Subframe connectors---a good idea?

gokstate74

Hey all. Looking into the possibility of putting subframe connectors at some point on our 1992 Vibrant Red. I see only one post on this about 5 years ago.

Has anyone done this and can comment on?

I understand the rationale--after rolling the mustangs off the assembly line, all convertible foxes were shipped to Cars and Concepts to have "their tops chopped." From my understanding, there is inadequate subframe support given to fox mustangs, hence the reason for the subframes. Only drawbacks I can see are the cost, welding and modification of a stock vehicle.

If any have done, any photos of the finished product, and which one did you choose?

Chris

jburn57

Okay first when the convertibles were modified they installed body stiffeners to the rocker panel and floor pan seem, you can see all the rivets in it just under the the rocker panel. You will not find these on a coupe or hatchy. Then after they had done this they cut the roof off of the coupes.

Below is a very good article on the subject whether you need subframe connectors or not. Page 2 is very interesting and a surprise from what all the other forums have to say about them. but read the whole article. Also if you would like to have an inexpensive set of connectors these work really well for a car that won't see hard use at a track, click on the 2nd link.

Enjoy, Jerry


http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/t ... index.html

http://www.latemodelrestoration.com/item/LRS-SUBS

FlyinTiger

Great read linked above. I agree with the need for sub frames being determined by your use and driving style for the car. If it is a show car/weekend driver, it is not worth the effort and depreciation to the car. Only the Saleen market looks favorably at sub frames, in regards to values to the car. If you occassionally track your car, you will feel the difference of removing the body flex. In the end, it is your car to do what you want to it. If you choose to go the route of sub frames, look into bolt on versions. Holes can be filled relatively easy, but weld ons are many hours of grinding to remove and will deter many future buyers.

Stangfan

My 7-Up was extremely "loose" when I got it, to the point that the windshield/cowl shake made me feel a little nauseous. I got the Kenny Brown chassis stiffening kit which tightened up the car like you would not believe. I was able to see how each part of the kit improved things, as each was put on individually. The subframe connectors went on first and the difference was very noticeable. Even if you do no other reinforcing, I feel this one is very worthwhile. The "reinforcement" that Ford did to replace the roof, in my opinion, was not enough. Also, I have heard nothing but bad things about bolt-in subframes. You are better off getting weld-ins, as they make the frame much stronger.

jburn57

Weld ins are the ideal choice but bolts ons are fine for the street driven car that isn't going to the track. But then again it should be based on the cars use and owners choice. A lot of mods people do are over kill.

I put over 200 miles on mine today and I am 400 miles away from the big 90. My car is still pretty solid yet as some of the roads we were on today proved.

I have also riden in some with 1/2 as many miles and they creaked and rattled terribly. I think a lot of this has to do with how the car was driven. Example, did the prevoius owner just drive down the road oblivious to the road conditions, like my wife, or were they paying attention and try to avoid all of those pot holes? I think you get the idea.

Right now I don't think I need them but may in the future we will see. Of all the shows I have been to, MCA, Shelby Nat. usually the heavily modded cars are the only ones with them, or the younger guys cars. The majority of Foxes don't have them from what I have seen in this area.

All boils down to the individual car and owner choice.
JMO,
Jerry