Sandbox2.000 Suspension Build

[Turdle]

Um. You can't move the upper down without moving lower down same amount, all angle must match or wonky bump steering things occur

 

[97Sandbox]

My understanding is that having the tie rod at too much of an angle at ride height is what causes bump steer. That's what I'm experiencing now anyway. Ideally, the LCA and tie rod should be close to parallel at ride height, but since they are different lengths, the angles change in different ways after lowering.

Lowering the upper ball joint (by way of using a shorter spindle) will move the instant center back towards where it would be when stock. The main affect I see being different then is the camber gain because the upper and lower control arms aren't the same distance apart anymore at the outside. Suspensions are complicated and I'm by no means an expert, but I think it is possible to move the ball joints closer together without introducing bump steer as long as the tie rod is adjusted accordingly too.

 

[CDW6212R]

Keep the tie rods at the same angle as the LCA's, as close as possible. That produces the least amount of bump steer.

Mustangs have that issue a lot when people swap spindles, steering racks, and lower the cars all at once. The Fox Mustangs accept the later SN95 Mustang parts, but part of making it work well is setting the TRE location at the spindle to match the new steering rack and all the other swapped parts. There are common TRE spacers made for those which restore the TRE angles to closely match the LCA's. I'm working towards doing all of that with my 92 Mark VII, using the SN95 parts.

 

[allmyEXes]

Grant. I can't believe that I have missed what is going on with this thread of yours. I see on the page where I was initially watching it and then I don't get notifications. Anyway, looking good.
In a post #25 pic of the metal tabs added the old shock absorber, are the extra pieces of steel added to the cup and frame intended to make the cup are stronger to be able to convert over to coil overs? Does it appear to be enough extra reinforcement for them?
I would like to do a 1.5 to 2" drop on our 2002 Sport Trac to make it easier for me and my wife to be able to get up in the truck without the extra strain on the hip joints. I know that a 5.0 conversion would drop the front a tad and maybe even a shorter tire for the 16" wheels that seem really tall compared to late '90s Gen II wheel and tire size. I wonder how much extra thread is on the rear U-bolts that might not have to be changed if the rear shim was thin enough.
I really like that the way that you've done this conversion. I'm following.

 

[97Sandbox]

Thanks! Most of this build happened a couple years ago, so I'm not surprised it fell by the wayside.

Yes, the welded on tabs are to help the shock tower handle the extra stress from the coilover. Ford never designed them to support the weight of the front end, but with the added tabs, the cups are holding up fine. @RockRanger makes a kit with tabs that fit much better than the tabs I had in the kit I bought.

Is the Sport Trac spring over axle or spring under? If it's spring under, you can do the same procedure I did. The Belltech kit came with the appropriately lengthened U bolts which were also beefier than the stock ones.

 

[jr230]

Ah, good catch. The word I meant to say was biennial (every other year). Even as a native speaker, English can be tricky haha!

my 99 was ohv 02 and 04 ohc trouble the ohc little more power less fuel but when or if the timing chain x2 go its a engine pull to do job right
i did see the usps vans with the plastic nose they all got the ohv engine a good choice imo for info the chasse of the last model of the llv was a right hand drive explorer from when AU actually one time had car makers . they also built some Pontiacs imported g8 and the police only caprices
last heard no cars makes left in there country . sad the politicians sold the workers out to foreign countries