I know there has been a lot of talk about using the late model crown vic front under our trucks, but has anyone looked into if the front suspension out of an expedition will work also?

 

2009 expedition front track is 67 inches. a Slick is 60 inches.

Garbz

 

Would an explorer be a better match, just trying to find out what is similar to the crown vic.

 

The thing that makes the '03 & newer CV suspension attractive for these trucks is that the whole front suspension including the crossmember un-bolts from the CV and bolts into your truck with a minimal amount of welding. I don't think that's true for the Explorer or Expedition. Their crossmember is built into the frame.

 

If it was worth doing, Garbz would have done one by now.

 

From reading many of Garbs other posts, it seems his biggest beef with the CV frontend is the width because you have to use the late model rims with a different offset to clear the fender wells. Besides, he has major ties with the fellows who build the Dakota base front ends.

 

Wasn't there an artical about someone using a Astro van front end?

 

Early Ford Aero Star van... Similar to the CV as it is the correct width and is a bolt in with a spacer.

As to the Dakota i fabricated them, therefore i could be a little biased and have replaced a few botched MII based installs. But name one other aftermarket suspension that is specifically designed for a truck application using truck based components to handle the weight and have the identical track width of ford trucks from 55 to 77 and a similar front to rear weigh?

Garbz









Garbz

 

Hey Garbz,
In case you're wondering, I meant absolutely no disrespect in pointing out your bias for the Dakota front end. In fact, you almost convinced me to go that route with my 66 until I had a reality check with my time & work space, so for now, I had to opt for the simpler power steering/disc brake swap from a 78 F150. Hopefully, someday, I'll get to proceed with the fancier stuff.

 

None Taken.

I just am not a fan of MII based suspensions in heavy cars or trucks. The Areo Star mentioned has been installed in a few trucks i know of, Namely Johnny Canucks 64 Merc but none have been given the road test yet as to how they handle and react.

As to the CV it would be the shnizz if it was of a narrower track. With the wide track and offset requirements it looks like a camaro clipped truck. I jut can bring my self to like the modern mustang wheels. And of you do not install a wider rear it really looks funky.

Garbz

 

Does anybody have an article regarding a swap of an aerostar front end on to my 66 f100.

66rex

 

i thought i saw some discussion about ladder frames and aluminum crossmembers at one point- issues with flex?

 

Yes there was some discussion of the use of cast aluminum a month or two back. The more i learn the less appealing the CV appears as a viable swap.

Steve has expressed interest in fabricating a next generation swap suspension specific to the weight and bias requirements of a truck. It will take a bit of time to fab and prototype. The current Dakota cross member is out of production at Adam Young Fabrications with currently no plan on when they may reappear.

If you have never stopped in industrial chassis website do so, lots of heavy duty custom suspension work going on. Look at the Dynacorn truck frame Steve built as it is a true one ton rated frame and suspension. The only builder in the country that would take it on and warrant the rating.

Garbz

 

Just curious....wouldn't boxing the entire frame and beefing up the cross members eliminate most of the flex, Garbz? Would that make the CV swap more feasible to you? Other than adjusting for the wider-track issue, it seems to be one of the most affordable swaps available. Realistically, if the truck is mostly a street/highway driven hobby truck how many miles/years will it take to stress the CV crossmember? Looks like a rebirth of the Dakota swap is a few years down the road which is a long time to wait for these guys who are building their trucks now. Thoughts?

 

Boxing will eliminate some flex, however it will still have some. The CV unitized construction has zero flex. Cast aluminum and any movement/flex is a bad combination.

I have had many conversations on this with experts, and we agree cast aluminum used in this application on a ladder frame is asking for trouble. And that trouble will happen suddenly abruptly and expensively. Ford never intended for the suspension design to be used on anything other than the unitbody design of the CV. it may take one minute or it may take a year for the front suspension to fall off at 65 miles per hour on the freeway or while you are making a turn or it may never.

When you look to the MII aftermarket the units sold today they are all based on the geometry of the Mustang/pinto/bobcat with some improvements. All the units are designed to be installed from a certain point and level with built in anti dive on the upper hats.

Of the installs touted here name one that has actually set up a crown vic on the table and measured and digitized the points to obtain the correct angle on the cross member or the correct placement of the rear mounting point. Every install happening today is a crap shoot as very few have the expertise to set up the frame and ride height to attain the correct settings for the CV. Most is just bolt the sucker to the bottom of the frame, Is where they are bolting it actually at the correct level or angle? Was there previous damage to the frame and is it out of square, parallel or bent oblique?

I guess it is my point that it is a cast aluminum piece with about the same strength as a kitchen pot, and no detailed instruction as just where to place it and at what angles.

Garbz








The CV has zero aftermarket support, no bags no anything. All that is going on now is trial and error fitting of the CV with some decent installs and some down right scary installs.