'Went to a local show this weekend and drove my '53 F-100. It's kinda like a "resto rod": Essentially a restoration but some custom things-still Flathead powered. The truck is nice but as I looked around the show, I realized I wasn't going to take home a trophy. There were 3 other '55-'56 F-100s there that had been given the full "dark side" treatment: late model drive trains, A/C, custom interiors with power buckets, I.F.S., $$$ paint & chrome-absolutely beautiful trucks.

However,I couln't help but notice one thing about all of them. I guess I thought that EVERYBODY in the F-100 world was aware of the one most significant visual defect in the '53-'56 models: the front axle is about 1 1/4"-1 1/2" too far to the rear relative to the arch in the front fender. All 3 of these high dollar trucks had Mustang II or Jag front ends in them yet the builders had located them in the original position: too far back. I would have thought that that was the perfect opportunity to fix the obvious.

 

I am sure all the mono leaf sets and such correct that.

 

I have had this same thought a million times...

When I was looking for a '56, I ran into a few trucks that were almost "perfect" for me...except that the aftermarket front ends placed the front wheel in the stock "wrong" location.

Maybe they like keeping it original? Maybe they like that tight turning radius! ha

 

Does the wheel setback give it the tight turn??? I though it had something to do with the steering box?? Will I loose that going to the Toyota box?

 

It's not wrong - It's the way it is designed
The engineers had to have a reason
The position of the steering box doesnt have anything to do with the wheel/axle position - The Toyo box won't change it.

 

So where does it end? What are the obvious that need "fixing?" These truck sit too high, they're underpowered, they only have six volts, they have uncomfortable bench seats, they steer hard, they don't have AC, they don't have power brakes, and the list goes on and on. Can we say "darkside" or shades of grey?

 

And for all those reasons we are first attracted to the trucks, if were fixing problems I want mine to fly like in back to the future with a way to use garbage as fuel. I can afford the gas then, Hahaha.

 

We installed a heidt's mustang II kit on my last '51 and the instructions gave specific measurements (on the frame) where to weld the crossmember and upper shock mounts (they use the front spring mount holes as a reference point, see pic below, to measure from). We didn't deviate from the directions since we felt that the engineering/design people placed it in this position to avoid "surprises". It may be a different story for the '53-'56's.
My current '51 still has the manual steering box from the factory and since the front steering components appear to be in great condition I don't see the need in removing all the components, then lifting the engine (to replace the front sump oil pan that will hit the new welded crossmember) so I'm going to install the toyota steering box. The last truck was lowered 3" which looked nice but getting under her to do anything became a chore. As far as winning anything at a car show I've never felt like it was possible unless I spend $40K to go all out and build a truck I'm afraid to park at the corner store. Plus my wife would "Lorraina Bobbit" me in my sleep if I spent that much on it.

Wally

'51 - 'ol red

 

If you want to"correct" the front axle location with the stock beam axle, you can easily and inexpensively (especially if you are replacing the springs or eye bushings anyways) do it by replacing the OEM springs with Mid Fifty's "down and forward" leaf springs plus extended draglink. The main leaf has the centerbolt moved forward to move the axle. If you don't want to lower it, just add a couple original leafs back into the new stack. This will work with the OEM or the Toyota box. I like what they did with Foose's 56. When they put in the IFS they moved it 5 forwards of the stock location to give the truck a 115" WB then moved the wheel arches 4" forwards in the fenders to visually lighten the front fender overhang. This also had the secondary advantage making any oil pan sump/crossmember interference problems installing the Roush crate engine disappear.

Oh yah, the "misplaced" axle location is only on the 53-56 F100.

 

I didn't say it was wrong-and I'm sure the engineers had the wheelbase established before the stylists got into the act. I merely said it was a "visual defect" which I believe has become a consensus over the years among fans of these trucks.

 

I suspect it was done for OEM size tire clearance when wheels are turned and suspension is fully loaded/cycled.

 

Wallster, the 48-52 don't have the same visual problem, it is the 53-56 that have the issue. As AXRacer stated.

Agree with the orig post that if installing an IFS or similar mods, fix the problem when you are doing it.

 

I don't know for sure, I can't site any authority on it...but I've heard that quite a bit. Kind of makes sense to me, but I'm no expert..

 

I agree, and I think most everyone except 4tl8ford understands your point and what quotations mean when used online.

 

I agree with "visual defect" in the 53. That is why I corrected it when I installed the Volare suspension. If I were to do another [not likely] I would install an IFS moved farther forward and move the wheel opening in the fender to match. Much more visually pleasing to me and allow a low truck with better front bumper clearance.