|
Author
|
Topic: difference between 94/95 and 96-98 spindles
|
1sick65
¯
Member # 3957
|
posted
 
 
is there any difference between these and if so what are the pros and cons of each. also what all is necesary to do the swap from mark 7 shit to the late model stuff?
Posts: 1457 | From: Sacramento,CA | Registered: Jan 2004
| :
|
|
cdog301
¯
Member # 5136
|
posted
about 1/2 inch more on the track width for the 1996 spindles than the 1994 bad if you want to run 17's or 18's on the rim and tire
[ January 03, 2006, 07:35 PM: Message edited by: cdog301 ]
--------------------
1992 Notch
Dss Pro Bullet
Afr 165's
GT40 U/L
Bassani X w/cats
and other goodies!!!!!!!
I love MOSTLY MUSTANGS OAKLAND CA
Posts: 386 | From: Richmond CA | Registered: Dec 2004
| :
|
|
1sick65
¯
Member # 3957
|
posted
so why cant you run 17's or 18's, i am pretty sure that wrong, cuz for one, thats one of the main reasons people swap to 5 lug and also hella people run 17s with this setup.
Posts: 1457 | From: Sacramento,CA | Registered: Jan 2004
| :
|
|
Luke87GT
Lay'n more stripes
than Caltrans
Member # 21
|
posted
Here's the scoop.
96+ spindles push each front wheel out 8mm further than the 94-95 spindles.
94-95 spindles have a curved tie rod end mounting arm. This means you are more likely to require a bump-steer kit if your car is lowered. The tie rod will we less parallel to the ground compared to the 96+ spindles.
I can tell you that I personally would NOT use 96+ spindles on a fox 5 lug conversion. I have 94 spindles and my car is close enough to rubbing. I would not want them to stick out anymore.
That's not to say it won't work. Some people have gotten them to work.
You can learn a lot from my site:
http://www.mustangmotorsport.com/sn95conversion.html
--------------------
Stangless
Posts: 7802 | From: San Mateo | Registered: Jul 2000
| :
|
|
Email this post to someone!
Printer friendly view of this Ford topic
