I have a 52 f-1 Im building right now and its getting a M2. I had a both suspensions in the pst and prefer the M2, it was a daily driver till someone stole it. No issues whatsoever and I beat on it bad for a good 6 years between work and 1/8 mile racing. Most parts can be bought OTC at local parts stores and the ride is great.

On the other hand if your hauling heavy loads and want a stock look then stay with a straight axle.

You could easily build a M2 (if you have the tools and knowhow) for less than a grand if you buy right. Big parts include the following....

M2 crossmember-shock hats
springs-shocks
a-arms
calipers-wheel bearing-caliper brackets-flex brak line
spindles
Rack and pinion

Those are the big $$$ items but you get the picture. The brakingsystem can be modified for different size rotors and calipers real easy, also not to forget the advantage of a different bolt pattern.

You will have to think about the ramifications of manual or power steering rack and pinion and the different brake system......These systems can nickel and dime you if you dont buy right and I usually get the bigger ticket items off EBAY and the wearable items from the local auto store.

you need help with one of these then let me know I will give you some insight. I have no working or building knowledge of the old staight axle systems but they are good but not for me...Good luck

Are the same Mr. N who is an offroad guru and has the D60/D44 info online?[/quote]

Nope, Different Mr. N

I rebuilt my 51 F1 front end and had new springs (etc.) installed. I drive with it on the same roads as my 2002 Ranger and the stock single axel front end rides and drives just as good as the Ranger.

I was sure I was going to change front suspension when I bought the panel (we are national level autocrossers and can really appreciate good handling) but after driving it cross country we decided the (rebuilt) beam axle was perfectly acceptable except for the original worn out steering box and ram style power assist combination on it.
IMHO the beam axle in good shape and alignment is more than satisfactory alternative to IFS and likely to get your truck on the road years sooner. Body roll is easily controlled by proper shock absorber choice.
PS is such a natural, easy conversion on the beam axle and inexpensive compared to rebuilding the OEM box (and you still have an 80 year old design box) that I'd highly recommend it, especially if you or other drivers don't have big arms and shoulders.
Power assist brakes are not needed unless you go to disk brakes. Dual chamber MC is highly recommended for safety, and power assist is a small extra expense if you are changing the MC. Most vehicles today have power assisted brakes so driver's are not used to or may not be comfortable with unassisted brakes.

After my last post, I started poking around web for front suspension info. The website for the guys making the Dakota set-up still list it, BUT there been some upheaval in their staff. I also found a number of guys who feel the way I do re the M2.:-X07

There is an 11 or 12 part series here on FTE re Alternative Suspensions for F-100's. It discusses pro's and con's of each.

The coolest thing I found was bolting, Yes BOLTING, a 2003-07 Crown Vic/Marquis/Marauder front end on an F-100 frame !!! There's a video journal on YouTube by an autoshop teacher, who put the entire drivetrain and front suspension from a Crown Vic cop car in a '67 F-100. There is also be a thread here about a guy in Texas doing a late 60's F-100 with Crown Vic front end and an Isuzu diesel. This set-up drops the truck 4-5" with no alteration to Crown Vic suspension. The autoshop teacher added blocks to keep his near stock height. I gonna have to build one of these!!


Mr N: The other 'N' is on the Pirate4x4 site. His info has been invaluable to me(kinda like Number Dummy here).

Later,
Jim

There is a great deal of difference in the width of a 67 F100 and a 53-56 F100 and a CV.

53-56 Frame width 34"
Track width 60.0"

CV Frame width 55" !!!
Track width 63.4"

I got a tci ifs .Havn't drove it but was easy to put in and looks great.

Hi AXRacer,

Not sure where you got your info, but, it's wrong. The critical dimension on the CV is where the front suspension mounts, not under the body. Also important to note/repeat: This only applies to 2003-07 Crown Victorias, Marquis, and Marauders. The earlier CV's would require grafting the frames together like many of the other swaps (Volare, Aerostar, Etc). The fact that this is bolt on is what blew me away !!!

A quick search for "crown vic isuzu" would have found it. Here check it out: https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/7...o-67-f100.html

Also, the frame width on most old trucks (regardless of make) was 34". Ford went to 36" in late 70's. Not sure if it all trucks or just some of 4wd's

Jim

straight or not?
 

I don't where AXracer came up with 55" frame on the CV. I bought one to install on a future build. It is perfect for the 53-56. The CV bolt holes will perfectly center each side of the frame. Just be sure to box the frame in that area, and you will have to use wheels with a high positive offset. These can be found on many late model vehicles such as the Mustang and Charger.

As far as the straight axle goes, I have been driving a 56 with straight axle and 235/75/15 tires for years and I love it. I do consider it steering by 'Armstrong'. On the other hand, I recently purchased a 52 and put LT215/85/16 tires on it and it is markedly easier to steer than my 56.

Good luck.

I have a Mustang type suspension, not a transplant. These kits are designed with the size and weight of your truck. Much stronger than the stock units. I use my truck at least a few times a week,not daily, and I think the ride is great. Goes around corners like a dream and on the highway at 75 or more, it's smooth and solid. Yes you do have to stiffen the frame and frame must be square and straight. Just my opinion. I drove mine with the stock straight axle for a couple of years, but it was difficult to keep up with traffic and keep the truck straight because of bump steer. Good Luck Hope this helps

I found the measurements on the internet.
Straight axle bump steer should not exist unless there is something amiss.
Using strong reverse offset wheels may solve appearance issues, but can really mess up the scrub radius (handling, tire wear) if the suspension geometry is not designed for that offset. That's solving one problem by creating another.

Regardless of frame width, the track width is still 63 1/2" or so, which is wider than stock. It will work, yes, but the offset will need to be taken up by the wheels (as was mentioned). Some people will frown on the look of a FWD pickup or the "biggest wheels I can fit look". But to each their own. As a reminder, the '52 and earlier frames are 32" wide in front. Also, FWIW, the 34" wide frame in front goes all the way through the 1970's despite a wider track starting in 1973. 1980's have the same track and width as '73-79, though the frame flares out at the front bumper. (as an example, a 400 from 1978 will fit a 1983 F250 with no modification)

In that build thread linked by Jim, page 22 is when he finally puts wheels on it.

As a rule of thumb, if the suspension is IFS and IRS, the frame should not flex (boxed), and if using solid axles, the frame should flex.