Sounds like you have just a couple mods there!  Surprised the lightning ran speed density, sounds like svo was behind the production side.  I have had a document compiled by Tom Cloud open on my desktop for the last few days.

You sound like the guy to ask, could you state the pros/cons of sequential vs semi-sequential or tell me where to find an answer?  I understand the multiple pulses per cycle, but haven't found a clear list of the benefits of each.

One issue that barnett might be seeing..

Based on my understanding, u-joints also need a minimum angle in order for the bearings to not wear out prematurely.  That is why some OEM manufacturers have rear-ends that are offset, and some even offset the entire engine/trans centerline (dodge?).

I am sure barnett knows the ideal angle, but maybe something to watch for down the road.
 

DC wrote:

I am running the DCC controller as well and it works great with the two speed fan I am using which is off of my 95 Mustang GT. It happened to fit mine since I severly cut the radiator support to take a 29 inch Radiator. My rad is also 3 inches core thickness, two rows of 1.5 inch tubes. I have the top of my rad support two bolt removable and the rad and condensor quick release to accomodate quick engine changes. I use my car as my mobile dyno now since my local dyno connection is no longer.

Not that I would want to put in a 29" radiator, but I am curious to see what that looks like.  I even went through your old posts looking for any pictures!  I was tempted to make my radiator support removeable when my lift was a few inches short of raising my engine high enough, but opted for a better lift..

I am liking this contour fan, looks like a perfect fit on my 24" radiator.

nice, like the color, i see you have extra floors and a blue fastback for parts, just in case

Finally crossed something off my list as completed.



The side post mounts are on the fender side.  I welded 1.5" angle to the trunk lip and hung the battery over the ledge a little.  I used 1" angle on the inside mount and here is a picture before I trimmed it to match the trunk angle.




Best parts is it hides my welds, keeping them under wraps.

Plan to hand it to an a/c shop at the end to do the hoses and charge, but here is the sanden sitting on the oem mounts.  I am waiting on the rear ports to find out if the compressor needs to be mounted off-center. The width of the tabs already lines up good and the belt looks good.  Might draw something up to extend the brackets and get them cnc cut .. before R134a becomes obsolete.




 

I wanted to see how much I could lower the upper control arm without a bind .. trust but verify.  Figured new manufacturing techniques and these brand-new control arms I got from Dynacorn looked to have some updates.

So today I got the car sitting on the rear wheels up on cinder blocks and leveled things out to get it sitting close to an estimated ride-height.  I assembled the control arms, strut rod, and spindle, but no spring or shock.  I also bolted the shock tower cover on.  These are all oem type replacement parts mounted in their factory locations.  I am referring to a 1 5/8" snubber which I think is the stock dimension.

Here is what I found from my estimated ride-height of 13", I had -2 3/8" of rebound and 1 7/8" of bump before the control arms were bound by pressure from the ball joints, a whopping 4 1/4" of total travel!  I was moving the suspension by hand, and the stops were very definite.  I took all measurements from the floor to the spindle and just showing the ranges.

Sound absurd? It gets better.  The upper control arm never touched the bump stop, not even close.  I put the jack under it and jacked it up till it was starting to lift the car and got it to just touch the bump stop.  I got another 1.25" out of the spindle, but it also jacked the car too.  I had the spindles snug, but not torqued, so may have had some flex there too.

So I loosened the top/bottom separately and checked the travel with just one arm at a time while trying to hold the spindle in alignment.  It appeared the bottom ball joint was dictating the bounds, but the upper still couldn't be pushed into the snubber.

The alignment of the upper could be off, I just estimated with 3/8" front and 1/4" rear shims when I put it together.  That should give a little positive castor but camber might be +/-, but should be in the ball-park.   Even if it was off, the lower ball joint was controlling the stops, and disconnected, the upper couldn't reach the bumper without being f

I am not a guru, just a few months into this, but I have a 1990 efi motor and was pretty excited that it had a much newer a/c pump and it should be so much better!

Wrong!  It is still a quarter century old and obsolete.  To switch to R134a you have to flush everything pristine.  Then the old a/c compressor will supposedly work, but it really can't handle the higher pressures of R134a and will never reach the full cooling potential.  Not sure if your car would have a parallel flow condenser, but thats what is recommended for R134a.

So I found this kit: http://www.latemodelrestoration.com/products/Mustang-AC-Conversion-Kits it is the only thing I found for upgrading the system, but seemed really pricey.  There are some mixed reviews, but those might have been early adopters.  I never asked if it was available piece-meal since the condenser probably wouldn't work, making it even more expensive in my case.

One popped up on craigslist so I went and checked it out.  The pump was a sd7 series, I would need to look up the number in my notes, but it is a good pump that can be bought new for $200.  A parallel flow condenser can be as high as $100 or so.  I read custom hoses can run $100.  The mounts raise the pump up and out a couple inches and you need a longer belt, but subtracting the other stuff, they are $350 all shiney black.  It is still for sale on craigslist..

So I bought a rebuilt Sanden compressor for $120, which I can make work on the oem bracket with a little fabrication; it should look like it belongs there.   Was actually looking at the mounting tonight.  Still trying to find the right condenser to fit my 24" radiator, but contemplating one with a built-in drier.  And that pretty much sums up where I am at on my a/c for under the hood.

Thanks, I search pretty thoroughly before posting a question, but sometimes it is one keyword (explorer) that makes the difference.

I did locate this thread that states:

Other wrote:

For those wanting to use Explorer fuel rails, here's what I did and it appears that all will work fine:

- '89 5.0 engine & distributor
- '93 Mustang Cobra upper & lower intakes
- '96 Explorer fuel rails (the ones with return lines)
- '94/'95 Mustang adjustable fuel pressure regulator (Mallory)
- FMS 24# injectors
- Ron Morris flexible fuel lines routed via transmission tunnel (with appropriate precautions in order to route fuel lines in this area) 

But someone else had a distributor clearance issue in the same thread.  My 5.0 is a 90, so I guess I will hunt down a 96 explorer fuel rail unless I find a better option.
 

jkordzi, funny you mention the t5 shifter hole alignment, I am having an issue but I have the moderndriveline cross-member and their shifter that sits 1" back.  I guess with a centered shifter you could move another 1" back, but the cross-member would need to be extended too.

jon, i do have a pmgr but the solenoid is up top already.  I will loosely-assemble the center this week-end just to make sure and figure out what to do for the frame brace.  Did you buy or build your brace?

mcstang, not sure on the durometer of the bushing, I can't find it in my notes, I know the tube size is slightly larger than the one called for by buening for the shackle rubber.  Haven't been able to reach the guy I had make them, thought he was planning to make some more sets after I got him some feedback.

barnett, I have the rear supported in a way that is hopefully pre-loading the springs some.  Going to get the rear supported on the wheels to verify.  If the angles hold I am at 3.9 degrees after the drop or 4.5 before, thats with a 2.5 up pinion angle and mid-eye springs, much further off than anticipated.

gotstang, the tcp mounts look like a very clean install, sorry if this got a little off-track.

I handed a guy with a plasma cutter the plans for the rmp knockoff that were done by Buening (sp?) on vmf.  We discussed a couple of minor changes, and he used a 1.75" o.d. tube for a little more insulation and sent them to me fully welded.  I lost most of my side/side adjustment and will need to elongate the vertical bolt holes to make sure the mount doesn't touch the frame, but that wasn't totally unexpected.

The plans had 3 sets of brackets, and I have all 3, these are the 1" drop brackets.  The only issue I am having with lowering so far is the stock cross-member won't clear .. but I am not that attached to it..  I haven't had any side/side clearance issues for the headers or steering box the way it sits.

The t5 is dictating the fore/aft right now which is having it's own issues, but appears to be the only thing that would not let me move the engine back further since I don't have a drive-shaft yet.  I would like to go back another 1/2" to center the moderndriveline shifter which I think is 1" back from center.  Other than maybe losing an 1" of ground-clearance I can't find any reason to not want to go 1" lower and as far back as allowed.




 

1965 Mustang Ownership Day 160:

So the car has been apart for 7 weeks, seems like eons since we last drove it.

Finally turned the corner where we are putting things together to work out all the wiring/plumbing before taking it back apart to paint the underside.  But it feels like so much more progress than when taking it apart.

I have continued to write-up notes after the week-ends or any time I get over to do some work on it, I know, way too much to read, but if I can just help one person realize what is involved and just say no..

Actually we are still pretty excited about how this should turn out.




Since my last post on 1/11:

Starting scraping off patches of loose undercoat, some is permanent, some just falls off
No way 7.25” rear spring plates are usable for new rear, not even close
Strut rods came off in bad shape, one is pitted pretty bad, other has serious thread damage
Ordered drake 67+ spring plates and a couple of johnny joints and swedge tubes to check out
So appears front-end only had a cosmetic collision, nothing bent on body that I can find
Fenders appear to both be original panels, finding original red inside vendors, in front of doors
Some tweaked metal across top of radiator brace, and jack damage on the strut rod frame pieces, but one got mangled from a curb?
Trying to get the gas out, tried to raise one side of tank to make it faster and started a major drip
Noticed when I put pressure on the spout, the sender started leaking too, nice
Frantically grabbing drain pans, cut the hose and lifted tank out with 2-3 gallons left, cleaned up and called it a day

Pulled wheels/adapters/discs ms brackets, and swapped sides, cables fit much better
Assembled the rotors and wheel adapters and measured disc/rotor clearance, 0.008 at tightest spot
Used bolt to measure worst case caliper movement and the cable will still clear without kinking

Sold gas tank with a couple of gallons of gas to one guy, and rest of parts plus old rims/tires to another! $50

lowercasesteve wrote:

kdgt500 wrote:

I would never thought when I started this post, it go this long. Does anybody have a link to torque specs for the front suspension members. Somebody linked info for 65/66, but mine is a 67 and I didnt know if those specs are the same.

Look in the Mustang shop manual.  They are all there.  Mine is hidden out in the garage right now and is well thumbed.  The torque specs for the strut to lower arm is 55-70 and for the bushings it is 40-55.  That is for a 66, but since the suspensions are virtually identical, you will not go far wrong with those.

I read a thread on corner-carvers that made it sound like most known cases of broken struts were with the later cars where the entire strut rod tip is threaded making it easy to over torque.  On the 65-66 years only the end is threaded, so you can't compress the bushings endlessly because the nut bottoms out.

I have seen that 1 picture of the broken strut rod in a lot of threads.  It is apparent that the washers were installed wrong, but enough fud to make it worth finding the correct torque range.

Seems this one design change would cause there to be a different specified torque?  If they are the same, then great.  If not, it would probably be good to post the correct answer when you find it.