You can use a 03 and newer crown vic suspension under your truck, thats exactly what I put in mine. I wouldnt call it a true bolt in because there is some fab work. Some people say that it doesnt fit because it is too wide. I have mustang bullit wheels on mine and they tuck under the fenders. Feel free to pm me for details.

 

My 2c, fwiw, is if it has a 351 already installed correctly and you can get it running, you will save yourself a whole lot of grief by keeping that and selling the 390. The 390 is a big engine (physically large) and can be a difficult install. Your current engine sounds like it's all set up and would be a no brainer to keep if that's the case. 351's are good engines and will provide all the power your truck will ever need. Especially for your first build.

 

well the deal is i can't really keep the 72, but i want the engine and trans. It is already built. This 351 i know nothing about, how old how many miles or who built it. coulda been a drunk man in his garage haha, and thats why its not running. Im about to go start working on it, but of course its raining. hasnt rained in a couple weeks and the day i want to spend all day outside, it has to rain.

 

I agree that keeping that 351 will save some grief but a 390 isn`t hard to install with all that space underneath the hood.
Many years ago I installed a 352 in a 53 F100 I had at that time and I don`t recall running into any real problems.

 

Completely agree, my little 302 looks lost under the hood.

 

Just reading your thread for the first time. Good luck with your project.

I am putting in a 2005 Crown Vic into my 55 Effie as we speak. I narrowed the CV cross member by 1-1/2" cut from the center; shortened the lower control arms by 1-1/4"; designed and built the upper control arms with heims for caster adjustment; shortened the rack and pinion inner tie rods by 2" each side and re-threaded the shafts. The anti-sway bar was narrowed by 2" on each side and re-welded.

The overall width of the CV has been reduced by 4". The result is approximately 1/2" to 3/4" overall difference (on each side) between the stock axle dimension (hub to hub) and the modified CV. It's been a job but .... well worth it. The stock 17" CV wheels are approximately 55mm positive (2.16"). With 2" taken from each side will give you approximately Zero offset.

As for the engine. I have a complete CV engine and tranny from a 2005 CV PI with all wiring, computers etc. Without to much trouble it can be built into a 400 hp demon. The was an article in Truckin magazine showing the dyno results after each mod.

More than willing to share pictures and "how to" if you are interested.

Again .... Congrats!

 

If I might respectfully ask, how did you determine the affect of your modifications to the steering geometry on such parameters as akerman, bump steer, caster and camber changes? Are you an automotive engineer? You cut and welded both ends of the sway bar? how did you retemper it?

 

The sway bar was actually modified by a suspension shop here in Denver. They cut and welded the unit for me.

As for the control arms, I'm not a practicing engineer (although I do have a degree in engineering) my next door neighbor is a structural engineer and helped me with all the calculations and designs.

Roadrunner fabrications had the upper and lower control arm mounting plates watercut and I welded them together,

The stock control arms were measured and jigs were made by using the original arms as a guide. The centerpoint of the ball joint holes were located and moved inward (on a line perpendicular to the frame) by 1-1/4" and the centerpoint for the the new control arms was marked.

Templates were made for the lower control arms, plates were fabricated from 1/2" flat stock, bent at 14 degrees (to match stock geometry) and were then welded together in the jig.

The upper control arms were the result of several designs. Similar to the uppers, templates were made, 3/8" plates were fabricated and bent at 7 degrees (to match stock geometry) and then mounted on the jig with the centerpoint for the ball joints in alignment. Through trial and error we came up with a design that would adjust the camber. The control arms have a coupler that is threaded lh and rh so it will lengthen or shorten the adjustment of the arm (closer or further from the frame) by a single motion. Locking nuts are on both ends. This design is similar to some of the "off road" designs that have been used to modify suspensions for years. (my neighbor has this design on this extremely modified jeep).

As for the Camber, there are spacers that were made in 1/4", 3/8" and 1/2" thickness that can be used in combination (or individual) that will position the upper control arm (either forward or back) in relationship to the frame.

The alignment specs for the CV front end match up to this setup with the caster, camber and toe - all within tolerances. Of course, when I put the engine in and the body back onto the frame, the alignment will have to be redone by the shop due to the weight differences.

I will be starting a build thread with all the calculations, designs, spec's and lots of pictures once the truck is back on the road and everything has been tested. (Hopefully by April)

 

I still like my bumpy stock straight axle, less geometry to think about. I like to drive a truck, not an truck with a car front. Sorry, had to throw that in there. Off to other threads.

 

Static alignment is not what is concerning me, It really doesn't matter what it is when the vehicle is standing still, but dynamic geometry changes when the suspension is moving can drastically affect the handling. When you change the length of a pivoting arm, the arc the end subscribes changes the radial displacement which in turn changes the geometry.

 

Thanks for your replies. I totally agree with you. One never knows what will happen until the vehicle is driven. In my case, I have narrowed or shortened control arms on several cars and trucks since the 50's. Some have had to be tweaked but, overall, they worked extremely well.

Drag racing and short track in the 50's and 60's was a lot different than today. We had to improvise and fabricate or modify parts just to be able to race. Trial, error and testing was what I grew up with. It has served me well all these years. I hope that I considered everthing I've learned over the years in modifying this CV setup.

I will post an engineering diagram (in my gallery) that was used for this build.

Thanks again.

 

For the Engineering drawing and principles .... Search for 55 Effie Restoration and Modifications in albums.

For those that may be interested ... a good source for suspension infomation is: AutoZine Technical School - Suspension

Make it a great day!