Tie rod ends. L & R, or not?

Here is a puzzle. Falcon Parts uses one tie rod end for both the left and right side. Mac's auto parts sells two different tie rod ends, one for the left and one for the right. Which do you think is correct?

Falcon Parts:
Tie rods outer (2) 1963-1964 V-8 MANUAL STEERING OUTER TIE ROD ENDS SKU: C3DZ-3A130-G This part serves as the left hand or right hand outer tie rod end for all models of the 1963 & 1964 Ford Falcon & Mercury Comet equipped with a V-8 engine & manual steering. It is also used as the right hand outer tie rod end on all models of the 1963 & 1964 Ford Falcon & Mercury Comet equipped with a V-8 engine & power steering. The adjusting threads on this tie rod end are RIGHT Hand. Falcon Parts $87.95 x 2 = $175.90.
See: http://www.falconparts.com/ford-falc...DS-197p533.htm

Macs:
Outer Tie Rods - Manual Steering
Macs 1963 V8 Right, Falcon 41-35548-2 $94.95
1963 V8 Left, Falcon 41-35550-2 $116.95
See: http://www.macsautoparts.com/ford_fa...e+rod&x=16&y=8

I know in 1965 the two inner are the same and the two outer are the same - if you have manual steering, but I'm not so sure earlier models. I installed '65 manual parts on my '63. The '64 parts are one-off and may carry back into '63 cars too. They did weird stuff those years. If they look identical (thread size and rotation, length, bends) then they likely are the same. Power steering car, not so.

I have been very impressed with the falconparts guys when I have a question. They are still owned by the guys who started the company because they loved falcons. Each time, I get the feeling they know the answer, and each time I found what they said to be correct-as far as I could tell. It seems like with the MAC's people, sometimes they're reading the answer from the same catalog you are. If you have any question about it, I would email the falconparts.com guy directly- I have always gotten an answer quickly.

Hello, Roger and Don.

Thanks for the input. I believe that Falcon Parts is correct and that the left and right outer tie rod ends are the same based on the following picture. I bought a CD called "1960-1968 Ford Car, Part Diagrams and Exploded Views" and found a page labeled "1963/64 Manual Steering Linkage (Falcon 8 Cylinder)". The diagram labels the outer tie rod ends as "3289" and the inner tie rod ends as "3290". That indicates to me that there is no left or right, just two each of inner and outer.
Attachment 4015

My front tires are wearing on the inside edge and it turns out that my ball joints are worn out. That's no surprise. The whole front end is worn out. Rather than just change the ball joints, I am looking at re-doing everything on the front. Here is the parts list that I have.

Have I missed anything?
Should I change the front coil springs "while I am at it"? The existing coil springs seem alright.

1. Upper control arms with ball joints and bushings (2)
2. Lower control arms with ball joints and bushings (2)
3. Sway bar mount bushings (2)
4. Sway bar link kit (1)
5. Strut rod bushings (2)
6. Coil springs (2)
7. Coil spring perch (2)
8. Front suspension bumper (2)
9. Engine mounts (2)
10. Idler arm
11. Pitman arm
12. Tie rod ends inner (2)
13. Tie rod ends outer (2)
14. Tie rod sleeve (2)
15. Top coil spring insulator (2)
16. Shocks, front and rear

Here are some photos of the existing parts. I stuck my head under the car last night while it was in the garage and tried to identify the parts that I was reading about. I've never had time to pay attention to the front end until now and it is all really interesting to read about what each part does and how they all fit together.

Here is the idler arm. The long rod in the background is the center link. Wikipedia says: "The idler arm supports the end of the center link on the passengers side of the vehicle. The idler arm bolts to the vehicle's frame or subframe. Generally, an idler arm is attached between the opposite side of the center link from the Pitman arm and the vehicle's frame to hold the center link at the proper height. Idler arms are generally more vulnerable to wear than Pitman arms because of the pivot function built into them. If the idler arm is fitted with grease fittings, these should be lubricated with a grease gun at each oil change."
Attachment 4016

Pitman arm to center link. The tie rod adjusting sleeve is in the center background. "The Pitman arm is a linkage attached to the steering box (see recirculating ball) sector shaft, that converts the angular motion of the sector shaft into the linear motion needed to steer the wheels." ** "1963 ½ Falcon V-8 vehicles used 1 1/8 inch sectors shafts, six cylinder cars used a one-inch shaft."
Attachment 4017

This shows the strut rod connection to the lower control arm. The bolt sticking up is the sway bar link. A ball joint is on the right.
Attachment 4018

Upper control arm. The coil spring sits on a "perch" positioned on top of the upper control arm. The ball joint is on the right in the photo and the pivot bolt is on the left.
Attachment 4019

If your coil spring perches are the original bronze bushing type I'd re use those or go with the opentracker roller perches.

The replacement bushing type in my personal opinion don't rotate as well as the bronze bushing type do and puts the suspension in a bind. Plus they have a tendency to squeak.

opentracker is expensive at $119 a pair.. and a little overkill for a street car, but are a good alternative.

Finding NOS bronze bushing type perches is difficult at best. So unless yours are real sloppy lots of play in the cross shaft the rides on the bushings I say clean them up and reuse them.

Just my opinion though.

Dennis,
You'll be amazed at what that stuff will look like powdercoated. It's not that expensive either. I'm a rookie at this stuff, but I'm figuring it out step by step. I have all the front suspension stuff powder coated (except I replaced the control arms in one piece.) The stuff is so beautiful I'm going to hate to put the fender back over it after I get it put back together! I just made the decision to do it all from the ground up. (By the way...those ball joints were horrible...old hardened grease...and the shocks were totally spent. Whatever was in them was long gone...) Now I'm focused on the rear axle...almost done. Some pics below- you can see what a beauty it is now. :BIRTHDAY: You can imagine what it looked like before, and it was rancid inside. Of course, it could all fall apart when I get going if I screwed it up...but I don't think so. Before it was very sloppy. Huge play at the yoke, and one axle shaft wobbled. I replaced all the bearings, but kept the origional yoke and pinion based on members recomendations, I carefully put everything together by the book, youtube videos, and recomendations from others (carefully setting all torque...) Low and behold...that big slop is gone, and everything seems to work great...(on the bench anyway...) unfortunately I probably won't find out until late next spring, but I'm already getting pretty excited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathan289

If your coil spring perches are the original bronze bushing type I'd re use those or go with the opentracker roller perches.

The replacement bushing type in my personal opinion don't rotate as well as the bronze bushing type do and puts the suspension in a bind. Plus they have a tendency to squeak.

opentracker is expensive at $119 a pair.. and a little overkill for a street car, but are a good alternative.

---

Hello, Nathan.

Youch! The opentracker roller perches are $199 a pair. See: http://www.opentrackerracingproducts.com/rollerperch/
Attachment 4025

And there is a double roller perch for $300, see: http://www.mustangsplus.com/xcart/19...r-Bearing.html
The price for a TRIPLE roller perch must really be up there.

Then there are the cheapie rubber bushing pieces that cost $39 a pair on ebay.
Attachment 4023

You are correct that the original pieces rotated on a metal shaft and bushings shaft (see diagram below). That indicates that the piece was intended to rotate freely. Whether my car still has the original piece or not has yet to be discovered.
Attachment 4024

But .... I read that the rubber-bushings have advantages over the metal bushings or roller bearings in that the rubber bushings insulate the car from road noise, they cannot be damaged by a sudden shock as can bearings, and they do not require lubrication as do the bearings.

The roller bearings do rotate more freely, and I am trying to understand how that lessens "bind" in the suspension and what effect that would have on handling. The bottom of the shock absorber bolts (I think) to the spring perch and if the perch does not rotate freely its angle will change as the control arm moves up and down. This would put a small amount of twist on both the coil spring and the shock absorber. I guess that the twist would work against keeping the tires square on the road and would make the car feel less stable.

Does that reasoning sound correct? Could you really feel a difference in your car's handling after installing roller bearing spring perches?

Note to Don.

All you powder coating looks really nice. I'm looking forward to your getting your car back on the road and you posting pictures of the trips that you will take it on.

I've been studying the pictures of front suspension parts and its is becoming more clear (I think) about what they do and how they do it.

The sway bar is held to the frame rails by two bushings and the sway bar ends are held to the lower control arms with link rods.

Sway bar bushings on frame:
Attachment 4030

Sway bar link connection to lower control arm:
Attachment 4031

If the front wheels are traveling up and down in tandem, as when driving straight over an undulating surface, the sway bar rotates in its bushings and provides no resistance and does not interfere with the action of the coil springs. This provides the car with a soft ride. When the car leans during a turn, the lower control arms move in opposite directions relative to the frame and cause the sway bar to twist and act as a torsion spring. The torsion spring tension is proportional and opposite to the degree of body roll and provides additional support to the coil springs. If the frame rail bushings and/or the control arm links are worn and do not hold the sway bar and the sway bar ends firmly in place, the sway bar will move up and down instead of being twisted and it would not provide any torsion spring function. The sway bar would not do anything. (Mine probably is not doing anything. I need to change the link connections and frame bushings.)

The lower control arm is designed to swing up and down around a single pivot point. The strut rod prevents the lower control arm from moving forward and backward and becoming bent. The lower end of the strut rod is bolted to the top of the lower control arm.

Strut rod connection to lower control arm:
Attachment 4033

The upper end is sandwiched between rubber strut rod bushings and is bolted to the front cross piece of the car’s frame.

Strut rod bushings:
Attachment 4032

As the control arm moves up and down the upper end of the strut rod pivots within the springiness of the rubber bushings. If the rubber strut rod bushings become old and hard and worn, the fit of the upper strut rod end will be looser. That will allow more forward and backward motion on the control lower control arm. The lower control arm would move a little bit fore and aft in an arc and cause a changing alignment of the front wheels which would result in less precise handling and steering. (I need to change my old hard strut rod bushings.)

Dennis, I just added Urethane bushed spring perches to the Ranchero and so-far so good. They come with a grease fitting, just like yours has, which indicates you have the bush'd version and not the rubber version.

I also noted that the rubber spring pads on the perch on my only 3 year old parts (less than 1000 mile parts) had split allowing the spring metal to metal contact. I replaced them on my new urethane-bushed parts with the same material I made the hose hanger I sent you. I'm hoping that webbing strap holds up better than rubber.

The only other part you didn't mention is the drag-link. Whether you need all the parts you list will depend how good what you have is. Good luck!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

Dennis, I just added Urethane bushed spring perches to the Ranchero and so-far so good. They come with a grease fitting, just like yours has, which indicates you have the bush'd version and not the rubber version.

The only other part you didn't mention is the drag-link. Whether you need all the parts you list will depend how good what you have is. Good luck!

---

Hello, Roger.

Is there something to replace on the 1963 drag link (center link)? It looks like it is just a metal rod (see below) that the pitman arm, idler arm, and tie rod ends plug into. Do I need something else in addition to a new pitman arm, idler arm, and tie rod ends?

Attachment 4043

I am finding out about things that I didn't know existed. The picture I showed is for the basic cheapie rubber perch. I looked up "urethane spring perch" and they were listed for $199 per pair. Those seem nice in that they are evidently more flexible than rubber while also providing the same road noise insulation function. I also saw a "synthetic elastomer" perch for $104 per pair (see description below). Does the urethane offer an advantage over the "synthetic elastomer"?

"Part # C4DZ-3388-HP Now available from Scott Drake, these 1964.5-73 Mustang High Performance Coil Spring Perches offer a very affordable upgrade to stock spring perches with rubber bushings. These are made with synthetic elastomer bushings which are similar to polyurethane in performance and longevity, but will not squeak like polyurethane. The perch can rotate 360 degrees on the shaft, which allows the front suspension to articulate freely. This feature also eases the installation of the coil spring. Zerk grease fittings are installed and locking nuts are included."

See: http://www.mustangdepot.com/OnLineCa...ng-perches.htm

Dennis. My bad. It was the elastomer perches I used. Right at $50 each. Exactly as you described.

Didn't pay close enough attention I guess that you have that 1.5 year only version of the front end. Looking again it is evident. Most of those with that front end upgrade to the '65 front end parts (complete) because it's more readily available and less expensive because so. Ron at Falcon Parts has this nice page showing all the parts comparisons.

http://www.falconparts.com/ford-falc...ersion-d19.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

Most of those with that front end upgrade to the '65 front end parts (complete) because it's more readily available and less expensive because so. Ron at Falcon Parts has this nice page showing all the parts comparisons.

http://www.falconparts.com/ford-falc...ersion-d19.htm

---

Hello, Roger.

I considered upgrading to the 1965 steering parts and noticed a few things. The first is that the numbers on that Falcon Parts chart do not add up (literally). It says that the 1963 -64 parts are $900+. But, the numbers in the column add up to $535.75, which is not much different than the $417.55 for the 1965 parts. The chart says that the 1963 1/2 pitman arm is not available, but it is. Not from Falcon Parts, but you can buy it as Mac's, or at regular parts stores. It is Rare Parts brand part number 20103 (RP20103). It is listed for a 1964 Falcon 4.3L and fits a 1 1/8" sector shaft (six cylinder cars had a one inch shaft). The part is expensive ($260 at Macs), but it is readily available. See: http://shop.advanceautoparts.com/p/r...erm=pitman+arm
The chart says that the 1963 center link is unavailable, but that would not typically need to be replaced. You replace the parts that plug into it, but not the center link itself.

I read the article "Upgrade Your Steering" (from 1963 1/2 to 1965). See: http://www.cometeastcarclub.org/PDFs...ingUpgrade.pdf
It sounded good until Page 4 Note 1, where he says that you will need to change to a six cylinder steering box. Note 2 says that you have will also need to change to a shorter steering shaft and that also means a shorter steering column and shift tube.

What??!! :WHATTHE:

Then he went on to say that to install it he had to remove the shift linkage, an exhaust manifold, and a motor mount.

Uhhh ..... no. I will just keep the original configuration.

The point of the upgrade is to reduce "bump steer". If I am driving on a bumpy road and having a hard time holding onto the steering wheel, I could solve the problem by simply slowing down.

All very good observations. Having never done the swap I'd not gone that far into the pros and cons. Looks to me like you're heading the right direction.

:shift:

I've got all my new front end parts, including motor mounts, and will drop the car off after work tomorrow to have them installed:

Attachment 4117

I decided to keep everything completely stock and not "improve" anything. I bought new coil springs because the car had a noticable lean towards the drivers side. Maybe a previous owner was a big ol' boy. The drivers side seat springs are broken down also. The new coil springs should set the car straight. They were described as fitting a "Falcon Futura Sprint; 8 Cyl 4.3L; Automatic Transmission, Car, Without Air Conditioner." Perfect.

I did pay extra and bought the easy turning "elastomer" swivel spring mounts. That is not much of a change because they will perform essentially the same as the original brass bushing swivel mounts, but with possibly a little less road noise.

I had initially bought a set of the base $33 cast-in-rubber spring mounts but decided not to use them. The rubber was so hard that I couldn't budge the pivot shaft. That didn't seem very good.

Christmas in August!

;:)

I thought you were going to do the work yourself and then have it aligned afterward, but either way should be nice driving it with a new front end. Are they going to inspect the steering box 'while they'er at it' (WTAI as opposed to WIAI).

The hard-rubber spring perches don't move, which has always made getting the coil spring in a pain (for me, anyway). Going to the elastomer type made getting the spring in the Ranchero a breeze in comparison.

The only other thing you could have added, which I think you would have liked a lot, is a thicker front sway bar. Never thought I'd notice the difference, but having done my wagon (15 years ago) and recently with the Ranchero - a world of difference. Easy add later, but well worth the small investment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

(1) I thought you were going to do the work yourself and then have it aligned afterward, but either way should be nice driving it with a new front end.
(2) Are they going to inspect the steering box 'while they'er at it' (WTAI as opposed to WIAI).
(3) The only other thing you could have added, which I think you would have liked a lot, is a thicker front sway bar.

---

Hello, Roger.

(1) Taking those grease encrusted frozen parts apart would have been a real bear. The mechanic has a lift, the extra tools, and he knows what he is doing. He has a machine to do the alignment. He will probably have it done by tomorrow afternoon. Bingo bango duno.

(2) There is some extra play in the steering. How much is normal? Until the new pitman arm, idler arm, ball joints, etc., are installed I won't be able to tell how much of the play is due to a worn steering box and how much is due to everything else. I did pump the box full of lithium grease about a year ago. I could not add much extra, which showed that the box was almost full of grease to begin with. If it has been kept full of grease, maybe it is OK. Rust probably destroys these things quicker than does wear. I'll see what the steering is like after all the new parts are installed. If I can't say for sure that is a problem, maybe I don't have a problem.

(3) I did give a heavier sway bar some thought. I wondered why if the heavier bar was better, why didn't the Ford engineers specify one insead of the stock 11/16" bar. One guy at work thought that maybe it was economics. If the heavier bar cost 50-cents more and you build two million cars, the heavier bar costs a million dollars. Another guy said that a heavier sway bar makes the suspension stiffer. You sacrifice ride comfort on a bumpy road for less body roll on a sharp turn. Then I considered that the stock bar has been on the car for the past fifty years. Why should I take it off now? What I liked about my car when I bought it was that it was relatively unmolested. I want to leave it as original as I can. The 1963 ride may have had some body roll, but that's what a 1963 ride was and that is part of what makes it different from new cars. Along with its drum brakes, leaf springs, and generator. I can always add a heavier sway bar later, but I would first like to feel what the original ride was like. The new parts that will be installed include new sway bar links and bushings to get the stock bar performing like it is supposed to. I may be happy with it as is.

Rebuilding the front end will certainly improve the ride. As a follow up project, you should take a look at the leaf springs and bushings out back. I remember when I redid my front end the first time. The improvement was great. But replacing the leaf spring bushings made just as big an improvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbrown

As a follow up project, you should take a look at the leaf springs and bushings out back. I remember when I redid my front end the first time. The improvement was great. But replacing the leaf spring bushings made just as big an improvement.

---

Hello, Pat.

Thanks for bringing that up. When I changed my rear shocks I looked at my leaf springs bushings and wondered if they were something that required attention. The leaf springs themselves are not broken down, so they are probably OK. The bushings are in place, but they are dry rotted. It is a lot of work to replace them and I wondered if it was worth the effort. If they were missing then I would get a banging noise and the car would shift back and forth on its springs. Do you think that it would make any noticeable difference to change these bushings for new ones?

Left front:
Attachment 4120

Left rear:
Attachment 4121

Right front:
Attachment 4122

Right rear:
Attachment 4123

Dennis,

The rear bushing are actually pretty easy to replace - assuming the nuts come off easy from the shackles. They also see the most movement and wear.

The rear bushings are hand-pressed in and you only need to take the weight off of them a little as opposed to jacking up the entire car and pulling the axle out, which you need to do the front ones. Just place the rear shackles in a neutral position, one side at a time (if the tire comes off the ground - you've gone way too high), remove the shackle nuts, slip them off, pry out the 4 bushings (probably more rust-based glue than anything holding them in), reverse/rinse/repeat. Many bushing kits even come with new shackles

The fronts are a little harder to install and may require a press. But they are also much thicker and may not be rotted where you can't see them.

Evident in the pictures are also the spring anti-squeak pads (between each leaf), which are hanging and well beyond providing any anti-squeak properties by now. Most new springs don't supply them anyway. My new springs squeaked to high-heaven and I finally sprayed some lube between the leafs and it went away. You might just opt to razor-knife the dangly parts to clean it up a little.

Basically, if the car isn't sagging, you can probably go a while without messing with it. You can also add some coil-over rear shocks if you're noticing it is riding low in the back. I've got Monroe Sensa-traks on the wagon and made it ride much better without replacing springs. It has new rear spring bushings though.

Can't wait to hear the report on the front end - and yeah, I get the keeping it stock notion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

(1) Can't wait to hear the report on the front end - and yeah, I get the keeping it stock notion. (2) The rear bushing are actually pretty easy to replace - assuming the nuts come off easy from the shackles. They also see the most movement and wear.

---

Hello, Roger.

The mechanic installed the new front end parts and I drove the car back home this afternoon. He said that all the parts fit without any problems and to bring it back in a couple of months to align it again after the new bushings and springs have settled in.

Here is the new left lower control arm (with a smear of lithium grease) and you can see the new sway bar end link. I made a u-turn driving home and did not notice any body roll. The stock sway bar seems to be functioning correctly now.
Attachment 4129

The new pitman arm is in the background and you can see the left inner tie rod end. There were some blobs of lithium grease on the tie rod end ball joints that I wiped off with a paper towel. Maybe it got squished out while driving home.
Attachment 4130

Here is the new right upper control arm and coil spring. The new springs make the car seem to sit just a bit a little higher in front now and I do not see the lean to the left now that it previously had.
Attachment 4131

He put new bolts on the spring tower. These look a bit longer than what was there before. I can look inside and see the new shocks and the new rubber spring insulators.
Attachment 4132

Thanks for the advice on the rear suspension. Your description does make the spring shackles sound "pretty easy to install" and I have already ordered two of them. I thought that it was interesting where you said "They also see the most movement and wear." I found this suspension explanation that shows how the shackle swings as the spring moves:
Attachment 4133

Like you said, the shackle makes the most motion and swings forward and back on two pivot points while the front bushing just pivots a little up and down.

I took the car on an 86-mile test drive this morning. At low speed I noticed that the car does not creak and groan anymore while making a tight turn and the stock sway bar now prevents noticeable roll during a normal U-turn. I had to aggressively dive the car into a tight turn to produce significant body roll.

This is someone trying to imitate me:
Attachment 4134

The new suspension parts made themselves most apparent at high speed. I took the car on I-75 north and found that the previous shaking that had been present at above 65 mpg was gone. [yay] Yaaaaaay!!!! The car now runs and handles like it is supposed to. It rides smoothly at 70 mph and it keeps up with highway traffic without drama. The morning air temperature was 76° and the engine temperature gauge never rose above 1/3.

The Falcon is ready for long distance travel!

So we WILL see you at our next club meeting, or the upcoming Mini-Meet? YAH!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

The rear bushing are actually pretty easy to replace - assuming the nuts come off easy from the shackles. They also see the most movement and wear.

---

I bought two rear spring shackle sets rather than just the bushings because I thought that the old shackles might be rusted. I bought a little container of silicone grease in the plumbing section of Lowes for $3.33 and used it to lubricate and preserve the rubber bushings. Silicone grease is used to lubricate rubber o-rings and is safe to use on rubber. It is water proof and will not melt. In the upper left of the picture is the replacement standard interior rear view mirror for a 1963 - 1965 hardtop that I bought. The new mirror looks just the original. My original mirror would "droop" and not stay in place and the mirror had turned dark and the adhesive backing could be seen through the through the mirror. I installed the new morror and now the reflection is nice and bright and colorful and the mount is stiff so it should stay in position.

Attachment 4153

Attachment 4157

The left spring shackle came off easily. I removed the nuts and levered the old shackle out with a big screw driver. I was surprised to see that the bushings were actually in good shape. It was only the exposed outer edges that were crumbling. The existing shackle that was removed had some light surface rust but was otherwise in good condition.

Attachment 4154

When I tried to install the new left shackle, I ran into a problem. The top bolt went in straight, but the bottom bolt stuck up at an angle. I compared it to the old shackle and saw that the new one (on right) was bowed in a crescent. The holes in the shackle plate that went with it would not line up with the bolts. I had to sand the rust off the old shackle and re-use it.

Attachment 4155

Then I ran into a second problem. The lower bolt would not go all the way through the shackle and spring and I could not get a nut on it. It turned out that the spring was shifted about and inch to the left of the shackle mount. Is it supposed to be like this? Should/can the spring be moved to the right? I don't see how it can because it is held in position by the front bushing.

Attachment 4156

After a frustrating period of pushing and pulling, I ended up placing my tire iron against the inner left fender and levering the spring to the right and holding it with one hand while using the other hand to push the bolt through, position the other mounting plate, and start the nut. Then I used the tire iron the lever to top of the plate down to get the top hole to line up with the top bolt. Then I tightened both nuts and was done. Maybe the right side will not be as difficult.

Dennis - I assume you jacked up one side at a time as I said to? My bad. Hind-sight being 20/20 (as it always is), if you raise one side of the car (the other still being on the ground) the leaf will get forced outward if released because you've induced a twist in it. Best method would have been to support the body on both sides with the wheels just off the ground. Then place a floor jack under the rear-end and lift it until you see both shackles go neutral (perfectly vertical) - then pull one shackle at a time. No doubt if it had been me doing this, and seeing this, I'd have caught my mistake in trying it that way. Sorry for misleading you.

:(

Bad shackle could have been straightened but the old ones looked good too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

If you raise one side of the car (the other still being on the ground) the leaf will get forced outward if released because you've induced a twist in it.

---

Hey, Roger.

You beat me to posting the explanation. I asked a friend at work about that this morning (a mechanical engineer who owns a 1967 Fairlane) and he said .... "Did you just jack it up on one side?" That made sense.

In retrospect, yea, the car body was leaning down hill from the side that it was jacked up on and that caused it to move away from the spring.

So, the spring is positioned correctly and everything is good. When I change the other shackle this coming Saturday morning I will jack up both sides.

Even when the spring shackles go neutral, removing the shackle will probably still allow the spring to spring up against the frame. So watch your fingers. Maintain tension downward as you pull the shackle, then slowly release it. It will not have a twist in it this time and pulling it down to remove or align the shackle bolts should be pretty easy.

Sorry I wasn't thinking better. As soon as I saw the picture I knew what had happened - and danged if I didn't say to do it.

:doh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

Best method would have been to support the body on both sides with the wheels just off the ground. Then place a floor jack under the rear-end and lift it until you see both shackles go neutral (perfectly vertical) - then pull one shackle at a time.

---

Hello, Roger. I followed your above listed description and installed the other shackle this morning. It went in easily.

I jacked the car up and put a jack stand under each side.
Attachment 4179

Then I put the jack under the differential and raised it until the shackles were straight up and down.
Attachment 4180

I removed the old shackle and saw that the base plate was warped in a crescent shape. The new one was straight. The shackle axles being straight in-line will allow them to rotate within the bushings with less binding.
Attachment 4181

I greased the bushings, shackle axles, and the bushing holes in the frame and spring ends with silicone grease. This pictures shows the inserted new greased bushings. Note that the leaf spring is centered under the frame rail.
Attachment 4182

Then I installed the new shackle assembly and tightened the nuts and was done. Cool! The shackle is swung forward because the car was still on the jack stands when I took the picture.
Attachment 4184

One note about the silicone grease. The water-proof property that makes it a good plumbing lubricant makes the stuff impossible to wash it off your hands with soap and water. It is best to wear disposable latex gloves if you are going to use it to grease spring shackle bushings as I described.

Nice work on the shackle replacement. One thing to note; those new ones are bare metal so they will rust. You might want to get some black rattle can chassis paint for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pbrown

One thing to note; those new ones are bare metal so they will rust. You might want to get some black rattle can chassis paint for them.

---

Thanks for the tip, Pat.

Rust is unattractive. I used a brush and added a coat of primer. Some silicone grease had oozed past the press fit of the lower axle bolt and you can you can see below the bolt where the primer effectively "beaded" and did not stick. Oh, well.

Attachment 4191

I'll add a top coat of black tomorrow.

Next day update:

Is chassis black paint flat or semi-gloss? I painted the shackles with glossy black Rust-Oleum® paint. It was what I had on the shelf, and it will get covered with dust anyway. The paint is still wet in the pictures.

Behold, the painted right shackle! I spread a little paint on the bottom of the frame rail where it had been scraped by the leaf spring while replacing the shackle.
Attachment 4201

Behold, the painted left shackle!
Attachment 4202

Dennis, Where did you buy your "easy turning "elastomer" swivel spring mounts" (for the front)
and do those install with the spring end side towards the outside of the car?
Thanks...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dhbfaster

Dennis, Where did you buy your "easy turning "elastomer" swivel spring mounts" (for the front)
and do those install with the spring end side towards the outside of the car?
Thanks...

---

Hello, Don.

I ordered the "High Performance Coil Spring Perches" off e-bay for $103 from Maryland Mustang. These are from a different dealer but are the same part for $120: http://www.ebay.com/itm/C4DZ-3388-HP...35b532&vxp=mtr

I looked at the driver's side spring (left) and the lower cut-off end of the spring faces inward. This shot is looked from the front to the rear. The spring end is behind the tab that is on the right in the picture. On the lower left side of that tab you can just barely see the cut-off end of the spring. (I had the Moog 8088 spring shortened by one coil length to make the car sit level.)
Attachment 4303

Here is a photo of the elastomer perches. You can see where the tab is on the perch. Those tabs are positioned on the outward side on my car.
Attachment 4305

Here is a shot from the back of the spring looking forward.
Attachment 4304

Thanks, Dennis.

Dennis-

With the original-style spring perches the cut-end of the coil always went on the fender apron side of the spring perch. I've not looked in a book to show this is always the case, but it has always been that way on every car I've worked on - which is quite a few. You have it with that tab, and the cut-off end of the spring on the outer side - away from the fender apron.

I know you didn't install these, and I don't think, with the elastomer version it is as critical, but the "stuck-in-place" perches might want to eject the spring if the direction it is stuck in place was tilted in the out-bound direction.

Here's a couple pics I found on the Net that speak to this.

Attachment 4308

Attachment 4309

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

With the original-style spring perches the cut-end of the coil always went on the fender apron side of the spring perch. You have it with that tab, and the cut-off end of the spring on the outer side - away from the fender apron. ... the "stuck-in-place" perches might want to eject the spring if the direction it is stuck in place was tilted in the out-bound direction.

---

Hello, Roger.

Here are my thoughts:
1. Darn it!
2. Well, I am glad that I posted the pictures. I would not have known about this otherwise.
3. I was told to bring the car back to have the alignment readjusted after a few thousand miles. I can have this taken care of at the same time.
4. How could the spring get ejected? Where could it go?

Thanks for the info.

Roger....strange. :confused:
Is this another difference in later models from the 61?
That orientation has been confusing me...attached is a picture form the 1960, 61, 62 manual. (Sorry about the angle and over zoom...) This manual definitely shows the end of the spring on the outside towards the tire.
The other pic is of my falcon before I removed any parts...I'm pretty sure it hadn't been worked on before (no way to know for sure), but as you can see it is like the manual- towards the outside.
On falconparts.com (the only place I found that mentions orientation..) it says the new ones should be mounted opposite of the original--towards the inside instead of outside, and it says they are to fit 1960-1970. Here's the link: http://www.falconparts.com/ford-falc...HES-18p892.htm
Meanwhile..I do a goole search, and looks like most are to the inside.
:eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dhbfaster

This manual definitely shows the end of the spring on the outside towards the tire.

---

Here is a suspension diagram for 1960 - 1965 Falcon and it also shows the spring on the outside towards the tire.
Attachment 4312

I just looked at my car and saw that its right-side front suspension is consistent with the left-side and the spring end is towards the outside.

Falcon Parts.com says "... the spring stop on the original (freely rotating) perches was to the outside of the vehicle, on these (nearly immovable) replacements, the spring stop is to the inside of the vehicle."

I added the comments in parenthesis.

My "high-performance" freely rotating perches mimic the original brass bushing perches, so the outside perch spring-stop positions are probably OK.

My theory: The rotating perch allows the spring to press against a level base and it should not make a difference if the spring stop is on the left or right. If the perch is stiff it would not maintain a level base. Under that situation having the spring stop on the outside of the control arm gives it a winder arc of motion than it would have on the inside. Perhaps under an extreme circumstance the spring stop could drop far enough below the spring end to allow it to escape. The spring would probably not fly off, but it would be unsecured and allowed to rotating back and forth. This would cause friction and increased wear on the spring perch, spring, and upper mount.

Happy Veteran's Day!

Clearly, once the spring perch went from a rotating item to a restricted movement item, the trend changed from spring-end out versus in. I think had they "set" the angle with the spring-end stop on the outside, and high, rather than inside and low, then that's how we'd be installing them. Having the thing with a forced angle dumping towards the outside, then I can see the spring wanting to pop outward - if that were to happen in some rare instance.

The fully rotating parts makes this all a moot point, I think, and you're probably OK Dennis. And you probably are too Don if you are reusing the old perches. As long as they are not wore out. Do it by the book.

Even with the rotating perches - getting the springs in is a pain. It seems getting them compressed enough without having the compressor interfere with the spring perch, has always been a greater challenge while putting them in than it seems it was when taking them out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luva65wagon

With the original-style spring perches the cut-end of the coil always went on the fender apron side of the spring perch.

---

Hello, Roger.

I don't want to beat this poor dead horse any more, but if I were to ask my mechanic-guy to switch those perches around I wanted to be able to prove the point in writing so that he would not think that I was nuts.


Take a look at the Ford service manual, Front Spring Replacement, Installation, Page 9-11, Item Number 4.

Attachment 4334

It says: " ... position the assembly so that the spring seat groove containing the lower end of the spring coil is to the outboard side."
Attachment 4335

I asked my mechanical engineer buddy about this and he said "Jack the car up so that the front wheels are hanging down. If the springs don't pop out then you are probably OK."

I think that I will just leave the perches the way they are.