Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tubular K Member

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tubular K Member

    If ya got one, what brand is it and how ya like it?

    I'm wanting to install one and convert to an SN95 spindle and brake setup. My plan is to get a K Member and then get the used parts "conversion kit" that Mustang Parts Specialist offers.

    Any advice from those of you that have done this already?

    In conjunction with the K Member, I also an going to have a strut tower brace and caster/camber plates. I would like to get it all from one manufacturer so I know it all will work together, but what company is best?

  • #2
    QA1 tubular K-member (kinda long)

    I installed a QA1 tubular K member which I got for ~$225 from Jegs. It fit surprisingly well, HOWEVER, it widens the front track approximately 1 inch (I called the guys at QA1 and they verified this is correct for thier design). Add that to the SN95 conversion and the 2001 Mustang GT rims, needless to say, there was some clearance isues. I had to cut away the fender lip and beat the fender out a little, completely un-noticeable except for the broken paint.

    It also brought up a couple other issues: One, the front track is now so wide that even with adjustable caster/camber plates set as positive as they will go, I'm at a little over 1 degree negative camber. And two, the inner tie rods were too short, only giving a few threads on engagement. '94-up inner tie rods are about 1.25 inches longer, so I had to use those, fortunately they have the same threads as the stock SVO rack. HOWEVER, Ford, in thier infinite wisdom decided to change the threads on the outer tie rod ends some time between '86 and '94, so I also had to buy '94-up outers.

    I still used offset rack bushings (car lowered) even though they say you don't have to. Also, I had to make up .125" spacers for the lower control arms because the tabs on the K member are wider than the bushing sleeves. That didn't bother me too much because I put them on the backside, thus moving the control arm forward (more caster).

    If you're still awake at this point, I'll get to your original question, it handles great! Even with stock cut-down springs and take-off late model v8 struts/shocks. There is still some diving under braking (so I've been told by spectators watching me go into turn 5 at Road America), but the springs are really soft in that car, so...
    Wally Casten

    86 SVO-taxicab yellow
    tons of brake&suspension mods/standard engine

    Comment


    • #3
      SVOtaxi - you getting any bumpsteer?

      Comment


      • #4
        I haven't actually measured it, but the car drives very well, no noticeable bump-steer.

        It should be noted that I have no experience driving a stock SVO, so I can't do an accurate before and after comparison. When I bought this car, it was bent (passenger side wheelbase 1" shorter than the drivers side) and it was all over the place when I would hit bumps. I got the frame straightened, welded in sub frame connectors, then basically took it apart and did all this suspension work to it.

        Again, I don't have any exact measurements, but we mocked up the front end (stock rack, '94-current lower control arms, '94-current inner and outer tie rods/ends, '95 spindles, stock 75K mile springs with 1/2 coil cut off) and lowered the car down. After "eyeballing" the tie rod angles decided to use offset rack bushings anyway, although it wasn't that bad.
        Wally Casten

        86 SVO-taxicab yellow
        tons of brake&suspension mods/standard engine

        Comment

        Working...
        X