer and call me back at 2pm. Well, never heard from them.

When I called them yesterday morning, I got the same CSR on the phone and he said "Oh, I remember you, sorry I didn't call you back on Friday but I did talk with our engineer and he doesn't know what would be causing this narrowed ball joint width".

I'm no suspension engineer, but I can tell you this. There is only ONE WAY that the lower ball joint width is narrower and that is if the control arms themselves are narrower...Period!

Heidt's makes those control arms in two widths - standard and 5/8" narrower. If you got narrow ones instead of standard you'd be okay as long as the LCAs and UCAs were all narrow ones and you were okay with your wheels moving inboard 5/8" on each side.

[rbgray1]

Cycleguy,

Yes, you are correct, they make both. My problem is I ordered "std" width, confirmed this with them on the phone and again when I noticed the issue with ball joint width being 1" narrower. I even sent them a picture with a tape measure and both of my lower arms side by side. OEM vs. Heidts tubular. The tubular are 1/2 inch shorter(narrower) and they are confirmed to be the "std" heidts arm lengths.

I don't have a problem with going narrower, I will be ordering new Vintage Wheels Halibrand replicas eventually.

I just don't want to run out of tie rod threads (on the narrow side, since the inners can only be cut so much). I think this may be Redhawk's problem as well. I'm also not sure why this is the first time I've seen this on the forum as the Heidts stuff is great and has been used on CRs for years! Unless something else is driving this issue.

This would require me to source new inner tie rods and a mess that I particularly don't want to have to fix. I'm probably going to replace the 26 year old Rack and Pinion unit, will mostly look into it when I'm at SEMA this year for business.

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by rbgray1

Cycleguy,

Yes, you are correct, they make both. My problem is I ordered "std" width, confirmed this with them on the phone and again when I noticed the issue with ball joint width being 1" narrower. I even sent them a picture with a tape measure and both of my lower arms side by side. OEM vs. Heidts tubular. The tubular are 1/2 inch shorter(narrower) and they are confirmed to be the "std" heidts arm lengths.

I don't have a problem with going narrower, I will be ordering new Vintage Wheels Halibrand replicas eventually.

I just don't want to run out of tie rod threads (on the narrow side, since the inners can only be cut so much). I think this may be Redhawk's problem as well. I'm also not sure why this is the first time I've seen this on the forum as the Heidts stuff is great and has been used on CRs for years! Unless something else is driving this issue.

This would require me to source new inner tie rods and a mess that I particularly don't want to have to fix. I'm probably going to replace the 26 year old Rack and Pinion unit, will mostly look into it when I'm at SEMA this year for business.

So, the "standard" width Heidt's LCAs are narrower than your LCAs - the "narrow" LCAs from Heidt's are even narrower then! Definitely something to watch out for.

My West Coast Cobra has original stamped Mustang II UCAs and LCAs and I have contemplated going to tubular arms, but I'll have to watch that very carefully if / when I pull the trigger.

[rbgray1]

Brian, I'll post what I find when I get the front end mocked up and have the before and after measurements.

[RedHawk]

Originally Posted by rbgray1

One last item. If you were just starting this project, would you use the Heidts stuff again? Reason is, I called them on Friday on this narrower geometry issue and they said they talk with their engineer and call me back at 2pm. Well, never heard from them.

When I called them yesterday morning, I got the same CSR on the phone and he said "Oh, I remember you, sorry I didn't call you back on Friday but I did talk with our engineer and he doesn't know what would be causing this narrowed ball joint width".

I'm no suspension engineer, but I can tell you this. There is only ONE WAY that the lower ball joint width is narrower and that is if the control arms themselves are narrower...Period!

Okay I have only dealt with alignment at this pint and so far so god except knowing at some point in the near future I'm going to have to determine toe issue.

For now I'm trying to sniff out overheating issue.

As for Heidts, yes I got less than stellar customer service. I do know that QA1 makes their own tubular Arms so maybe talk to them.

[rbgray1]

Looked into QA1 tubular arms, seems they only make late model stuff and not Mustang II geometries.

[jtubbs]

My private message won't work.
Need contact info for Redhawk please

[RedHawk]

Okay so as the world turns.

Gee Box monkeys messed with putting in new thermostat and in the process returned my car about a gallon and a half low on coolant. Learned of this when deciding to investigate by burping the system.

Car now is running between 190 and 210 when I get on it. Still seems high. I adjusted timing to 12 and 36 and idle on their 560 cfm holley avenger. Still on the fence with this carb.

Also while having car jacked up to burp coolant system I said to myself" Did these monkeys even refill ball joints on A-arms when getting them back from powder coaters. Nope! It took two sticks of grease.

While I was there I checked Tie Rods....no grease! Holy crap.

Fuse has blow twice now on elctric fan. Not sure what the heck is going on there. Anyone?

Car now is tracking straight and riding well at 80 to 90 mph but honeslty not thrilled.

Lastly, one of the main requests while under there care was to tighten alan screws around steering shaft. Nope!

[moore_rb]

Originally Posted by RedHawk

Okay so as the world turns.

Gee Box monkeys messed with putting in new thermostat and in the process returned my car about a gallon and a half low on coolant. Learned of this when deciding to investigate by burping the system.

Nice....

Originally Posted by RedHawk

Car now is running between 190 and 210 when I get on it. Still seems high.

What spec is the T-stat? If it is a 195, then you are running right about where you should expect to be- If it's a 180, then check to see if you are still running lean, or if you have a coolant flow blockage somewhere in the system.

On a side-note- I know 200-210 sounds high, and is not the ideal temp range for peak performance; but the closer to the boiling point of water you run your engine, the better it is for your motor oil, because your oil typically runs about 20 degrees hotter than the water temp, and having the oil run above 212F allows all the condensation and other atmospheric contaminants that settle into your oil to evaporate off, leaving the oil to do a better job of lubricating, and flushing the normal wear off the bearings and rings.

So, you may not be making peak power at 200+, but you ARE improving durability and longevity in your engine...

Originally Posted by RedHawk

I adjusted timing to 12 and 36 and idle on their 560 cfm holley avenger. Still on the fence with this carb.

560 is plenty of CFM for your 351 (unless it revs to 8 grand), but it's still a Holley...

For street driveability, and ease of tuning, I'm a huge fan of the Weber re-designed Edelbrock and Carter Carbs. Sure, they don't look as "correct", but who can see what's underneath the air cleaner...? Another big plus with the Edelbrocks/Carters is that they have no gaskets below the fuel level, so they are much less leaky than Holleys, too...

Originally Posted by RedHawk

Fuse has blow twice now on elctric fan. Not sure what the heck is going on there. Anyone?

Electric fans pull a LOT of current - a 30 amp fuse, a switching relay, and 14 gauge wire (minimum) are all great ideas.- Also, make sure that when the fan is on while the engine is idling, that the alternator is keeping up - If the battery is below 12V at idle when the fan is on, then the alternator is losing the race....

Originally Posted by RedHawk

Car now is tracking straight and riding well at 80 to 90 mph but honeslty not thrilled.

Hey - You're gaining on it, and take some pride in the accomplishments earned (and the knowledge gained) along the way...

Funny- My car was for sale for 7 weeks, and in that whole time, I really only had one potential buyer who truly understood what the honest value of a "well sorted" car really is...

[RedHawk]

Originally Posted by cycleguy55

Presumably the shop's fabrication of new tower brackets involved welding on the new ones. If so, I believe the process of welding could easily damage sensitive electrical components such as the diode and/or other components unless proper precautions are taken (e.g. disconnecting the battery).

Coincidence? Possible. Cause and effect? Probably.

Good point.

[RedHawk]

Originally Posted by moore_rb

Nice....




What spec is the T-stat? If it is a 195, then you are running right about where you should expect to be- If it's a 180, then check to see if you are still running lean, or if you have a coolant flow blockage somewhere in the system.

On a side-note- I know 200-210 sounds high, and is not the ideal temp range for peak performance; but the closer to the boiling point of water you run your engine, the better it is for your motor oil, because your oil typically runs about 20 degrees hotter than the water temp, and having the oil run above 212F allows all the condensation and other atmospheric contaminants that settle into your oil to evaporate off, leaving the oil to do a better job of lubricating, and flushing the normal wear off the bearings and rings.

So, you may not be making peak power at 200+, but you ARE improving durability and longevity in your engine...




560 is plenty of CFM for your 351 (unless it revs to 8 grand), but it's still a Holley...

For street driveability, and ease of tuning, I'm a huge fan of the Weber re-designed Edelbrock and Carter Carbs. Sure, they don't look as "correct", but who can see what's underneath the air cleaner...? Another big plus with the Edelbrocks/Carters is that they have no gaskets below the fuel level, so they are much less leaky than Holleys, too...




Electric fans pull a LOT of current - a 30 amp fuse, a switching relay, and 14 gauge wire (minimum) are all great ideas.- Also, make sure that when the fan is on while the engine is idling, that the alternator is keeping up - If the battery is below 12V at idle when the fan is on, then the alternator is losing the race....



Hey - You're gaining on it, and take some pride in the accomplishments earned (and the knowledge gained) along the way...

Funny- My car was for sale for 7 weeks, and in that whole time, I really only had one potential buyer who truly understood what the honest value of a "well sorted" car really is...

Thanks!

Yeah this has been a ride, lol.

I think its a 195 stat.

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by moore_rb

Electric fans pull a LOT of current - a 30 amp fuse, a switching relay, and 14 gauge wire (minimum) are all great ideas.- Also, make sure that when the fan is on while the engine is idling, that the alternator is keeping up - If the battery is below 12V at idle when the fan is on, then the alternator is losing the race....

When the relay for my fans quit I wired a pair of 40 amp relays in parallel and installed a 30 amp circuit breaker in the circuit feeding them. I've not tripped the breaker yet, but if it overloads it will trip out, cool down, then re-set, all by itself. I may have a problem to deal with, but at least I should be able to limp home.

[RedHawk]

Originally Posted by RedHawk

Thanks!

Yeah this has been a ride, lol.

I think its a 195 stat.

Havent checked yet but what if the alternator isnt keeping up? I just put a new 65amp one in.

[James Stern]

65 amp didn't cut if for my CRII. I went to 100 amp.

[RedHawk]

Okay so as you may know I paid good money for someone to take a crowbar to my resonably good cobra.

Along with numerous problems they caused I am happy to report that two major ones have been solved. Overheating and electrical issues.

The solutions to the above turned out to be so darn simple that I collasped onto the driveway once my neighbor Rod and I figured it out.

Electrical.
Okay so the shop I took the car to took liberty and did a whole bunch of wire dressing most of which I didnt authorise. In doing so they re-installed the starter solenoid ground to a rubber clamp then to the heads. Lolci! Essentially the only reason I was getting intermittently power was the rubber had gotten so hot it partially melted giving touch and go contact. I seperated ground and bolted seperately to heads. Engine started right up on first key turn and idled perfectly.

Overheating
Went for a lap and shorlty afterward the car started to overheat but only while in slow traffic. It would run around 200 to 210 at 60mph then shoot up to 220 then 230 pulling up in driveway when bypass house would start leaking coolant. While driving my neighbor Rod said it seems like you need more airflow like a bigger fan or radiator combo but I'm not sure.

So when we pulled back in the driveway and I parked the car and left idling. The car cooled about 10 degrees to about 210. I popped the hood. While Rod walked around to front of car he noticed something strange. Hot air blowing through the front nose at his legs. Hmmmm what!! I reached in the engine compartment and was like wait a minute! Is the fan blade blowing air at the radiaotor from inside??? We tunrned off car to see which way blades were rotating. Clockwise!!. So we swithed + and - and wammo air was now being pulled through the radiator and not at the radiator from the hot engine. Oh my gosh!!!

These fellas at the SHOP wired the fan control board wrong and had the fan blowing hot engine heat into the radiator from within.

So a couple switch arooos on the wires and test run with a couple run and guns and the temp never even got to 200 staying steady around 190.

Great googly moogly!!

Hoooray!

[cycleguy55]

It's amazing sometimes how big problems can be caused by simple things with an easy fix. Glad to hear you found and fixed those.

[RedHawk]

Originally Posted by cycleguy55

It's amazing sometimes how big problems can be caused by simple things with an easy fix. Glad to hear you found and fixed those.

I know your not saying this but on the surface they look easy, but it actually took quite a bit of brain damage to find them. I guess I underestimated how incompetent they really were and didnt think they would screw up such a simple thing. I mean what the heck.

Anyway drove the car 40 mins to Denver and back with no issues with overheating or electrical except the suspension needs to be examined further. Basically as mentioned earlier the tie rods need to be dealt with so I can dial in proper alignment specs. Noticing bump stear.

More.to come....

[MaSnaka]

Thanks for the follow up RedHawk. Good luck with your suspension.

John

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by RedHawk

I know your not saying this but on the surface they look easy, but it actually took quite a bit of brain damage to find them. I guess I underestimated how incompetent they really were and didnt think they would screw up such a simple thing. I mean what the heck.

Anyway drove the car 40 mins to Denver and back with no issues with overheating or electrical except the suspension needs to be examined further. Basically as mentioned earlier the tie rods need to be dealt with so I can dial in proper alignment specs. Noticing bump stear.

More.to come....

In no way was I suggesting "simple" also means "easy" - sometimes it's far from easy to find and fix.

I found the upper half of my rear main seal installed backwards and, to continue the theme, the side pipe muffler inserts were installed in opposite directions (one with the louvers facing forward, the other facing back). The emergency flasher wiring was cut off under the dash and the brake lights were wired so they'd only work when the ignition was on. The gas tank was installed without a vent to the filler tube and was not only slow to fill but a b**ch to do so without spilling gasoline all over the bodywork. Oh, I almost forgot - the rollover check valve on the tank was installed backwards.

[rbgray1]

Originally Posted by RedHawk

I know your not saying this but on the surface they look easy, but it actually took quite a bit of brain damage to find them. I guess I underestimated how incompetent they really were and didnt think they would screw up such a simple thing. I mean what the heck.

Anyway drove the car 40 mins to Denver and back with no issues with overheating or electrical except the suspension needs to be examined further. Basically as mentioned earlier the tie rods need to be dealt with so I can dial in proper alignment specs. Noticing bump stear.

More.to come....

Redhawk,

Just getting ready to weld in my supports for my new Heidts front upper and lower A-Arms for coil overs.

I decided to ditch the strut bars and go with full lower A-Arms.

Anyway, I took numerous measurements with the stock Ford Arms and Strut rods and then mocked up the new Heidts arms. Since the Heidt arms use 5/8 inch bolts and the factory uses 1/2 in bolts for the lower arms, I used a 12 in long piece of threaded rod to temporarily attach and make all the necessary measurements with the new Heidts arms.

Long and the short of it, even though the new Heidts arms are straight at the ball joint while the factory Ford arms angle up about 7 degrees at the upper and lower ball joints, the actual spindle face measurements are EXACTLY correct to the stock Ford stamped arms. I even kept my tie rod settings EXACTLY the way they were with the stock Ford arms and the spindle tracking (toe-in) is exactly the same from factory to Heidts.

I have two sheets of measurements from the before and after measurements, please let me know if you would like me to forward them to you so you can measure yourself or have a shop do it.

I measured the following before and after, these are critical:

Front of Spindle face at spindle center side to side (Ford 50 15/16", Heidts 50 15/16")
Rear of Spindle face at spindle center side to side (Ford 50 7/8", Heidts 50 7/8")
(This is basically Toe-In as the spindle face aligns with the wheels/tires) Above is approximately 1/16+ of toe in at the rim.

Rear axle center to spindle center (measured at the face/base of the spindle where the spindle meets the "flat" portion) (Ford 94 7/16, Heidts 94 1/2") the 1/16 difference may be due to the upper arm in a very slight different position than the Ford OEM or just a variance in tram measurements. This is close enough and can be adjusted during alignment with the position of the upper arms on the T bolts.

Length from rear side pipe hole on the frame to spindle face center (similar to above, just an additional point) (Ford 77 1/4", Heidts 77 1/4")

Diagonal length from side pipe mount to opposite spindle center. (Ford 92 3/8", Heidts 92 1/2") 1/8 difference same as above, definitely within adjustment range) This measurement is critical and should be EXACTLY the same to ensure the car doesn't "dog track", meaning the tires do not track in the same horizontal plane when driving. Another way to spot this is to wet a portion of the road near your house and slowly drive from a wet road to dry surface with the steering wheel straight. If correct, the tire patches should have even overlap when you look at the wet tire contact patch on the street, however this is a rough measurement only.

Side to side face of spindle center to face of spindle center. Ford 50 29/32 +/- 1/32, Heidts 50 29/32 +/- 1/32) exactly the same.

Side to side Spindle Tie Rod hole to spindle tie rod hole. (Ford 47 7/8", Heidts 47 7/8") This measurement was done AFTER spindle faces on both sides were set to 1/16"+ toe in again)

A couple of questions/ suggestions to check:

1. I'm supporting/welding the new Heidts Lower A-Arms in different method than what your shop did. The Heidts lower arms require that you drill out the lower a-arms holes to 5/8 of an inch, weld on support tubes and gusset appropriately. I'm not sure how the previous shop would screw this up, but you may want to check if this was done "off center" from the factory holes. I can provide this measurement (from lower a-arm attachment bolt side to side, front of A-Arm and rear of A-Arm) to you if you need it, it will just be a few hours before I can measure this on my car.

2. Check your measurement from tie rod end to tie rod end. This can be done with a tape measure fairly easily. Measure at the top of the spindle tie rod knuckle where the tie rod attaches to the spindle arm. Most accurate is on the top of the steering knuckle right where the tie rod comes out of the knuckle from the bottom at the tie rod nut. This should be close(+/- 1/4") to 47 7/8" from center of tie rod ball joint to center of tie rod ball joint!!!!

3. Did your shop make any alterations to the front of each Spring/Perch tower? If not, take a very close look at this! The new Heidts Lower arms will contact the front of each spring tower, just above where the boot of the steering rack is during suspension travel. If there is any contact from the lower a-arm with the spring tower during fully compressed suspension travel, this is very dangerous! I'm personally going to cut a 1.5" slit in the front of the angled portion of the spring tower, bend the 1/8" steel inward to provide clearance and the re-weld the tower. If you shop simply beat this area in with a hammer, the strength of the steel may have changed your lower geometry, doubtful, but something to check anyway. Take a look at the front portion of your spring towers and see if this area looks like it was beat on with a BFH.

I wish you the best of luck and please let me know if you need any additional measurements or photos.

BTW, my car is a CR1 and based on your car if it is a CR2, some of the measurements may be different because I understand that Don Scott made some modifications to the frames from the original CR1.