IMHO I say you should seriously rethink this swap. Sit back and do a whole lot more research. You say that if you don't like it after you have done it you will change it. Well if you do this you won't have anything left to work with once it's all hacked apart. But, it is your truck time and money so do what you want, you have to make yourself happy first and not us.

 

MORE INSTALL PICS of the pre 03' steering box versus rack version



Below my Friend who did my IFS, Rear end, and MOTOR-Tranny-wiring-AC-Intermittent Wipers. In short guy who got me rollin' working on his next 56'

 

drivability is not an issue with this clip, its the width and only the width, that is the only issue with this clip (unless the installer doesnt know how to read a tapemeasure). i have been driving mine for 3 months everyday including a drive from houston to dallas and back with absolutely no issues. unless you count much better handeling, no body roll, better braking and tighter steering linkages issues. the geometry is not changed from the CV to the truck, the only thing that even can be changed is the Toe but if you measure the studs before it comes off then it will be exactly as it came off the car. my truck will almost hold its own against my buddies scion TC in the corners, and i plan on taking it to the road course first sunday of next month which is something i wouldnt be doing with a unsafe truck.

 

Please don't misunderstand my comment. As designed, I'm sure there is no drivabilty issues with this IFS. There is as you say a width problem with using it as is in a pre 57 truck, the tires will not clear the fenders unless the front end is lifted. I was commenting on the original poster's wanting to "solve" that issue by either/and 1. narrowing the CV crossmember, 2. using custom reverse offset wheels, 3. shortening the A-arms. Any/all of these mods would drastically change the steering geometry, and if done by someone who doesn't understand the ramifications of such mods result in something that could be unsafe to totally undrivable. THAT was what I was concerned about ending up on the highway.

 

agreed.

 

thanks for your concern. those were just thoughts that would never happen. It just sounds like a nice idea.
Anyway the wheels I am buying are 19" with a 42mm offset. this gives alittle over 3"out and you have the hub surface wich comes out 16". total of 19.5", I think this will fit inside the fender. I measured the truck, cv, new wheels, all just about clear but very tight.
Monday I will do my final measurments with the cv fornt end and the wheels next to the truck. Thats when I will make my final descision.

 

by the way, I would not use a reverse offset wheel, These wheels are 42mm offset. Mr.engineer

 

Sorry if I misunderstood on the wheels. I was under the (mis?) understandinding that (some of?) the stock CV wheels were already positive (reverse in my way of thinking moving the tire towards the center of the vehicle) offset? (offset is the difference between the wheel mounting surface and the center of the rim. see Wheel Tech - Offset )
If the wheels you are ordering have more positive offset than stock to try to make the track width narrower, that will affect the geometry adversely.
Not only do you need to have ~1" clearance between the tire and fender (and the tire and frame/suspension) when the wheel is pointed straight ahead to allow for suspension movement, but also when the wheels are fully turned.
I am not an engineer, but I do have a LOT of knowlege of suspension and steering from my research and hands on experience with racing suspensions, both drag racing and autocross.

 

there is 16" from frame to wheel mouting area on the cv, wheel i'm thinking of using is 3" (wheel that will work on 05 mustang with no -offset). So that makes 19" very tight maybe it's not the best idea. There is about 20-21" under the f100 frame to iner fender

 

IMO, I would first use the original wheels from the CV to see where they lie under the fender lip. And determined on that, you can buy an aftermarket wheel to match, or go to plan B. If the stock wheel seems ok, then the designed geometry should be pretty good. Not perfect though, since the rear may not be of equal height as a stock CV, which puts the A arms at a different angle than the stock CV, which obviously changes caster. Either way, you'll get the feel of how it handles by driving around the block with stock wheels first.

 

good point.
I think i'm starting to lean towards the jag set up. I just dont think there will be enough clearance for the exhuast of the 5.4, or maybe steering isues. also all the braking stuff, wheel lug pattern. besides i've read just about all posts about the jag ifs and none are 100% complete.

 

There are a number of completed Jag swaps, especially among our down under Ausie brothers where it is more popular than the MII type. Holmsey has done a multipart writeup on his finished swap. The Jag is a near perfect choice, the car has the same tread width, near same frame width (a minor trimming needed to fit the 53-56 frame, bolts right in to the 49-52) the front end weight is nearly the same, so the OEM springs, sways and shocks work, and it's an excellent design. It will drop your front end a couple inches or more depending on if you use the viscous vibration damper mounts or not. The Z joint in the steering is a little bulky but needed with the damper mounts, but any clearance issues can be solved by offseting the engine 2" to the right. If you buy a whole car for the donor, the IRS can also be installed with just a bit more effort and your truck will then corner like a sports car and ride like a ...well.. Jag sedan!

 

this is great info, thanks. my problem that I have now is not being able to find info on how the mod motor will clear the x member of the jag. another issue would be the exhuast clearance.

 

If the oil pan sump on the mod motor will clear any IFS crossmember it would clear the Jag crossmember. The problem with IFS swaps with a non mod motor FoMoCo small block is that most have a front sump oil pan interference problem. The solution for the non mod 302's is to go to a Bronco style mid sump pan and pump. I don't know what type oil pan the mod motor has or if you could use the Bronco pan. Ford has recently increased their interest in hot rodders using the mod motor so they have put a number of parts into their performance parts catalog, wiring harnesses etc. It looks like the install in Tacson's pictures moved the engine back to clear the sump but that means intruding into the cab and being limited to using an auto tranny, a manual tranny shifter would be too far rearwards.

 

I dunno for sure, but newer 4x4 pickups, expeditions, etc... may have the pan needed vs. 2wd. One would have to look to be sure.