Subframes gone wwwillldddd!!

reeeally.

and that mustang II...it's gonna hold up my big block and not dive, bumpsteer, or possibly BREAK at the welded seams, either, right?

sorry, Man. I have repaired too many Mustang II's to beleive that.

not to mention, that I just did a tech post on the subject. Simply stated. if you look at simple ch***is geometry of Camaro versus MustangII, you will discover that the mustang II is lacking in about 6 distinct categories.

weight (as in ability to hold it up)
caster
bumpsteer
camber
compatibility
ease of installation
parts avalibility.

that said, a shoebox ford is a VERY POOR candidate for Camaro (or any of it's cousins) simply due to the width. it can be done with narrowing,..but the shoebox is already independant, and all of the other avalible options (disc brakes, big fat sway bar,power steering,replacement parts) can be had. I don't make a habit of throwing Camaro clips under independant suspension cars that can be better modified with stock components. there are some (few) that I would consider a viable swap simply due to parts avalibility (early 60's Poncho and Olds come to mind) but even then, it depends purely on the condition of the car. if it's all in good shape, leave it be.

 

they heated and dropped the unholy **** out of the axles.

how low?
well, for instance, I would like to go from here

to here.


it's a total of 11 inches of drop.
NOT counting the tire.
still has around 9 inches of clearance between the oil pan and the ground, (I agree with the bumper pusher thing-there is such a thing as too low) but will be veeery drivable.

I should mention that to pull this off with a straight axle, your axle would end up ABOVE your frame...directly through the engine block.

 

I have a M11 in my 51 F-1. FE Ford engine, truck weighs 3350lb. I have 140K on it since I put it in. Sits very low, steers great, no bump steer, rides good. Maybe a lot of guys don't put them in properly? Ureathene strut bushings are a great help. We did K-MEMBERS M-1 Merc some time ago, he also loves it. Just my 2c................OLDBEET

 

not really the exact same animal-and I wasn't saying that mII is a poor choice. in a chevy, though, I would use the Camaro-mainly for 2 reasons.

the f1 has a nice, thin frame- like 4 inches,right? the chevy is around 7. meaning you gotta whittle on the frame a bit to get everything right. problem is, where you gotta whittle is...right where the most weight sits on the frame.

-the other is area of weld- the camaro offers up around 12 feet of welded steel once you finish it up inside and out. Boxing is unneccecary, and it's easy stret to line it all up.

as far as not installing it right, I haven't repaired any of the ones I installed, but rest ***ured there is some scary stuff out there by way of mustang II on the road. (kind of back to the can operate a welder, but not a tape measure thing.- or for some, our idea of "Tacked" is thier idea of "good enough.)

 

Another thing I forgot to mention is that just about everyone uses the ugly *** nova columns and those steering wheels. True you can get a grant wheel or somethingi, but there just ok, id wrather keep the stock wheel or something else that oem.

Also I dont like cars slammed, to me it looks fake or something, I think if yoiu got to start c notching your frame and cutting your inner fender wells it too low. Before I cut too many coils out of my merc was on the bump stops and bairly got the jack underneath the cross member and I hated out it looked horrible, even tho I prolly could of left it like that and cut the inner fende rout but I thought it looked bad.

What kind of handling do you guys need, what you guys flying around turns or something, THe fastest iv been was 120 in my 60 impala with bias tires and it wasnt bad and the inner treads were almost gone, A rebuilt front end a a good steering box with radials should handle good enough, even tho I just run bias plys because all I do is basically cruise my car

 

lux blue... kinda rhymes with not a clue.

 

and i'm one of 'em but they ARE ugly....AND a pain in the *** to hang sheet metal on.

 

sub it with a 55 chevy car stub?

 

i've clipped more than a few....in MY ****ing opinion, a MII is too light in a truck.

 

Welll, I gotta put in my 2 cents here as well...been building Kustoms for over 25 years...street machines (55-7 Chevies) before that. And besides....the NJ guys know me and my cars.
In the beginning, I was satisfied with the stock suspensions in the cars I had, but they were mid to late 50's cars...i.e. balljoints, "normal steering', and barely adequate brakes. As opposed to pre-55 stuff with kingpins, crazy steering set-ups, and even worse brakes.
When I built my 54 Chevy I did it with a Monte sub. I wanted disc brakes, modern PS, and good handling. I got it. The wheels did not stick out, and it rode, and handled, like a dream. I put over 30,000 miles on it, sold it and the new owner put over 40,000 on it! I drove her all over the country (first trip >2000 miles), and I knew if I broke a balljoint, or tie rod, I could wander into ANY parts store and get a replacement! Can't do that with 54 suspension parts!
Did my 46 Chevy with a Camaro clip, with air ride. Sits right, and handles extremely well.
My 50 Ford PU came with it's original front end with disc adapters. The ride and handling ****ed, and it sat WAY too high. I did the M2 swap on it, cause it was easier, and faster. I am still not convinced it is a better idea than the GM front ends. I believe the handling and ride qualities are not as good as my other subbed cars. I have done other M2 swap, and they DID seem to handle a bit better than my truck, though, not sure why. Could be the compromise with the wider wheelbase of the truck, using adapters to widen the steering rack.
I think there are good reasons to do modern suspension swaps. Things DID improve over the last 50 years! It ain't traditional, but it gets you from point A to B, safely and comfortably. In a Kustom, that stuff is hidden anyway....as well as most stuff under the hood. On a traditional hotrod, it would be unacceptabl;e, though.
When I rebuild my chopped 55 Olds, it WILL get modern suspension, and brakes. I almost crashed it near Branson Missouri, over 20 years ago, when I came flying around a bend at over 80 MPH, and came up upon a roadblock for construction. Put the car sideways trying to stop it in time. I barely made it! Coulda been dead, or busted up real bad, very easily, 1800 miles from home.
Gotta have disc brakes!

 

Wow this thread sure took a turn. Glad you chimed in Mark, I think like anything, it depends on how much homework you do. Mercs for one, I really dont think you need to subframe them necessarily...for one the power steering kits are nice, the IFS handles nicely from the factory (even when lowered to death with drop spindles and lowered spring pockets) and disc brakes are adaptable...not to mention the stock drums are huge and dissipate heat rather nicely.

There are a few guys on here that have subframed and done REALLY well. There is a fella from SC or NC "Flamedabone" I think....builds some stupid cool rides, and a lot of em...anywho he just subframed a Merc with a G body clip, and Id be damned if anyone on here could tell. Looked absolutely perfect! The wheel to wheel measurements were like 59" or so, which is very close to the Merc dimensions. With that said I would love to subframe my 49 to try and fix the too-short frame swap that was done to it, but if I can somehow keep my 51 on a stock ch***is I would use bolt ons. I have an Olds 98 for its frame/floors if not, and with inset wheels should look stock or close to.

I plan on driving one of these two all over....and all that Mark said just plain makes sense. I loved moving my almost-done chopped Ford around the block a few days ago...what a rush. But man it stops like **** and steers like junk. Local cruising no prob, but I wouldnt want to take it cross country after being used to a 2000 Altima.

The point is if your front end measures from wheel mounting surface to wheel mounting surface lets say....59"....if you replace it with a subframe that is 59"....whats the problem???

 

Nova subbed, BBC, driven as much as 1150 mi in 19 hrs and 8,000 mi in 1 months time. This is definitely not an around town only cruiser so highway handling is very important

 

also rhymes nicely with **** you.

and for someone as clueless as I am supposed to be, and apparently didn't do my homework, I sure have alot of subframed chevy trucks out on the road.

I should mention I don't typically go around flinging poop at my elders, but aside from stab and run comments and knowing alot about e-bay, What exactly do you do? I will offer you the same thing I offered the last fella to get ****py with me on the internet. Come to the round up, we will drive the chevy in question, then YOU can tell me if it was worth doing. I don't give a damn how many subbed cars or trucks you have driven or ridden in, I didn't built it, so, until you have seen my work, and know what I do, shut it. I grew up in this, and paid my dues a long time ago, Fella.

 

I agree.
I love it when the whole "frame swapping isn't traditional" thing comes up.

then we all talk about how whichever car would look *****in' on 32 rails.

 

better brakes, handling, availability of parts.. pretty easy to understand...

exactly, one done correctly is awesome. my Henry J came with one done wrong, after fixing it and a host of other issues I really had lost my love for the car. I ended up sending it down the road...

Homework? Dude you are clueless. A mustang II ****s under a full size truck, handles worse. But then if you knew anything about steering geometry you'd know that.

And now you're being a total ***... but then I guess it because you're clueless... **** off already

yep

Yep... done right (just like anything else) it's great, but then I've seen more than a few Mustang II kits that have been installed by monkeys with a football...

You have to match the track to the car you're subframing as well as the seeing if the frame is compatable as well. Logical thought is a ***** for some people.

 

im with chopolds here!!! im subframing my 58 olds very soon. for a few reasons. 1 it needs all 4 balljoints, and kanter is the only place to get them @ 140 bucks a piece!!! **** that!!!! (2) the car is not low enough for me now and the crossmembers is about 2 inches of the ground.. so now it will be very low, have disc breaks, and not ride like a ****box with cut coils.. not to mention they dont make dropped spindles for this tank, nor would i trust them in this 3 ton car..

 

marc.. what are you using or going to use on your 57? its the same front end as my 58

 

Well the way some people throw around their opinion it's seems like they're the LAW. It's quite possible I misread what you were trying to write. I'm losing my thick skin with age, sorry. later shawn

 

Actually I'm using a full frame. I was given a 76 Chevy station wagon that had a good frame, and the proper wheelbase. So I am using the whole frame. Manny Bastiao used to do frame swaps...even did a few for Donn Lowe when he was in Colorado. He used to laugh at us doing all that cutting and chopping of the frames, when you could swap out the entire thing! so I'm going to give it a shot. The Olds has a lot of rust in the floors, and body mounts, so I need to do work there anyway.

 

I'd love to see the rest of your rulebook on "how things should be". Maybe we should all build our cars and trucks how YOU like. Funny thing is, your not gonna be driving mine! Doing the ******** traditional thing in every situation is fine if your into it, we're all here because of tradition and old school, but laying out blanket statements that ultra-low is bad and subs are always wrong is just "ridiculously stupid".

I think we can all agree that the shoebox in this thread was horribly hacked and badly abused!

 

How 'bout a 50's Ford truck, is that okay? Can I have your permission, pretty please? Ever look at the frame on a Mustang? How 'bout the tiny stock control arms. Maybe gander at the wimpy rack and pinion? Every part on a Camaro clip is heavier-duty, perfect for a heavy truck with a big motor. Mustang II setups are fine in some applications, just not under my truck! Permission granted!!

 

hehe...I just bought a Vista Cruiser to swap our 51 Buick onto.
425, auto (shocker...not) big 10 bolt, killer brakes, and although it smelled like squirrell piss, the a/c still blew cold for 700 bucks.
I also get to use various other parts- 6 mindow motors, 3rd row seat for the poncho (yes...the dreaded suicide seat!) gl*** (I can cut the flat stuff into peices I need for the buick- it's coke bottle blue "soft ray" throughout) kick ***.

as far as "thousands of dolars" to get a clip done, I think that number is waaay off. I have never once bought a clip for more than 250.00 (unless, it still had a motor in it, or the rest of the mullet attached to it.) point being, the price isn't that high. besides- you priced a complete mustang set up recently? yowza! and god forbid you want the chiny chit, mains.


top it off with the fact that we traded the carc*** for a 55 chevy california frame, and i would say we did alright for a couple of white kids.

 

I'm sure I'll catch hell about this but... subframes are traditional. Now before you blow a gasket consider that builders have been using subframes for 30 years or more. To a lot of people 30 years is a lifetime, to everyone else it is certainly a generation. The definition of tradition is a custom or action that is p***ed on from generation to generation. Therefore the use of subframes is traditional. Now I know the purists here are collectively screaming "its not traditional unless its all pre-50's era hardware". Hogwash! We could go back further and insist that traditional means your vehicle must have a Bombay horn and kerosene headlights or further still and determine that traditional means its 1 horsepower and p***ing involves a whip. There's my 2 cents. How much change have I got coming back?

 

and even then...what we refer to as traditional involves similar swaps- 40 ford juice brakes...v8 flatties in earlier models...big fin buick drums- they didn't even start making those until the 60's...

this is simply a different approach.

on a side note kanter DOES NOT have everything. they had exactly nothing for the front end of my Starfire. Same with Grand Prix...some parts simply don't exist within my reach anymore.

 

If you drive a more popular car you may be right. Find that **** for a '57 Buick. Nada! Not even a Mustang II kit. There is one disc brake kit that is so overpriced it's funny. I can name a couple of other cars that fall into this realm. But then even with all the stuff for a more popular car you still get a lot more benefits from a swap than rebuilding the stock stuff. I'm sorry if you drive like a grandma But I drive the ever loving **** out of my stuff, I like going fast, I like curvy roads.

 

I seen cars like that before.......hmmm aught not done that to that fella. (in my best Billy Bob Thorton voice)

 

I'm sorry if you drive like a grandma But I drive the ever loving **** out of my stuff, I like going fast, I like curvy roads.


Amen and a big second for the fast curvy roads. If it can't handle it I make it so it does

 

Boy, you take these opinions kinda personal, don't ya?? hows this, i don't give a **** how you build your car, if the bumper s****ing the ground isn't low enough for ya, dig a ****in hole and put it in, maybe that'll do...by the way, you wouldn't understand my rulebook, so I won't even show ya...yeah, i like cars built in the tradition of the 50's to the mid 60's, MY OPINION, MY TASTE...sorry if that offends you....