You'll get all kinds of answers on this, from S-10 to Camaro to Nova to '78-'86 GM G body to Dakota. Only the S-10, Dakota and the G body have full frames, the others are unibody with subframes.

Drive the car straight ahead and stop it so that the wheels are straight ahead and measure from the centerline of the left front tire to the centerline of the right front tire. That's called the front track width. Do the same at the rear. That's called the rear track width. Now, measure between the centerlines of the front spindle and the rear axle. That's called the wheelbase. Post the measurements here.

I'm giving the meanings of these measurements so that newbies reading this can begin to pick up the proper nomenclature.

 

The 40 will have running boards and the headlights mount in removable "pods." The 41 did not have running boards and the headlights were in the fenders. In 42, they went to the fender extensions that were mounted on the front doors. That ran through 48. They changed the basic body in 49.

Techinspector1 has it right. My 41 had a 79-81 Camaro clip on it and it would have had to have been in the trees for the suspension to work. I wanted it low. Found an original frame and went Mustang II.

If you find one with the correct front track, chances are probably in the high 90% range that you are going to have to modify the floor. And, if you think you are going to save money over the MII, be sure and check the ball joints, tie rod ends, brake components, etc. and add in what you are going to have to pay for parts to rebuild it before you write off a new MII.

 

SO which Mll kit did you use?

 

I went with the Total Cost Involved unit. I do intend to put braces (at least on the rear) so the lower control arm bolt is in double shear. I am not sure if one will fit on the front and clear the rack unit. I have to lay it out. I do have a friend who is a professional welder, so welding the hats on was not an issue. The crossmember bolts in using the factory bolt hole locations. If it were not for Don doing my welding for me, I probably would have gone with the complete bolt in unit like the Chassis Engineering unit.

 

Arizona '41 Chevy coupe

I also am working on a '41 chev project. I have read some pro's and con's to S-10 frame swaps. The floor, and trink florr as well as the wheel houses will have to be replaced on my car. How would an s019 swap work, if you had plans to rear clip the frame with a narrowed rear clip from an after market company? That way I can get big rear tires under the factory rear fenders. I will have to fabricate body mounts also, along with replacing the fire wall as well. I would do the rear clip on any frame that I use.

Has anyone out there, actually done this swap? Is the Must II the better way to go?

 

My 41 had a 79-81 Camaro clip on it and it would have had to have been in the trees for the suspension to work. I wanted it low.

Sorry.. I posted on the wrong car.. :drunk: :drunk: :drunk: Sorry redsdad..

 

They will work fine... if you wanted it to sit low, all you had to do, is zee the front,, Then you can set it down as low as you want...You set the ride height when installing the clip...

The tires would only point straight ahead or rip the fenders off. A little tough to go around corners. I have attached a photo of the front wheel at full compression of the front suspension. The Camaro front end is too wide. I could have bought narrow a-frames and special offset wheels. But with all of that expense plus the expense of rebuilding the front end, it was much cheaper to go with a replacement frame and the MII. Plus, the steering box interfered with the radiator.

 

The tires would only point straight ahead or rip the fenders off. A little tough to go around corners. I have attached a photo of the front wheel at full compression of the front suspension. The Camaro front end is too wide. I could have bought narrow a-frames and special offset wheels. But with all of that expense plus the expense of rebuilding the front end, it was much cheaper to go with a replacement frame and the MII. Plus, the steering box interfered with the radiator.

I stand corrected... I guess I been up too long today... :drunk: :drunk: I have never used one in that car,, I thought I read where someone used one,,Guess I read wrong...We did use a S-10 clip in a 40 dodge once..It fit very nice,Like it was made for the car,,Just had to move it back a little because the steering box hit the grill a little..Couldn't even tell it was back a little..Sorry Redsdad.. :drunk:

 

Hello i have a 1940 or 41 chevy coupe ,dont know which one cant read the vin tag,but i would like to do a complete frame swap does any one know what frame would work under this car so that i can get the ps ,ds upgrade and the rearend.

It would be much easies to build a frame for it,, And you can set it up like you want...Finding a frame to fit, can be a lot more work then building one sometimes..

 

I know a guy who used an earlier, rear steer unit. I think those are out of 67 - 69 Camaro's and 68 - 74 Nova's. He cut 2 inches out of the center of the crossmember and centerlink and welded everything back together.

The one thing I get back to is that, unless you find one with a recently rebuilt front end and brakes, you are going to have to buy a bunch of new parts. Ball joints, upper and lower control arm bushings. tie rod ends, idler arm, centerlink, (can't remember if the pitman arm is a wear item or not, don't think it is), rotors, bearings, and calipers. All that stuff is new with a MII kit. Plus, the track width is better without a bunch of cutting and welding. And, you move to R&P.

I could have made the 79 - 81 Camaro work. But, I would have had to completely redesign the front sheet metal mounts. And, after I did all the mods to make it narrow enough and bought the new parts, I would have had far more in a front end that was not as good as the MII. I am not saying it can't be done. There are probably some out there running around and sitting low. It just seems to me to be an exercise in dollars chasing dimes. IMHO, I wouldn't recommend it.

 

It would be much easies to build a frame for it,, And you can set it up like you want...Finding a frame to fit, can be a lot more work then building one sometimes..

I think building a new frame would be a much better alternative than trying to cobble up a frame swap. I actually considered doing this. You can have it follow the stock frame configuration back to the rear fenders so the firewall and floor can be stock. You can use the stock body mounts. Then, at the rear fenders, you can move the rails in and tub it for some really wide tires. You could also notch it to make it real low in the back. And the stock body mounts could be moved inboard at the same time. You might lose the one directly over the axle depending on the notching and lowering. But these cars used 22 bolts to hold the body to the frame, so you could probably afford to lose 2!

 

I do intend to put braces (at least on the rear) so the lower control arm bolt is in double shear.

If you do this, remove the lower control arm and run a rod through the bolt holes so that as you push the bar through, it will tell you where to put the pivot point of the rear control arm that you will add. The centerline through the control arm holes needs to cut exactly through the center of the rear pivot. I've seen this botched more than once.

 

It amazes me that one guy who asked a completely novice question a week ago and hasn't had the interest to return to the discussion can generate so many good responses.

The fact of the matter is that all your suggestions are good and will work fine for someone who has fabrication ability. Its pretty plain, to me at least, this guy is a total novice. If you can't tell the difference between a 40 and 41 by looking at the car you can at least do a Google search which will tell you the answer in a matter of seconds. Something he must be too lazy to do.

Second, the "Top Hat" design of the 40-48 Chevy frame is legendary for strength and adding PS, PB and a new rear is just a matter of bolting on commercially available parts. Its plain this guy knows little and for him that's the way he needs to go if he has any chance at all of success...... but then we'll never know since he popped in, asked a question, and hasn't been back.

 

Arizona '41 chevy

Thanks to each of you for your comments. I appreciate the input. I had to work all week, so I didn't get a chance to reply until now. Sounds to me like I should go with a Mustang II front, and do a norrowed rear clip and my existing frame. Thanks again.