Hi,
I am new to the forum here and have the luck of finding a 61 uni.
I have been watching the forum here for a while and learning alot about what to do and maybe what not to do. The one thing I have not seen to much is on changing the front end clip to a Dodge front clip. I have heard this is the right way to go, I dont want to go with a Volare ( to soft) . Any input to this would be gladly accepted.
Thanks

 

aguaboy,

1st of all, Welcome to FTE and our community here.

I don't understand what you mean when you claim that MoPaRs' Aspen/ Volare K frame is soft?

I had both an Aspen & Volare. They both had the same Direct Connection formuls, Stage III, L- A, Hi Per, 318 Cid engine in them and I could adjust my ride by preloading the transverse torsion bars in the front suspension any way I cared to.

This is the most common "K" Frame people use because it is a more or less very complete uint. In addition, as I said it has transverse torsion bars that jack up on until there is no give at all. Also which shocks one chooses makes a difference. Although I disagree with notion of hanging MoPaR parts on a perfectly good Ford Truck, if I were to make that mistake I would use Aspen - Volare "K" Frame B4 I'd use any other MoPaR Front end I can think of. What Dodge frame are you thinking of???

I don't think Ball Joints are the hot Set Up for trucks, Look at Brand Xs' problems @ 40K Miles, and even New Durango SUV & its' Ball Joint problems. But that's just my opinion, a lot of folks have made this conversion and claim they are happy with it.

If I had it to do again, I'd fit my integral bed body to a later frame and kill all the flies with 1 swat. I think the trick is to use a later (65 + up) nose. The only thing that req's is making the connection for the top fender brace to the 61 firewall, the fenders should bolt up to 61 holes, and the 65 support core should make or complete the transition, it would seem to me.

But I bleed corporate blue when I get cut myself, so I guess I'm predjudiced to FoMoCo solutions for FoMoCo trucks & FoMoCo problems

FBp

 

Check out the 1948-1960 forum. They have several front end options outline with the pros and cons weighed. although the volair IFS is the most widly accepted and practiced swap, and dispite its mopar backgroud does seem to be the best ALL AROUND solution. That being said the Ford large passenger car swap does look very appealing if you want to remaine true blue BLUE!

JJ

 

On a side note:

Fordboy I would be really interesed in getting a more indepth rundown of you propesed grafting, mixing, fankinstineing (whatever you want to call it) of a unibody and a post 65 truck.

Thanx, JJ

 

In essence the big corporate change in Dearborn took place in August of 1964 with the advent of the 1965 Model Production Run in nearly all FoMoCo lines. Across the board engines, bodies, transmssions, chassis. engine & trans mounts, and steering gear etc was all revised.

One change that did not take place was F Series 4X4s. It seems they retained the older, 57-63 style chassis & running gear right up until FoMoCo started putting coil spring front suspensions under F Series 4X4s.

We know that the fender skins from 61- 66 interchange with a minimum of modification. We also know the 65 & 66 use the top beam and a different inner fender panel than 61-64 used. They also use a different support core for 65 and another one for 66.
The 66 will fit all the way to 1979, but 65s fit 65 only. BUT the 66 core will fit 65 fenders & inner fender panels fine.

Only where the top inner fender beam hits the firewall/ cowl is different on 61-64, but same for 65 & 6. It's a matter of mounting the later (preferably a 66 support core with 65 or 66 inner fender panels & any outer fender skins 61 - 66, onto a 61 -64 cab body.

As for the cab, the front cab mount must be relocated on a later frame/ chassis because 61 to 64 miss by a few inches. It's a matter of precision cutting/ removal of the early (61-64) mount outriggers from the 61-64 frame and locating them correctly on later frame/ chassis.

The steering column, dash bracket & box from the 61-64 will not work with the later "twin I beam" frame/ chassis. BUT the later columns & brackets can be installed in 61-64 cabs easily, At least non tilt columns through 77 can. these are relatively simple items.

Okay, people have been putting all sorts of bodies & body combinations on truck frames for a long time. Particularily on 4X4 chassis. Rodders, such as myself have been swapping bodies for ages. It.s a matter of positioning the body on the frame/ chassis so it "looks aesthetically correct" when it's assembled. Since there are great similarities between 61/4 & 65/6 the key is to position cab ( center member of 3 body parts, nose-cab-bed)1st. I believe the rear cab mounts "hit" right on.

If so tie. locate cab in place using rear cab mounts. Measure the CA & firewall/ cowl to front axle and to front X member where support core strikes, to see if they will work out, & they should.

The guide line is bottom body line @ rear of front fender wheel opening, along door sill (bottom of rocker panel) along bedside bottom on a style side, or runningboard bottom on flareside. If & when these are straight, or in the same horizontal plane, the body should be positioned right.

After that it has to be a matter of making holes where they're requied, and welding holes up where they are not required. Now I'm speaking to a 4X2 [2wd] truck. I'm sure a 4X4 is a bit tougher, still it's not impossible. I helped set a 1947 Nash (inverted Bath Tub Body) on 76 F 100 4x4. It took some creative engineering to do but it got done. I do not know where that truck is now. ALso my buddy loves 55 CHevy bodies but hates GM. He had a 55 Chevy Station Wagon he cut into a "El Camino" then bolted it on a 77 F 100 4X4 SWB chassis. So stranger things have been done than "RETROFITTING" a early [61-64] Slick to a later eFFy chassis.

FBp

 

FBp, I have noticed on tv shows like American Hot Rod with Boyd Cottington, the guys seem to go to a rack and pull a chassis and build the car on it. They same thing seemed to have happened on the show when Ford built the new Cobra.

Cottington just finished a 56 Chevy that he pulled from a junkyard. I realize these is about $25,000.00 of highly skilled labor involved in building this car, and most of us will never make the grade, mostly because we don't know where to start.

Are there chassis sources that guys can use to build their trucks on?

How can you find out the differences in chassis layout say between 60 & 2000?

After being at a fellow 65 owners home and measuring the wheel bases on his 65 and 92 4X4 and finding 1 1/2" difference, I'm thinking it might be easier to move the sheet metal to much newer rails than to 79.

your thoughts?

John

 

John,

the only problem that makes frame swappint tough is when there is radical vertical differences between the two horizontal planes. IOW front frame rail kick to allow for, say "A" Frame or maybe Torsion bar suspension etc. Or another example is kick over a rear axle.

It's not unworkable, it just req's shimming to "agree" with the congiguration of the bottoms of the floors of parts being installed on the frame. OR you can modify the floor to accomodate vertical anomalies, either way though it makes for more work.

As far as width I think that's been rather standard at 37 inches (mol avg) for decades on pick ups. BUT I personally would select a "Ladder Type" frame as opposed to the omni-oganal shapes of something like GM uses. Mid 60s- late 70s GM "A" - Body frames scare me the way they head in at 90< @ the firewall. No wonder they don't handle.

Mamma's 2002 2500 Sierra turbo Diesel 4X4 "Company Ride" has that config & it distorted to hell with a load applied to it. Like Windshields broke, dash boards cracked & the Glove box popped and sometimes cab doors open if she got it "twisted" like crossing a gully or a Fire Cut. . . . It also got stuck easy & often.

They'd come out with a Powerstroke F250 4X4 & pull her out all the time. Since she got the 2003 Dodge 2500 4X4 sha hasn't got stuck, or broken windshields or dashboards. GMC said what do you expect? The Div of Forestry said they expected the truck to be good in the forest, like on TV. GMCs' answer? Hell those are only commercials on TV real trucks can't do that. . . .

Anyway I agree with you similar vertical elevations across the horizontal plane, a ladder type frame with MOL equal width & the wheel base within 3 or 3 inches and it should be pretty easy. It might require using the botom of the later support core as I think I said above, and being dreative with mount outriggers.

I'd favor the original body mount locations since those are what are considered bearing or "jack" points by strength of design. So Yeah, I can see it being done, hell if Gale the Body Man can make a 55 Chevy El Camino & put it on a Bronco chassis I don't see why many other combo's are not possible.

John did you check out the "poll question" yet? It's sort of about this very thing.

Talk at'cha later Bud! FBp & I'm outta here 4 now

 

Interesting, Great post.

Don't know anything about your poll, where is it?

John

 

John,
Right now, about 0830 EST it's about 15 lines down on this page & was posted by Key Lime Express.

He covered a lot of bases & combos, pretty interesting results so far. FBp

 

I got it. Question didn't fit my truck.

I did tranny, driveshaft, steering, brake, wiper, seat, upgrades to my truck.

John