thats what I was thinking, atleast the front never really differed, i know the 73-79 flared out at the rear but didnt know about the earlier frames. do you have any clue how these interact with air ride? meaning, are they fairly basic to lay out? pretty sure the frame would need to be Z'd to fully lay out on a fairly tall tire, am i correct in thinking that?
have you been to the ford truck forum yet? don't they make dropped i-beams for those. bet there is tons of fullsize fords laying around that would work for the swap and that would give you ps.,pdb. check out some newer lincolns they have complete x-members that drop out. the rears are independent, that would be trick in your truck.
yup what 55 dude says im not sure an S10 would work well for that truck but im not gonna say impossible around ANY of these guys!! heres some measurments though.. Here's some stats on the S-10 frame: 3 wheelbases 108", 117", 122". Track (wheel mounting surface to wheel mounting surface) is 56" front and 55 rear. Frame is 32" wide at the front and 34" wide at the rear. Frame is 3" wide and between 3" and 5" high at key stress points. Frame is boxed from the front to midway of the length, that would put it at just behind the door. Comes stock with power steering, power disc brakes, IFS, newer ones come with 4 wheel disc brakes. hope this helps
with some minor work, rear cab mounts, new fronts, and bed mounts, I can use the whole crown vic frame. the guy who has done it just ovaled out the holes, I wouldn't do that. what "new" lincolns are you talking about? This may be an option, I just don't have any yards that sell the whole suspension as a unit, they go down a list the size of a book and sell you each piece seperately. I think a front clip at all the yards I hit were like 600+. Are you talking 90's town car, or 2000+. Also had the idea of just bolting up a 67-72 chevy crossmember and suspension, but havent given it much more thought that just thinking of it.
some of those numbers are a little intriguing. the 117" wheel base could be shortened at the rear to accomadate my 114.4 wheel base. as well as the 32" width, as mine is only 34" front to back.
I will give you a great example. So, as of right now, We (crushproof) are in the middle of a build. 48 Caddy Sedanette. Rick (RixRex on here) wants a pretty simple equasion. Low and Fast. And all Caddy. What to do? In case you havent looked around lately, the amount of performance suspension parts for a 48 Cadillac are pretty slim. and the Very cool Flathead in it doesn't really make for fast...especially considering it sat outside with the heads off of it since Nixon was in Office. So, we want Disc Brakes, Power steering, a decent sway bar, and LOW. We could use a MII sub, but simply stated, This big *** car is TOO HEAVY for that. (and wide...and long. plus I really don't like them much due to suspension Geometry, but that's personal.) the rear end fer sure won't hold up to the 472 We stumbled upon, either. soooo, here's what we did. Did Y'all know a 79 Caddy Seville (you know, the ugly ones with the 30 foot hood and 2 foot trunk?) is actually an F Body? and 4 wheel disc brakes? Hell, the rear end was even Posi! These peices of **** way actually be worth somethin! Broke out the tape measure...and now we are waiting for Tech week. THAT'S why people are "still clipping cars." it beats the HELL out of trying to track down ball foints for a 48 Caddy.
Before I'd drop $600 on an s10 clip, I'd buy a whole truck, get what I wanted, and junk the rest out. Might come out with a near free clip. Might be worth test driving a few different brands of old beaters and taking them home and do measurements, then take em back and say "No thanks". We bought a Dakota pickup with a trashed trans for a few hundred for our Dakota clip. Buying another one for $100 as soon as the lady get her income tax money back so she can buy a car. Don't really care what it looks like as long as what I need is OK. Gene
Would all 47-54 GM cars be similar? The F-body was a uni-body; I guess we will find out how you addressed that come Tech Week. LOTS of suspension stuff for those Camaro/Firebirds; I'll be watching for this one.
GM "A" bodies are sometimes reffered to as a "F" bodies. Early camaro's were "A" bodies throughout the mid to late 70's. This may be what he used, as were chevelles and other cars like that. Meaning they were A bodies.
uhh , gm A body= chevelle/montecarlo/tempest 64 to 77, called G body from 78 up f body=67 up camaro/firebird and i THINK 68 up novas were X body but don't quote me.
What choo talkin' bout Grant? An A Body is an A body- Full perimeter frame.made from 64 to 72. (subtle differences between 64-67,68-72) Monte carlos had this frame until 74?- but it was a sedan frame-4 door. an F body is an F body- subframe front, unibody rear.67-69, then 70-79. (difference being front or rear steer. the only thing similar to one another was the x body- Nova (well, Nova,Omega,Ventura,Apollo-ever notice they spell out "N.O.V.A."?) The Caddy Sevilles of the late 70's were, in fact, listed as F bodies. Big ugly F bodies, yes, but F bodies none the less. as far as similarities between Caddy and "others" The Caddy appears to be it's own beast. full perimiter, with a big "X" brace down the middle. independant front, leaf spring rear.
73-77 were called "Colonade" bodies...should be called "Colostomy bag" bodies. That's when everything got reeeal ugly.
Don't you mean 70-81, 82 was the new F with four link and coils in the rear, replacing the leafs. So were the Sevilles unibody/front subframe like the Camaro/Firebird?
80 and 81 had a weird set up -sort of a half strut/half control arm ( I have seen them both "conventional" and otherwise- but for arguments sake, I call it at 79. I think it has to do with where they were built.) Yep The Sevilles were same as Camaro/trans am...with an even BIGGER set of sway bars!
well, it musta been one of the texas only f bodys with the modified macpherson strutts cuz the 81 z28 sub that's sitting behind the shop sure as hell ain't! the 76 seville sub i had was VERY similar to the 70-81camaro/f-bird/75-79 nova sub but there was a width difference...overall and frame.
That's where it gets "funky" I have worked on a couple 81's that had this **** front end...it was the same subframe ( even had the upper control arm mounting oint) but instead of an upper control arm, it had a strut attached to the spindle. as I recall, the brakes were the same (disc and Caliper, anyway) but the spindle was it's own animal. the spring pocket was still there, too...just empty. the Seville frame I measured was the same "where it counts"- only the bumper side was different...and it had those giant shock absorber looking bumper mounts. I wasn't too excited to be rolling around under it, as it was supported by a stack of wheels, but Mr. Tape measure said the rails were the same as Trans Am.
I think the S-10 track width might be a little narrow but maybe fine with the right wheels. those 3 wheel bases listed are all made from the same frame. the front half slides into the back half. you could grind out the welds and slide the frame to your desired W.B. Good luck with your project I always wanted to do a real low f100 and i knew it couldnt be done with i beams.
The Jalopy Journal
