Frame / Springs: Sub frame

[Rainmaker]

Thinking about ordering Mustang two sub frame for my 51 Champion and was wondering how much difference there is between a 53 frame and a 51 frame?

[bezhawk]

53 had rubber inner bushings on the control arms. 51's were steel with grease fittings. not much other differences at all.

[Rainmaker]

Would a sub frame for a 53 fit a 51 then?

[Alan]

Is this a trick question? There are differences on any year, WB, Model. Is the Mustang set up for a C,K or sedan? The steering arms will be angled differently. Yes it will fit but you may have to do some finessing.

[PackardV8]

Thinking is good, but before writing the check and firing up the cutting torch, try a search here. This has been covered extensively and some have well-thought and experienced reasons for not doing it. Others have done it successfully and like the clip. Educate yourself about the ins and outs.

jack vines

[bezhawk]

There are no differences between any body styles in the front suspension. The wheelbase is all different BEHIND the firewall. Any subframe designed for a C-K WILL fit a sedan, Lark or any other model you can name! This is not conjecture, it's fact.
That being said. the decision should be based on improving instead of just replacing because one deems newer as better. Often a thorough rebuild and upgrade of stock is financially less, and also maintains all the sheetmetal attaching and bumper mounting etc. An upgrade to Delrin bushings, Bilstein shock absorbers and Dave Thiebault anti sway bars will astound most nay-sayers of the stock setup.

[StudeRich]

Are you sure about that one Bez? I never built one, but all I know is, the Studebaker Slick Street Stuff C&K Kit had to be so modified to work on a '55 Wagon as to be more work than building the Kit yourself, so the Pro, Street Rod builder/installer told me.

One obvious difference is the sizeable Frame length and engine location difference, front axle centerline to firewall between C&K and Sedan/Wagon.

After much rework by a real Pro Street Rod Builder with many show winner builds under his belt, this was the final result:

[bezhawk]

Yes Rich, the frame is the same, but the body is mounted further forward , but the added length as I stated is added further back. If one measures where the frame kicks up they are all exactly the same.
The C/K bodys have the engine mounted further back by the MOUNTS, not a frame length change.

[Alan]

Bez is right about stock Studes. But once you put a Mustang 2 cross member and front steering on it no. The Ackerman is built into the Stude front suspension at the bell crank. With the Mustang, 0 Ackerman would be a string drawn through the center of the king pin to the center of the steering tie rod end to the center of the rear end. Suspension built for a 120 1/2" WB car put on a 108" WB car would give you excessive toe in on a turn.

[Mike Van Veghten]

Agreed, BEZ, and Alan ARE correct.
The difference in location of the cut make no difference per car...only the cut "location".
There will however possibly be differences in the bumper, core support and fender support locations. This shouldn't be a problem if you are tackling a kit suspension install.
Or like I did in my Lark, designed and built my own front suspension with the correct bumper mount and fender support locations.

AND...as Jack hints at, beside the fact that this thread was started for a 51 Stude (and may not count quite as much)...if used on 53 and up cars, the actual driving benefit most likely will be MUCH less than the car owner expects his/her new parts will add. As noted, some homework is involved in rereading the MANY past posts as to why this is fact, (I promised Jack not to rewrite any of it...).

Mike

[Jerry Forrester]

The Ackerman is built into the Stude front suspension at the bell crank.

I don't have the parts book in front of me, but if the above statement is true, and Ackerman is as important as most self proclaimed front end geometry experts state, then the bellcrank or the third arms (steering arms bolted to the spindle) must be different between the C-K's verses the Larks and other short wheel base sedans.
Either the bellcranks and/or third arms are different between the coupes and shorter wheelbase Studes or Studebaker Corp. didn't think Ackerman was as important as some would think.
Which is true?

[Alan]

Jer; On the 53 I took apart and Lazered out, set on turn plates, ran a bump steer, checked the factory work book dimensions and plugged into 2 computer programs. I came to the conclusion that the 3 degrees Ackerman comes from the bell crank movement. On my turn plate test I turned the left wheel 20 degrees, the right turned 17 degrees. Same as the factory book gives. That with magnetic lazers from Harbor Freight mounted to the hubs gave me just over 1 1/2" toe out at 10' Here are a couple of pics.

[/URL]

[/URL]

[StudeRich]

I find it easier to download the Pics from "My Computer" "C" Drive, where I store all Stude Pics.

[Alan]

Yes Rich; I had a HD crash on Windows Vista 32, so upgraded to W7, 64 bit. But hard drive was unusable or readable, so I took a hammer to it and threw it in the trash. Lost a lot of pics, but the 2 pics of the bell crank should have been on Photo bucket with each other but were not.

[Jerry Forrester]

Jer; On the 53 I took apart and Lazered out, set on turn plates, ran a bump steer, checked the factory work book dimensions and plugged into 2 computer programs. I came to the conclusion that the 3 degrees Ackerman comes from the bell crank movement. On my turn plate test I turned the left wheel 20 degrees, the right turned 17 degrees. Same as the factory book gives. That with magnetic lazers from Harbor Freight mounted to the hubs gave me just over 1 1/2" toe out at 10' Here are a couple of pics.

[/URL]

Put the other pic up shortly, Photobucket acting up.

I understand what you are saying and doing. And I admire your ability to run these test and set up the suspension as close to correct as possible.
What I'm saying is, there are trade offs in many of the systems of the front suspensions and steering and I don't think Ackerman is as critical as some others.
Yes, 100% correct Ackerman would be wonderful to achieve on every build, but I'm also okay with the Ackerman lines intersecting 8-10" in front or behind the rear axle with the steering set dead ahead. And as long as it stays there during steering.
Have you checked the Akerman on both the 120" and 108" wheelbase cars.

BTW, I've seen many cars with the original steering and suspension leave black streaks on the pavement when making a tight turn on city streets and parking lots.