OK, answering my own question here, it seems that 1/16 shim in the front bolt will add 1 degree caster.
I also read that Ford manual states there should be no more than 1/16th difference between the front and rear bolt.

Another point - seems the Shelby drop requires 1/8 inch adjustment to correct for the positive camber the drop adds.  With my 69 that woould be adjustment at the camber adjuster of the LCA??

 

SA69Mach wrote:

the Shelby drop requires 1/8 inch adjustment to correct for the positive camber the drop adds.  With my 69 that woould be adjustment at the camber adjuster of the LCA??

yes.

.
well, one option is have an arm with an adjustable ball joint that slides forward and rearward . . maybe i should patent that, lol.

the arc of the strut rod alters caster as the suspension moves also.

best thing to do is use a formulae 1 type system, lol.

Last edited by barnett468 (4/10/2015 4:33 PM)

One thing nobody ever considers when shimming upper control arms.  I think THIS is why Ford changed to no shims with adjustment at the LCA pivot.

When you add different amounts of shims to an upper control arm, then tighten the attaching bolts, it tries to bend the control arm pivot shaft.  The shaft, when alot of variation is in the shim pack thickness front to rear, is placed at an angle to the shock tower.  It tries to be parallel with the shock tower as the bolt is tightened on the front shim pack, then back at an angle between the two bolts, then back parallel to the tower as the rear bolt is tightened, and then is forced by the UCA to try to be at an angle again at the rear.
So, you get a shaft that is being forced to be bent four times along it's length. I think this is partially what causes binding upper control arm bushings that wear quickly.  Probably why the Ford book says no more than a very minor thickness variation allowable.  In reality, these cars require alot more variation than the minimal amount to get them aligned.
Probably why the MII suspension puts the camber/caster adjustment (upper control arm shaft mounting bolts) VERTICALLY so the shaft does not have to bend as the bolts are tightened up.

Just another MustangSteve theory, but if you stack different amounts of shims, the upper shaft WILL bend and will bind the bushings.  To me,the only answer, if you retain the stick type upper control arm, is to change it to have vertical mount points for the UCA shaft.

I am still waiting for someone who has replaced all that with a coil-over or some other variation of suspension to show me it is really better.  I just need a drive to be convinced.  So far, I have not had any offers to state it is really an improvement.  I am not saying it is NOT an improvement, I am just saying I would like someone to convince me it is.  If I can see a major improvement, maybe I would change.  If you think it is a huge improvement just because you sunk a ton of cash into installing it, that is not the type of data I am looking for.

.

MusatangSteve wrote:

I am still waiting for someone who has replaced all that with a coil-over or some other variation of suspension to show me it is really better.  I just need a drive to be convinced.  So far, I have not had any offers to state it is really an improvement.  I am not saying it is NOT an improvement, I am just saying I would like someone to convince me it is.  If I can see a major improvement, maybe I would change.  If you think it is a huge improvement just because you sunk a ton of cash into installing it, that is not the type of data I am looking for.

.
If compared to the suspension below, the different design will have no affect on ride feel . . what occasionally happens is people have a worn out suspension or just an average one and they switch to something like the one below that isn’t worn and has better shocks and it does ride better so they wrongly attribute the improvement in ride to the design when the biggest improvement really came from different shocks and springs . . then of course there are the others that convince themselves its better simply because they just paid $5,000.0 to buy it and have it installed. .
 
SUSPENSION RATIOS
 
They are nearly if not exactly the same.

 
STRUT ROD VS NO STRUT ROD
 
The strut rod changes the camber slightly as the suspension moves which will affect steering slightly but not ride feel.

 
UNEQUAL LENGTH SUSPENSION ARMS
 
Both types have them so there is no difference there.
 
 
SHELBY ARNING DROP
 
Looks like the Heidts kit has it but this will not affect ride feel much.
 

 
 
 
 

Last edited by barnett468 (4/14/2015 2:10 PM)

IMO the only reason to switch to a Mustang II style suspension is if you need to eliminate the shock towers for engine clearance.  That's its primary benefit.  Everyone should build their car their way, but I wouldn't want to go through hacking the car up that much when you can make as much power as you could reasonably want with a small block that will drop in.  '67-up cars have the option to go to an FE big block if they want to pin the cool meter, and with a 445 stroker you can build a 500HP engine that idles like a stocker and tears up the streets.  Yes the FE builds are more expensive, but compared to a $5,000 front end kit the disparity between big block and small block shrinks in a hurry.  Not a fan of the mod motors, and the 385 series is just overkill for something this light.  Guys are pushing 800-1,000HP from Windsor strokers with blowers and/or nitrous.  Nastier FE strokers can push 650-750HP NA.  Power can quickly outstrip reasonable traction, and if you're going to just build a drag car there are plenty of 4 cylinder Fox body LX notchbacks to go around.