[matt167]

The Camaro actually weighs right about what your old Chevy weighs. Bit lighter, but not really all that much. It would be what I recommend to use if you really want a highway driver with a good inline.

My Rat rod has a 1994 Ford Ranger front end on it. It's not perfect by any means, but it will do what I want it to. However, I wouldn't think of it for my 1951 Chevy..

[aosborn]

I still have my Grandfathers 65 F-100 that he bought new. The first year of the twin I-beam. I just gifted it to my son upon his graduation from college.

GFaRT, you are right on the money with your analysis of that front end. If you install it properly so the camber is where you want it at ride height, you won't have a problem. It also goes negative in bump which is what you want. Toe wear won't be a problem if all the steering linkage is tight, just like on any other car. You could add an anti-roll bar, (my son and I plan on doing that to Grandpa's truck), and weight jacks on the coil spring were also in the plan to fine tune ride height. Static camber on my Gramps old truck is about 1/2 degree positive, so one plan we had was to redrill the inner beam pivot up as far as we could (about 3/4") and then adjust the truck down with the weight jacks until we are sitting at about 1/2 degree negative on the camber. That should lower the truck about 1 1/2" to 2" with no other modifications. Then maybe add power steering and it will then be good to go.

Folks say that those old Chevy's are heavy. What is heavy on those old cars is the engines and cast iron transmissions. The frames and the bodies are actually quite light. Have you weighed your car? I would have no concerns putting a Mustang II in one of those, and have many times. Mustang II's aren't that light either I might add. All that 5 mph bumper crud, V-8's in many of them, hundreds of pounds of ugly simulated leather upholstery and plastic door panels, and don't forget the padded vinyl tops!

Re-drill the flanges if you want to change the bolt pattern. Not a big deal...

Regards,

Andy

[GFaRT]

Thanks for the comments Andy. I haven't weighed the car, but When I get a chance I'll take it to the scale. It will be interesting to know the weight change afer the modifications. Will post the numbers.

John

[timothale]

There were very few light duty F 100's built in 1980 that used the passenger car 5 x 4.5 patterrn and 14 in wheels. At the end of the production run the factory donated a pallet of 9 in rear ends to the college where I was teaching. I did some saturday work building selves and the dept head asked me if I wanted the ones not used for Demo's . I said they were too wide for my roadster projects but decided to take one, about a month after they were all gone I found that they were all detroit lockers. Government regulations changed and it was cheaper for the factory to build F 150's with a higher GVW rating and fall into a different emission classification and not require expensive emission equipment, air pump, cats, etc.

[adantessr]

Originally Posted by GFaRT

Thanks for the comments Andy. I haven't weighed the car, but When I get a chance I'll take it to the scale. It will be interesting to know the weight change afer the modifications. Will post the numbers.

John

My '57 chevy two door sedan 210 was the lightest car that I have owned. Funny that I remember the weights of my first three cars. '57 210 was 3373, '62 Impala SS w/327 & PG was 3485, '67 Impala SS w/283 & PG was 3615. Compare that to my 2010 Equinox w/2.4 liter 4 cyl & 6 spd. auto weighing 3700 lbs. Wanna see something scary, look at the weight of a new mustang or camaro. And we thought the '70 olds 442 was heavy.

[aosborn]

I did a restoration on a 71 Hemi Cuda some time ago. It had a trashed drivers door so we found a replacement from a 73 or 74. That replacement looked identical, but it must have weighed 50 or 60 pounds more. It was due to internal bracing for side impact protection I would guess. It was amazing the difference in just a few model years.

New cars are made from lighter materials, but they have to add so much structure to meet crash standards and so many options, they never seem to get any lighter overall.

Check out the link for a comparison of a 2010 Camaro vs a 1968.

2010 Camaro SS vs 1968 Camaro SS - Tampa Bay sports car | Examiner.com

The 2010 is about 800lbs heavier than the 1968!