[polkat]

Hi folks! Long time Mopar builder/racer but new to true Hot Rods. I've got a 1948 Dodge 4 dr sedan I've just started on. The stock front end is trash, and I weld pretty good, so I've been thinking about a front clip. Looks like everyone is going MII's now. Would that be good for this Dodge? I'm not rich, so I'll be pulling something from a junkyard. What's the best car to look for? And does anyone know if there are detailed basic instructions for doing this anywhere on the web? Thanks!

[30desoto]

polkat

I would think that your car maybe to heavy for a M11 kit, I know on this board that there are some that have used a camero front clip on their car, 38special for one, and he is happy with his, if I may say this you might PM him and he can give you the particulars on how it was done and /or check out his journal there or others but my mind is weak and don't recall them all, mine is a small car and I have a tci M11 on it which is fine, yours is allot heavier.
welcome to the board
30dee

[Centerline]

Your car is NOT to heavy for a Mustang II IFS. If it was 10 years newer maybe. I don't know how the myth that a Mustang II IFS can only be used for lightweight cars got started but it is just that, a myth.

If you're going to pull one from a junkyard then get the whole crossmember, strut rods and all. I would also PM Willys36 since he as extensive experience on installing the stock Mustang crossmember. The technique is a bit different when using a stock crossmember instead of a kit but the results will be just as good and using the stock crossmember will save you some bucks. Rebuild parts are available for the Mustang II IFS all over the place and so are disk brake upgrade kits as well as rebuilt power and manual racks.

Good luck.

[30desoto]

polkat

I got to say that CENTERLINE is probably RIGHT, I am just in this for the fun and it is a good hobby and keeps me out of trouble.

I should have said IN MY OPINION and I apologize to you for being miss leading in any way.

Good luck on your rod and remember to have fun doing it

30dee

[Deuce]

Originally Posted by Centerline

Your car is NOT to heavy for a Mustang II IFS. If it was 10 years newer maybe. I don't know how the myth that a Mustang II IFS can only be used for lightweight cars got started but it is just that, a myth.

The fact that the donor cars ( Pintos and Mustang II's ) which are LIGHT CARS.....most likely lead to the opinion that they are for light cars. Compact cars with 4 lug wheels at that. With 9 inch brakes........all lead one to believe that Ford designed that front end for a light car


Compare a A arm from a similar weight vehicle like a Chevelle or Monte Carlo ( similar weight to your 48 4 door ) to a Pinto/Mustang II A arm you you can easily see the difference........even Ray Charles could...

I would not install a Pinto/Mustang II IFS under anything that weighs over 3500 lbs......but that's MY opinion......

[Centerline]

What bothers me about these discussions is that when people think of the Mustang II IFS they think that just because the cars were relatively light the suspensions can't handle the weight of a normal street rod. This simply isn't true. The Mustang IFS was designed to support a Ford 302 V8 with the old style air conditioning setup mounted directly over the crossmember. In almost all street rods the engine is mounted with the front damper over the center of the crossmember which removes a whole lot of weight from the front of the vehicle. This is significant.

As an example.... When I was building my truck I used a set of Mustang II V8 springs I had left over from a previous project for mock-up. With most of the truck assembled including the hemi and trans (basically everything except the two front fenders and hood) I couldn't get those springs to move. Even jumping on the front of the frame (and I'm no small guy) wouldn't get those springs to compress. They are designed to handle a LOT of weight. Later I changed them out for the set I planned to run all along (a Mustang II 4 cylinder set) and the suspension worked perfectly. If my 750 lb. hemi had been mounted 2 feet further forward then it would have been sitting in the same location as the stock Mustang 302 and would have compressed the V8 springs properly.

All that said, I agree with Deuce and wouldn't install this suspension on anything over 3500 lbs. The stock Mustangs even with the V8 didn't go quite that heavy.

[Deuce]

Centerline and I have had this discussion ...many times......
In different threads and on different boards.....

He and I both feel differently about this Pinto/Mustang II thing.....
And we agree to disagree .... as gentlemen...

Without weighing you 48 Dodge 4 door sedan ( which is not a little, small car ).......I cannot and will not suggest any changes......that's for you, the owner to decide. That said, many folks use the Pinto/Mustang II is vehicles that I would not......BUT my wife says I " over engineer " most everything I do....

I do not use 8 inch Fords ......9's are just too easy to find
I do not use Turbo 350's.....I have over 350 HP ..... so I use Turbo 400's
I use 1/2 inch wheel studs ( no little 7/16ths for me )
I always box my 32 chassis....no exceptions
I always use a external transmission cooler in addition to a 4 core radiator..
I always use 4 bolt main blocks.( yes I know 2 bolts are good to 450 HP )
And I never use a Pinto/Mustang II IFS under anything over 3500 lbs

Just me.......and my hangups.....but I rarely have equipment failures..

.. When in Doubt...make it stout... works for me......


disclaimer of sorts.......
I am going to use a 700R4 in my new project.....a untested new area for me.....HOPE it will hold 450 HP....if not....I have the chassis fixed where a good old reliable Turbo 400 can be installed.

.

[poncho62]

They say that the Dodge Dakota clip works well..............that would keep it all MPOAR.

[Centerline]

duplicate post

[Centerline]

Originally Posted by Deuce

Centerline and I have had this discussion ...many times......
In different threads and on different boards.....

He and I both feel differently about this Pinto/Mustang II thing.....
And we agree to disagree .... as gentlemen...

Without weighing you 48 Dodge 4 door sedan ( which is not a little, small car ).......I cannot and will not suggest any changes......that's for you, the owner to decide. That said, many folks use the Pinto/Mustang II is vehicles that I would not......BUT my wife says I " over engineer " most everything I do....

I do not use 8 inch Fords ......9's are just too easy to find
I do not use Turbo 350's.....I have over 350 HP ..... so I use Turbo 400's
I use 1/2 inch wheel studs ( no little 7/16ths for me )
I always box my 32 chassis....no exceptions
I always use a external transmission cooler in addition to a 4 core radiator..
I always use 4 bolt main blocks.( yes I know 2 bolts are good to 450 HP )
And I never use a Pinto/Mustang II IFS under anything over 3500 lbs

Just me.......and my hangups.....but I rarely have equipment failures..

.. When in Doubt...make it stout... works for me......


disclaimer of sorts.......
I am going to use a 700R4 in my new project.....a untested new area for me.....HOPE it will hold 450 HP....if not....I have the chassis fixed where a good old reliable Turbo 400 can be installed.

.

Well said and I agree with 99.9% of it. Give me time and I'll figure out what .1% I disagree with.

Originally Posted by poncho62

They say that the Dodge Dakota clip works well..............that would keep it all MOPAR.

You know I hadn't thought of that. Everything I've heard is good about that swap. Don't know how difficult it would be with that chassis but you're right it would keep it all Mopar. And THAT'S a good thing.

[mosstrooper]

I am building a 39 Hudson Coupe, and when it came to the front clip, everyone seemed to use a Mustang, why I don't know, they just do. But I wanted a complete set of running gear, front to back and all compatable. I chose an 81 Chrysler New Yorker because it was the exact same track and wheelbase as the Hudson. The Mopar front subframe has the engine mountings, steering box and Torsion Bar suspension all in one neat unit. The New Yorker has it's torsion bars running fore and aft, other cars in the lineup use torsion bars which run across the subframe in an even smaller package. The ride height is fully adjustable by the turn of a screw acting on the torsion bar, so you can have just the right stance without cutting spring coils or having new ones made. I used the whole lot, front subframe, engine/box, driveshaft, rear axle, plus much interior stuff.

This setup would also keep your car all Mopar, and this type of suspension spanned many, many years on Mopars. The Mopar web site "Alpar" has diagrams which you can look at.

[polkat]

Thanks guys.......hummm, a lot to think about. Using the search function here, I read an old post somewhere that said the late 40's Mopars had a pretty good stock front suspension to begin with, and that one economic approach is to upgrade what's already there. Does that sound logical? What about strength factors? I'm thinking of running a Mopar 383/727/8-3/4" setup.
I don't mind kingpins if they are strong enough (I see fatman has a dropped kingpin setup for this car), but I don't like the double tierod pitman arm, and don't understand why the shocks are connected between the two A arms, rather then to the bottom A arm and the frame!?

Or is that headed up the wrong alley and I should get back to thinking about clips? I'm too new at this :-)

[Henry Highrise]

A lot of guys us a Volarie clip. That way it stays Mopar.

[farna]

The Mustang II setup is darn near identical to 60's Fairlane setups, and also similar to 62-69 Rambler setups. The Fairlanes used a front mounted strut rod, the Ramblers used a high mounted spring (spring on top of steering knuckle/spindle assembly, NOT on the A-arm). The arms will support the weight with no problem, as long as the upper spring mounts are welded in and properly supported. That's where all the weight is. So yes, from an engineering standpoint it will work with a heavier car (I'm not an engineer, but I'm surrounded by them where I work -- they agree with my assesment).

One thing to remember -- the flathead six that was originally in that 48 Doge is one HEAVY mo-fo!! The "little" 195.6 flat head Rambler six bare block weighs more than a late 60s 302 Ford small block, by 10-20 pounds. The pistons are as heavy though smaller (3.125" bore), rods and crank are much heavier also. Every engine built before 62-63 had forged crank and rods as well as thick cast blocks because thin casting techniques and casting techniques and materials that allowed cast crank shafts to be durable enough weren't invented and put into regular use until then. My old 61 American weighed 200-300 pounds more than my buddies 72 Pinto back in high school. We actually weighed the cars. I guarantee the old flat head six in my car easily weighed twice what the Pinto engine did, and was the weight difference.

[polkat]

So if I understand this correctly, due to the high weight facxtor of the original '48 Dodge engine, if one were to use a modern big block V-8 (I had the 383 in mind) and cut the weight down with aluminum (heads, intake, water pump, etc.), the weight difference on the front end would be marginal?

Can anyone answer my earlier question about upgrading the original suspension/brakes rather then going the clip route? I was told that the original suspension in these 40's Mopars was not all that bad, and that upgrading it with disks, a better shock setup, lowered kingpin setup, etc. might be a cheaper alternative. make any sense?