early frame design flat vs sagging (curved)
Thread Starter
|
Freshman User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
From: central PA
early frame design flat vs sagging (curved)
My question is WHEN DID F100s GO TO THE CURVED FRAME (SAGING IN THE MIDDLE UNDER THE CAB) RATHER THAN THE EARLIER FLAT/STRAIGHT FRAME ?
I'm working on an update to a 53 F100, I dont want to go to a M II front clip but rather use a later generation Twin I beam and disc brake setup. A 65+ is the desired, but how late can I go before the frame dips to lower the cab?
thanks
Mike
I'm working on an update to a 53 F100, I dont want to go to a M II front clip but rather use a later generation Twin I beam and disc brake setup. A 65+ is the desired, but how late can I go before the frame dips to lower the cab?
thanks
Mike
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 693
Likes: 0
From: Tuttle, Oklahoma
well 67-72 "droop" so if you know if the 65-66 don't or not that should be your best bet. however if you are going through the trouble, I wouldn't go with the twin I beam setup, there isn't much you can do with the suspension without spending a BUNCH of money. I would suggest scabbing in a LTD or MK-V IFS setup. it has a decent trac and can carry the weight. and for what it's worth......time being money and all......I'd just go with the mustang II IFS from Fatman's or something. measure it out and weld it in place (atleast that's what classic custom trucks wants us to believe).
Post Fiend
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,231
Likes: 1
From: Near Fresno, California
I like the twin I beam, and do not trust a car type suspension on my truck. I am currently redoing a 59 and bought a 87 donor truck, mostly for the EFI engine. I am working on using its front end under the 59 so I can have PS and power disk brakes.
I am still measuring to see if I can make that work, but intend to scab the new frame onto the old one just in front of the front cab mounts.
I am still measuring to see if I can make that work, but intend to scab the new frame onto the old one just in front of the front cab mounts.
Fleet Owner
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 24,552
Likes: 74
From: Creedmoor, North Carolina
Mike, The chassis from 65-79 are the same from the rear cab mount holes to the front bumper. The mid 70s would give you power steering and disc brakes.
My O, If you aren't gonna haul anything a car chassis should work fine. A working truck is a different animal.
John
My O, If you aren't gonna haul anything a car chassis should work fine. A working truck is a different animal.
John
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 693
Likes: 0
From: Tuttle, Oklahoma
I agree with jowilker, and I may add if you want a cruiser, you should go with a suspension better suited for it. even if you only plan on hauling a water heater or a load of landscape timbers from home depot, you really don't NEED a heavy truck front end. but if you already have it, and you are going to splice frames anyway....go for it. there are alot more parts available for the later model twin I-beams than the 65-79. so in reality that may be better for you anyway.
Post Fiend
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,231
Likes: 1
From: Near Fresno, California
OOPs, didn't mean to step on anyone's toes - lots of people have used chrysler and other front suspensions with no problems.
I am going to be towing a camp trailer with a weight-distributing hitch so I want the heavier truck type suspension. I would also like to add power streering and power disk brakes without having to pay hot rod shop prices for them.
I am going to be towing a camp trailer with a weight-distributing hitch so I want the heavier truck type suspension. I would also like to add power streering and power disk brakes without having to pay hot rod shop prices for them.
Fleet Owner
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 24,552
Likes: 74
From: Creedmoor, North Carolina
*****, Why don't you find a way to put the 59 on the 87 chassis. It'll take some fabbing, but could make a real dream to work with.
John
John
Trending Topics
Post Fiend
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,231
Likes: 1
From: Near Fresno, California
Originally Posted by jowilker
*****, Why don't you find a way to put the 59 on the 87 chassis. John
I am not sure, I need to spend the weekend measuring and thinking about which way to go with the project. I need to park them side by side on a cement slab and really look things over.
I have been driving the 87 donor for a few days and hope that the end project rides and handles as good as it does.
I was hoping someone would have done a simular project an would tell me how easy it was to do.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalytic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
Elder User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 693
Likes: 0
From: Tuttle, Oklahoma
Originally Posted by WillyB
I was hoping someone would have done a simular project an would tell me how easy it was to do.
hahahahahahahahahaha you know better!!!if it anything were easy, none of us would need the forum!! haha
I'm just kidding, I just got a kick out of that one.
Posting Guru
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 2
From: Northwest Fl
The frame width is wider on the 89, the mid 70's frame was 34", which is the same as the 53-56 and possibly all the Ford frames through the seventies.
I have my 55 sitting on a 69 F-100 frame with the front I-Beams from a 75. The cab sits within an inch of the stock 55 height. The dip in the frame is between the front and rear cab mount and is not visible from the side view because of the running boards. Only problems so far is the front track width is a little wider than the stock 55, which I think can be controlled by possitive offset front rims.
As we all know, there are 3" dropped I-beams available that can drop the front a little, but never going to get the 'slammed' look out of it. The 87 frame being wider, would require channeling the older body to make it straddle the frame as it does in it's stock form.
I have my 55 sitting on a 69 F-100 frame with the front I-Beams from a 75. The cab sits within an inch of the stock 55 height. The dip in the frame is between the front and rear cab mount and is not visible from the side view because of the running boards. Only problems so far is the front track width is a little wider than the stock 55, which I think can be controlled by possitive offset front rims.
As we all know, there are 3" dropped I-beams available that can drop the front a little, but never going to get the 'slammed' look out of it. The 87 frame being wider, would require channeling the older body to make it straddle the frame as it does in it's stock form.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rustywheel68
Brakes, Steering, Suspension, Tires, & Wheels
3
Dec 30, 2012 01:01 PM
3Mike6
1948 - 1956 F1, F100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
2
Nov 28, 2004 07:04 PM
brucewolff
1948 - 1956 F1, F100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
9
Oct 18, 2004 08:43 AM
grumpy1
1961 - 1966 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
9
Mar 29, 2004 06:31 PM
b1rdjx88
1980 - 1986 Bullnose F100, F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
6
Apr 15, 2002 06:11 PM