I'm currently in the process of building a 66 shortbed and have been pondering which ifs setup to use. I've thought about dropped beams, mustang II, and the dakota. Now I don't want to anger anger any of my ford brothren but has anyone ever entertained the thought of using the frontend from a mid seventies chevy pickup. I believe the track widths are close and the chevy should bolt in with few modifications. Also they are relatively inexpensive at most bone yards. Anybody out there ever tried this?
Thanks, Rob

 

Ehh... Doesn't your 66 already have twin I beams? Last time I checked, that was a reliable and decent form of independent front suspension. It isn't the most glamorous, but its relaible. It is tough to align a twinI, esp. camber. So Ford ditched it -- after 13 years, so that should say something.

If you think you are going to get large performance gains with a seventies chevy over a twin I -- well you are mistaken IMHO. And even though I am sure you can do it -- it can't be easy.

 

Your truck has IFS
if you want it lowered, get drop Ibeams or shorter coils

 

I agree with CD 100%. Maybe even more, if that's possible!

If you want a loose, poor handling, underbuilt, passenger car suspension that is known for eating its' light weight ball joints which were designed & installed upside down by OEM factory & engineers, then obvious choice is buy one of the Brand X trucks.

When I R&R'd a set of brake pads on a 3500 Bowtie Truck for the 2nd time in 11 months & realized they were from an Impala Passenger Car I understood why I was putting brakes on that customers truck 2 or 3 times a year, and lower ball joints every 40K miles.

Also way lower A frames align with spindles, spindles over run theoretical ideal stop points on full, stop to stop, turns allowing wheel vertical center to "Flop Out" in an over center condition (it's another design fault) and it is also the cause of premature BJ & Lower A frame Catastrophic Failure these crummy suspensions are notorious for suffering.

As for angering me, it's not gonna happen over anything that involves a Brand X (aka Chevrolet) I never get mad when I have a good joke I can just laugh & Laugh at. Someone once told me that Chevrolet is "Shanty French" for "laughing stock".

Fact is it's usually Bowtie Boyz who get mad, and often at me or my Slick. What good does that do em? Suspension options go to:
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/s...75#post1186975

Build your FoMoCo Right and your problems will vanish!
FBp

 

Yup! All true. Personally I don't like dropped I-Beams and the steering linkage adapters. Kind of flimsy IMHO! I wish someone would do the Dakota swap. I am curious as to how that would turn out. For now I use low profile tires 55's. Later I will try a set of shorter springs. But if you want to get into the weeds, I think the Dakota deal would be best.

 

Ford Kept the twin I beams up until the 90's so there must have been something done right.

I want to lower the front on my Slick (77 F150 Frame) truck has anyone ever had experience with drop springs or I beams?

I have heard that drop springs will trow your alingment way off possably too far to corect. And from what I have seen the droped I beams are very expensive, maby I am just looking in the wrong places. But are there any other options besides a clip?

 

Last spring we installed an Aerostar IFS under a 65 Merc (Canadian F100). It is the easist swap I have ever done. It took longer to remove the Twin I-beam than to install the minivan crossmember. The crossmember unbolts from the van alot like the Chebby truck design you asked about. It gives you a 4x 5 1/2" bolt pattern, same as a Ford car. The truck is not on the road yet ( I need to set a fire under that boy) so I don't know how low it is. Let me say that it is not as low as a Volare' or Mustang II. It can be with the use of airbags. It gives you power rack and pinion steering that won't interfere with motor mounts like the Volare'. The bodies on these vans rot so bad that are plenty in the junkyards.

 

Has anyone read the article in Classic Trucks Mag, might have been Coustom classics about the IFS from Fatman Fabrications?

Bobby

 

I read it but it was a while ago, I forgot what all it said

 

Shorter springs are a sure method to knock your camber WAY out. If you really want to sit low to the street, don't care about safety, handling or tire life -- go right ahead.

You CAN shorten the springs radically, and then put a new bend in the Ibeam to correct the camber. I presume that most "dropped Ibeams" aim at some combination of shorter springs and corrected camber. Bending your own Ibeam is a very special and possibly dangerous process -- get it wrong and the steel is brittle (after heating) -- one nice BUMP in the road and you are riding on a busted axel. Not common, but occured often enough that it quite possibly is a main reason why Ford ditched the twin Ibeam setup. Its a very good suspension for a truck. A good compromise in that it can handle heavy loads, rough roads and still deliver a decent ride and handling. Compare and contrast to chevy, if you will.

Anyhow, for me, a lowered pickup is just another idea that's pretty dumb. You want a low vehicle -- buy a car. You want great handling -- buy a car. You want a truck. Great, that's what you have!!! Keep it the way the engineers designed it. You know, they were sending men to the moon in 1965. They probably knew something about suspension too.

later....

 

and you can see where the front sits. It's funny to hear some opinions, but what it comes down to is taste. MY taste is for a truck that sits lower than the stock stance. My truck also didn't come with a 514, tubbed, or louvers in the hood. Trucks weren't running around in the weeds in '65, so we have to "fix" them nowadays. To each thier own, but take a gander, and F.Y.I., my beams will be for sale in the near future, so I can go even lower with an i.f.s. airbag system. The picture in my gallery of my truck on the ground was just done by goofing around with Photoshop. The article in Classic Trucks is in the new issue, and it covers the swap in nice detail for us,.......finally!

 

I will be installing the fat man mustang II kit in my 65 this summer. I am going to go with the complete kit with air ride. If you want endless possibilities go with the must II. You can go with coilovers, air ride,stock coils, drop spindles, stock spindles, basicly any stance you want. Fat man said that the must.II kit with stock spindles and coils would drop the truck 5 inches, if you want more drop than that, do drop spindles, want to go even lower go drop spindles and air ride for 11 inches of drop with the air let out. I just do not see any drawbacks to the must.II for a custom truck that you want dropped or slammed.

 

Truckfarmer, thanks for the info on the aerostar. Are there specific years that work better than others? Also were you able to use the steering column from the van or your origional column?
I'm currently working on a frame off buildup on my 66. I'll more than likely keep my 352 and fmx. Just want to ditch the twins and go with something other than a mustang or dropped Ibeams because like most of us I'm working on a budget and the aero sounds good because of the price and ease of installation. Would appreciate any info on your swap.

Thanks, Rob

 

I forgot to add that if you think you will not be happy with only a 3" drop it would save you time and money to with the must.II suspention to begin with instead of changing up the sus. multiple times till you get it to the stance you want. Headturnin65 will probably agree with me since I see he has been bittin by the bug to go lower. I know I will get shot for this but, I have a 69 chevy that is bagged and layin frame. I put lowered coils on it, That was not low enough, so here I go again wasting time and money getting the stance I really wanted to begin with.

 

Go to Slick 60s and ask Matt (A65 MERCURY) or Johnnie Cannuck to see photos of their Aerostar IFS. There are about 3 guys on there that have gone the minivan way.
You can use any steering column you like and connect it with a Borgeson or Flaming River u-joints. The downside of the Aerostar is that the steering input shaft points up pretty darn vertical. After your engine is mounted, see if you can rotate the shaft for the steering rack back towards the firewall.