Bill and Dustin,

The bolt in Bronco II 8.8 sure sounded good.  I measured the track of the stock Comet at 55.5" with stock rims.  I googled the Comet track and it came up 55.6".  Next I googled the Bronco II track and it was said to be 56.9".  I went to the local wrecking yards and measured two Bronco IIs and both had a 57 11/16" track with stock wheels - darn, just too wide.

Back to the drawing board with the narrowed 9".  I called Cliff Williamson in Temple City, CA and he was in the middle of re-splining some axels.  He agreed to do mine and I guess that will be the direction we will be headed.

Cliff is a very experienced Y-Blocker with machine shop, super charger, and El Mirage experience.  He is very interesting and I think I will add a few lines about him in the "Y-Block Personalities" over in the This-N-That section.

Thanks guys for the recommendation, I will chase down any idea that will make this project easier or better.

Charlie Burns Laton, Ca (South of Fresno)







BurnsRacing981@gmail.com

Charlie, I am using a 57 ford housing in my 67 Falcon. The 57 9" housing is about 1/2" less than the Falcon 8" housing and the spring pads lined up perfect. I can get a 10" rim with 4" backspace with 10'X30" slicks in the stock wheelwells. I only had to clearance the very front of the wheel opening about 1 1/2". Your Comet maybe a little shorter, but with the smaller tires that you will be running, it should work fine and alot easier to change gears in than the 8.8. It might cost as much for a 57 housing though as to narrow a later model 9' housing.

Glen Henderson



Freedom is not Free

Letohatchee, AL

Charlie, looking good!

If I may chime in on the spring topic, I have had tried a little of everything in my F-100, but it still may be helpful to this scenario as far as spring rates and my experience. A lot will be dependent on how the engine sits over the axle c/l in the Comet...

I started with MII V-6 springs. V-8 MII springs were next, and still a little mushy, so I swapped in a set from a late 1980's 5.0 'stang. They were a marked improvement, but I had to cut between 1 and 1 1/2 coils to get down to proper geometry. Feeling that there was still room for improvement, I decided to try a freebie set of coils from a '95 Mustang GT. The diameter works, and they have been settling in for about 6 weeks. They seem much firmer, and I should only need to remove 1/2 or 3/4 coil to get to proper geometry. 

You probably know this by now, but "proper" geometry on a MII is when the lower control arm is parallel to the ground. You'll probably be able to play around with your ride height quite a bit with how you locate the X-member in the Comet's front sub frame.

Also noteworthy is that aftermarket spring "hats" are fabricated with a few degrees of caster built in. I don't know what the stock set-up has, but I can measure the angle on mine if your curious.

Think I'm starting to ramble on, so I'll quit for now...feel free to give me a call anytime if you need a sounding board...

Todd in Central California...about half way between Fresno and Sacramento

1956 Thunderbird - 1960 F-100 - 1961 Starliner - 1961 Imperial

  I seem to recall that back when, the guys building early Mustangs('64-'66) would swap the 9" rearend out off an early Bronco('66-'75 ?) and was 1/2" wider then the mustangs(?),so would an early mustangs width be the same as the Comet? KID

The holidays have taken it's toll on the progress of the BonnevilleComet.  However, that is the order of things.  Family and friends will always be first in my book.

Glenn,  I like the idea of the 57 9" housing if it is the correct width and especially if it has the spring mounts in the right location.  I have a number of 9" housings, third members and extra ring and pinions, I will probably stay with that. 

Kid, the other housings are tempting, but I like the 9" hp capability and the fact that I have so many extra parts.  I will mock up with a shortened 9" and keep an eye out for a 57 housing to see if it fits.

Todd, as the crossmember gets set this week, I'm sure I will be calling you if I run into any problems or questions.

Here is the rebuilt Mustang II suspension system ready to be installed.

 

Charlie Burns Laton, Ca (South of Fresno)







BurnsRacing981@gmail.com

Did you use the front springs from a Mustang II Cobra?

Ol'ford nutCentral Iowa

56 Vic w/292 & 4 spd.

Actually, I haven't purchased the springs yet.  I am waiting to see what the mocked up car with full weight tips the scales at all four corners.  There will be ballast in the rear area to try to keep the weight even on both sides (remember the driver) and to make approximately 52% of the weight on the front wheels and 48% on the rear wheels.  I think I can get a better idea of what springs I need with the weight info.  I have read elsewhere and in Todd's post that the final weight and spring rate depends on the location of the engine in relationship to the crossmember as well as how heavy the engine is.  A few inches either way makes a big difference.  If I just start with very heavy springs and try to cut them until they work, I will loose the rate that was built into them.

It sounds crazy to go to all the trouble for a car that will only go (hopefully) in a straight line.  The spring selection and weight distribution for the front (and rear) will help stabilize the car at speed and especially if I hit rough salt or heaven forbid have a spin.  It is commonly thought that 30% of the money and energy goes to the power of the car and 70% goes to safety.

What you are looking at is the original 61 Comet springs that I cut just to set the suspension with level lower A arms (and look complete).  The arms are in a fixed position with a solid rod replacing the shocks.  This will help me set the ride height where I want it by raising or lowering the crossmember in the frame.

My wife always says, "I asked for a nickel question and you give me a five dollar answer!" ................Guilty!

Tomorrow the frame gets cut to accept the crossmember.  The frame rails are 31" outside to outside.  The width of the crossmember where the frame attaches is 27 1/2".  Something has to go.  I'll post more pictures.

Charlie Burns Laton, Ca (South of Fresno)







BurnsRacing981@gmail.com

This may actually work to your advantage, as notching a relief in the front sub-rails will allow you to weld in multiple locations and planes to the MII cross member. For lack of a better word, you'll unitize the suspension with the uni-body construction...

Todd in Central California...about half way between Fresno and Sacramento

1956 Thunderbird - 1960 F-100 - 1961 Starliner - 1961 Imperial

Charlie - Great project underway! Top speed runs rule.

Are you going to rig the lower "A-arms" with the stocker single pivot / strut rod system - or convert it to a "real" lower A-arm? Those struts have always scared me to death when I think of going really fast with parts made for a Pinto!!!!

Also - how much caster are you shooting for with the final assembly? You must want more than the usual stocker for that too, for topend stability....its going to be easier to deal with this subject now when you set the front x-member - than maybe later when its anchored in there permanently.  

 
 Steve Metzger       Tucson, Arizona

Steve,

Excellent questions.  I am walking a thin line between gas coupe and altered.  There is no mention in the rule book of the front suspension required to be original for gas coupe.  However, it does specifically say that the frame needs to be in it's original location.  The front frame rails will appear to be unchanged, but I don't want them to look to long.  I am trying to do everything I can to make this car as safe as possible and not get moved up to the altered class.  Those stock strut rods will probably have to stay.  I want this thing to look as stock as possible and not give the tech guys reason to look any further than they have to.  If I run altered in the future, I will undoubtedly change to the "real" bottom A-arms.

You are right on target with the caster question.  We cut the frame yesterday to set the crossmember and I have decided to research the best caster question a little further before I make the welds permanent.  I rolled the solid axel 8 degrees positive caster in the race truck, but problems with bumpsteer has not allowed me to see if that was optimum.  I know there is some adjustment available in the upper A-arm for caster.  However, if I give it a head start with the placement of the crossmember, I will have a better chance to reach the desired angle.

Thanks for the input.  These are helpful questions.

Charlie Burns Laton, Ca (South of Fresno)







BurnsRacing981@gmail.com