Something that has not been repeated 1000 times in this thread is that as soon as you modify the existing MII setup you have in your car, whether it needs it or not, you definately shift the liability for any kind of failure, from manufacturer to yourself.

Mikey

__________________
BE different....ACT normal.

No one is completely useless..They can always be used as a bad example

Amen.

Vince

__________________
Here's to you DoC, you will always be here.
My project 34
http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/34-...ght=34+progress

Thanks Mikey - I think that's where I was headed before I got sidetracked by something, probably CRS.

Again, thanks for stating that very important consideration.

Dave

Congrats. Takes one risky unknown out of your hot rod equation. Now cross your fingers you put your engine & tranny together properly!

What?!?!!! You mean there are rules for that stuff too?! Jeeeeeeeeeeez!!!!

Antny :-)

Great thread. I've read this thread and the previous one on the subject and I can certainly see the value in having strut rods. My '36 Chevy 2 door sedan had a Fatman's MII crossmember with stock MII CAs and strut rods when I bought it. I kept the crossmember but ditched the rest. I added air bags and shocks from Air Ride Technologies but I still worry (a little) about the lack of strut rods.

Here's my question. The strut rods wouldn't work in stock form due to the lack of "range of motion" that the air ride suspension requires (when deflated). What are your opinions on adding a strut rod set up that has a heim joint or bushing on the end nearest the frame so that it would still be able to travel with the suspension?

I'm thinking this would work best with the strut rods on the front of the suspension (as opposed to the stock rear location) so that the heim/bushing is in tension instead of compression in the event of a hard hit that would bring it into play. In normal driving, the strut rod is just "along for the ride".

Richard

What you are describing is an after market strut rod and yes, that would be fine. I would go w/ a rubber bushing designed strut rod though 'cause heim joints tend to wear out faster. Great on race cars where they are rarely used in clean environments but not so good on the grimy street.

Oh glad to hear hes ok but what a crapy way for the rod to go i was thinking of puting a IFS in my truck but know i'm glad i didn't hope he gets that old rod going again one why are another

The mustang II I'm using in my rambler is set up very close to the photo that staleg posted. I'm hoping it will be stout enough but am considering adding struts if I can find room because I keep adding hardware to this car and I'm sure it will go over 3000 lbs.. One problem I did encounter by adding another bracket to the rear of the lower control arm is the 5/8 bolt was a bit to short for my liking so I purchased some 5/8 diameter high strength tool steel and threaded each end in a lathe.

Attached Thumbnails

   

At a minimum box that secondary bracket to the X-member. That will relieve a lot of the stress on the thin frame from the bracket. Strut rod eliminator A-arms are fine IF you beef up the system to handle them. Just pulling off the strut rods is a really horrible and deadly idea. The new wide A-arms they add on these setups are great in their own strength but the X-member will fail without adding the extra resistance to bending removed with the strut rods.

Gentlemen and Ladies

I don't wish to cause any problems on this discussion, because I am inclined to feel that the lower A arms would definitely be better off with the added strut rod for support.
But.....I have to say that in all the engineering done by the companies that developed the MII systems such as TCI, Heidts, and Fatmans would it not be fair to have the companies give their opinion of their system and any other facts and/or opinion on this post.

I wish everyone who has responded to this post to please don't misunderstand me because I value your opinion and you have helped me immensely on my project and I Thank You all for this.

In reality this would only be a fair way to judge the aftermarket MII systems out there and we do this with other companies on their service and parts.

Thanks for listening

30dee

Howdy all, long time reader, first time poster (so please forgive any naiveté)

I am in the early planning stages of my first rod, and am thinking a ’35 ford sedan with IFS and IRS should do well. This thread has given a lot of weight to the argument on the progressive automotive page that the C4 corvette IFS is safe (newer technology, and I assume, WHOLE and unmolested).

Anyone have any experience with a C4 IFS?

I don't have personal experience but I have seen several rods built using C4 Vette IFS and IRS. It's an excellent system, as you'd expect. The problem I've seen is that because of it's width, it severely limits your choice of wheels for the car.

Progressive Automotive makes a setup that eliminates this problem.
http://www.progressiveautomotive.com/sweet.htm

HTH

There is a guy I know that made doing some model specific C4 conversions a business.
He thinks very highly of them.

http://www.newmancarcreations.com/

Paul doesn't do anything earlier than 53, but give him a call, he might be able to steer you in the right direction, or give you some insight into the process..

Later, mikey

__________________
BE different....ACT normal.

No one is completely useless..They can always be used as a bad example

I was making that reply when SinistrV6 was posting


That Progressive setup is cool, I didn't know about that until you posted it.

Mikey

__________________
BE different....ACT normal.

No one is completely useless..They can always be used as a bad example