Re-enforcement?
ok im going to be putting a 4.6 cobra engine in my car...67 coupe...but to do that i have to remove the shock towers. now if i remove those something tells me the structure of the vehicle will go to hell in a hand basket. do i need to brace it? and ive seen kits that just modify or change the shock towers....should i go this route? is a built up shock tower suspension better than a mustang II suspension?
sorry for all the questions but thanks for the help!!
sorry for all the questions but thanks for the help!!
IF you are going the modular route I think you have to notch the shock towers...there are a couple of companies that make the notch replacement panels.
I plan on notching my 68 anyway to fit my setup in. Even though it will be a windsor motor, the header configuration Im planning will be MUCH less of a hassle with the towers neatly trimmed.
I also plan on bracing the car and its front end as much as possibly..probably some tubing welded in place for me and a tower brace or two also..
You're level of bracing partially depends on your intended power output and use of the car (track/daily/weekend)...Im planning on a mountain of power so Ill probably go a little overboard on bracing.
I plan on notching my 68 anyway to fit my setup in. Even though it will be a windsor motor, the header configuration Im planning will be MUCH less of a hassle with the towers neatly trimmed.
I also plan on bracing the car and its front end as much as possibly..probably some tubing welded in place for me and a tower brace or two also..
You're level of bracing partially depends on your intended power output and use of the car (track/daily/weekend)...Im planning on a mountain of power so Ill probably go a little overboard on bracing.
If money is not a problem http://www.griggsracing.com/ has a front suspension that will blow out any mustang 2 kit made.
ok im going to be putting a 4.6 cobra engine in my car...67 coupe...but to do that i have to remove the shock towers.
No, you don't. Change them, yes, but you'll still have towers, preserving structural strength. Dynacorn now has "flattened" shock towers, they will still mount the export brace at the top, but flatten out lower down to clear the wider engine. You'll still need the Mustang II suspension, but the car will maintain strength without a lot of custom fabricating.
I've seen kits that just modify or change the shock towers....should I go this route? is a built up shock tower suspension better than a mustang II suspension?
I've seen the modular in early cars, and I'm not sure you could cut the tower enough to clear and still have enough tower to mount the suspension.
No, you don't. Change them, yes, but you'll still have towers, preserving structural strength. Dynacorn now has "flattened" shock towers, they will still mount the export brace at the top, but flatten out lower down to clear the wider engine. You'll still need the Mustang II suspension, but the car will maintain strength without a lot of custom fabricating.
I've seen kits that just modify or change the shock towers....should I go this route? is a built up shock tower suspension better than a mustang II suspension?
I've seen the modular in early cars, and I'm not sure you could cut the tower enough to clear and still have enough tower to mount the suspension.
ID keep the shock towers for sure..check out this install video :: http://www.motorator.com/videos/33
And a quick pic from the Equus Tom 1 (or whatever its called) Mustang :
And a quick pic from the Equus Tom 1 (or whatever its called) Mustang :
Wow, that was in a '64 Falcon which has less room than a '67 up Mustang. If they could get a modular in a '64 Falcon ('65-'66 Mustang almost the same size engine bay) then there should be plenty of room in a '67 up Mustang. I'm not sure what they did about the steering box and steering though.
Although as far as the stock suspension goes, I would point out that the springs over the upper control arm Ford tried in the '60s didn't last very long in production. I think the reason why is all of the engine weight as well as the rest of the front of the vehicle was supported by the shock towers and they tended to cave in. By going to one of the Mustang II kits you transfer all of the weight to the cross member assembly. You can think of it as an engine dolly that gets welded into the front of the vehicle. The geometry of the Mustang II suspension is better, imo, with reduced bump steer and I think better handling. On my '64 Falcon I had to add a sway bar and would recommend using one to improve the handling as most kits don't include one.
Also the modular oil pan is assuming a steering rack will be in front od the spindles rather than behind the spindles. So if the stock steering is retained, a new oil pan and pump pickup will be needed. On the 5.0s those parts are available, but I don't know about the 4.6s. Also on the 5.0s the dipstick has to be relocated to the timing cover rather than the side of the block.
Although as far as the stock suspension goes, I would point out that the springs over the upper control arm Ford tried in the '60s didn't last very long in production. I think the reason why is all of the engine weight as well as the rest of the front of the vehicle was supported by the shock towers and they tended to cave in. By going to one of the Mustang II kits you transfer all of the weight to the cross member assembly. You can think of it as an engine dolly that gets welded into the front of the vehicle. The geometry of the Mustang II suspension is better, imo, with reduced bump steer and I think better handling. On my '64 Falcon I had to add a sway bar and would recommend using one to improve the handling as most kits don't include one.
Also the modular oil pan is assuming a steering rack will be in front od the spindles rather than behind the spindles. So if the stock steering is retained, a new oil pan and pump pickup will be needed. On the 5.0s those parts are available, but I don't know about the 4.6s. Also on the 5.0s the dipstick has to be relocated to the timing cover rather than the side of the block.
Last edited by rbinck; Dec 11, 2009 at 10:02 AM.
wow ok...this is exactly what i was looking for. so dynacorn has a kit to flatten the shock toweres but in all honesty i shouldnt get rid of them at all.....but still go mustang II
thanks guys
thanks guys
If you go Mustang II there is no reason to keep the shock towers at all. I'd get rid of them for the additional room.
Get rid of the shock towers. You will never regret it. If you will ever have to work on the engine once the car is done. You will be cussing those damn shock towers. Plus you will never have to worry about the shock towers caving in on you and as tight as it looks in the picture with the guy that left them in there. All it will take is for them to cave in a little to hit the engine. With the little bracing he has done in a few years if he drives the car hard much, those shock towers will come in. They all do! Unless you brace the hell out of them.


