|
|
The time now is Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:48 pm |
|
|
Author
|
Thread |
|
|
1320lane
Senior Member
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 270
Location: Central Oklahoma |
My thought is to change spindles for a better choice of racing brakes. _________________ Larry Hampton
______________________________________________
'63 Fairlane 2-dr post. Race car since at least '67. In the process of turning it into a proto-clone Nostalgia Super Stock car with FE power and three pedals.
|
Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:45 pm |
|
|
purf_man
Senior Member
Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 151
Location: Dayton TN |
what are you looking at? you can get adaptors to run SN95 mustang brakes on your stock spindles.
http://www.mustangsteve.com/cobrabrakes.html
I am looking at picking these up once I get a little farther along to getting my car on the road again. The GT/V6 brakes use the same mount and will clear 15" wheels. They use a smaller rotor though and a single piston cast iron caliper.
I am not sure if there are any better upgrades for a rearsteer spindle.
|
Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:43 am |
|
|
mygirls63
Senior Member
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 416
Location: Kansas |
quote:
Originally posted by 1320lane:
My thought is to change spindles for a better choice of racing brakes.
Larry, any 66-69 Mustang brake setup will work.
I used a Wilwood 4 piston setup for these years Mustang. Bolted right up.
No need for different spindles to use these. _________________ Scott
1963 Fairlane Mini tub 10pt cage New 408" C4 Canfield 195CC heads Comp solid roller Victor Jr. 9" w/4.11? gears Moser spool & 35 spline axles. www.marksullense85carburetors.com
|
Sun Jan 10, 2010 4:18 pm |
|
|
1320lane
Senior Member
Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 270
Location: Central Oklahoma |
Purf_man, I'm not looking at anything made up from stock. The car will be built to be legal to 8.50's in the 1/4, not sure if it'll run that while I own it, but that's what I'm building it to.
Scott, that's good to know. I haven't looked real close at them, but I know how the '70-'73 Mustang spindles are supposed to be heavier duty and was thinking towards that. _________________ Larry Hampton
______________________________________________
'63 Fairlane 2-dr post. Race car since at least '67. In the process of turning it into a proto-clone Nostalgia Super Stock car with FE power and three pedals.
|
Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:30 pm |
|
|
mygirls63
Senior Member
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 416
Location: Kansas |
Yes, 71 & up spindles are heavier, Granada size spindle, but the steering arm geometry is different as well as the tie rod ends.
I have some Maverick drum brake spindles I bought to swap but elected to stay with the 63 Fairlane spindles as they were the same as Mustang drum spindles. I bolted up the Wilwood setup, no issues & no bump steer to worry about at the traps.
I could make you a heck of a deal on these if you wanted them. I am not sure if they differ from the newer Mustang, steering wise, but if I remember correctly, they are the same as Granada. They are for the larger bearings.
Wilwood & Aerospace offer kits for this spindle. _________________ Scott
1963 Fairlane Mini tub 10pt cage New 408" C4 Canfield 195CC heads Comp solid roller Victor Jr. 9" w/4.11? gears Moser spool & 35 spline axles. www.marksullense85carburetors.com
|
Sun Jan 10, 2010 10:52 pm |
|
|
CompactFairlane
Member
Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Posts: 87
Location: Arizona |
quote:
Originally posted by mygirls63:
Yes, 71 & up spindles are heavier, Granada size spindle, but the steering arm geometry is different as well as the tie rod ends.
I have some Maverick drum brake spindles I bought to swap but elected to stay with the 63 Fairlane spindles as they were the same as Mustang drum spindles. I bolted up the Wilwood setup, no issues & no bump steer to worry about at the traps.
I could make you a heck of a deal on these if you wanted them. I am not sure if they differ from the newer Mustang, steering wise, but if I remember correctly, they are the same as Granada. They are for the larger bearings.
Wilwood & Aerospace offer kits for this spindle.
Actually, I
believe
that the cut point was 1969-70 with the Boss 302 Mustangs in 1969 using the bigger bearing spindles as well.
|
Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:24 am |
|
|
mygirls63
Senior Member
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 416
Location: Kansas |
quote:
Originally posted by CompactFairlane:
quote:
Originally posted by mygirls63:
Yes, 71 & up spindles are heavier, Granada size spindle, but the steering arm geometry is different as well as the tie rod ends.
I have some Maverick drum brake spindles I bought to swap but elected to stay with the 63 Fairlane spindles as they were the same as Mustang drum spindles. I bolted up the Wilwood setup, no issues & no bump steer to worry about at the traps.
I could make you a heck of a deal on these if you wanted them. I am not sure if they differ from the newer Mustang, steering wise, but if I remember correctly, they are the same as Granada. They are for the larger bearings.
Wilwood & Aerospace offer kits for this spindle.
Actually, I
believe
that the cut point was 1969-70 with the Boss 302 Mustangs in 1969 using the bigger bearing spindles as well.
Yes, there were 2 spindle applications in 69 - 70. Depending on who you talk to depends on why this was.
That is why I said 71 & up as that I do know is correct. Anything 68 and older used the small bearings. Both size bearings were used in 69 & 70.
This can be confusing. _________________ Scott
1963 Fairlane Mini tub 10pt cage New 408" C4 Canfield 195CC heads Comp solid roller Victor Jr. 9" w/4.11? gears Moser spool & 35 spline axles. www.marksullense85carburetors.com
|
Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:14 pm |
|
|
wishbone
Senior Member
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 359
|
Quick question, kinda on the subject. I am looking to beef up my rear axles. It is the 8" Ford with 3.80 gears posi under a 347 stroker with 425hp.
I put the stock axles back in the car. They were in a 3 speed automatic 260 engine and looked to be in really good shape. Do you think they will hold up to some burn outs or drag races? If not, what is a beefy pure replacement that will fit right in? I was told that Maverick axles are a direct fit and are beefier. Anyone know if this is the case? Thanks
|
Mon Jan 11, 2010 8:42 pm |
|
|
mygirls63
Senior Member
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 416
Location: Kansas |
The axles are the same size/splines as most 9" rears, ie: 28 spline.
Will they hold up? Who knows.
What transmission do you have?
On street tires they "
might
" be fine, but with slicks & a stick shift, most likely not.
Having said that, the 8" center section will let go before the axles will.
As far as what you heard about Maverick axles being beefier, nope, sorry. Someone is trying to sell you nothing for something. Mavericks came with the same 8" axle, and as I stated earlier, the 8" & 9" 28 spline axle is the same.
Pony up for a 9" axle and if you plan on running slicks on occasion, get 31 spline axles at a minimum. _________________ Scott
1963 Fairlane Mini tub 10pt cage New 408" C4 Canfield 195CC heads Comp solid roller Victor Jr. 9" w/4.11? gears Moser spool & 35 spline axles. www.marksullense85carburetors.com
|
Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:12 pm |
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|