New Idea For IFS?

MBigDaddyM · Post by **MBigDaddyM** » Sun Dec 17, 2006 3:04 pm

I called a guy who has many ads for Mopars he is parting, he had a 73 New Yorker and I wanted the K-Frame and the entire front end to do the IFS swap that Robin has suggested. When I told the guy of my plans he informed me that 73 and up B-body frames are about a half inch shorter across than the C-body frames and it would be easier to take the crossmember (and everything underneath it)from a 73 and up B-body and weld that crossmember to the frame rails. There would still be the issue of what to do with the torsion bars and how the steering would setup, but other than that a quick and easy IFS. 73 & up B-bodies include Chargers and Roadrunners and they still make brake/suspension kits for those! Has anyone tried this? Any thoughts or ideas? -BD

CLIFF · Post by **CLIFF** » Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:16 pm

Yes ..what do you do for the torsion bars? Arnt these at a critical angle. How far back does the bars go? Do you have to make all new mounts for these?

What have you guys had to do..those of you that have done this swap allready.

MBigDaddyM · Post by **MBigDaddyM** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 2:38 pm

CLIFF wrote:Yes ..what do you do for the torsion bars? Arnt these at a critical angle. How far back does the bars go? Do you have to make all new mounts for these?

What have you guys had to do..those of you that have done this swap allready.

Bump.

-BD

73_Adventurer_Sport · Post by **73_Adventurer_Sport** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 4:33 pm

There was a guy in the Tacoma chapter of Mopars Unlimited that did that swap and it was beautiful. He used the New Yorker rear end, 727 and the 440. He also installed the New Yorker split-bench seat and dash.

He did this about 12-15 years ago, and he was retired at the time, so would be getting up in years now. I think he lived in Bremerton, or Poulsbo. You might get on the Tacoma website and see if anyone remembers his name, or knows if the truck is still around. He was a great guy and very willing to explain what he had to do to swap.

The truck looked very stock from the outside and he did such a great engineering job, people ignored it at the shows because everything looked like it came from the factory. The only hint was the lower ride height. Even the inside looked stock if you didn't know what the original truck interior looked like.

MBigDaddyM · Post by **MBigDaddyM** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 5:46 pm

73_Adventurer_Sport wrote:There was a guy in the Tacoma chapter of Mopars Unlimited that did that swap and it was beautiful. He used the New Yorker rear end, 727 and the 440. He also installed the New Yorker split-bench seat and dash.

He did this about 12-15 years ago, and he was retired at the time, so would be getting up in years now. I think he lived in Bremerton, or Poulsbo. You might get on the Tacoma website and see if anyone remembers his name, or knows if the truck is still around. He was a great guy and very willing to explain what he had to do to swap.

The truck looked very stock from the outside and he did such a great engineering job, people ignored it at the shows because everything looked like it came from the factory. The only hint was the lower ride height. Even the inside looked stock if you didn't know what the original truck interior looked like.

So he used a 73 and up B-body front suspension and a C-body rear end? -BD

73_Adventurer_Sport · Post by **73_Adventurer_Sport** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 6:17 pm

He used everything from the New Yorker. I think it was a '75 or '76. The frames were a close enough match that they looked stock unless it was pointed out where they joined.

I used to have some photos of the engine compartment, but have no idea where they are anymore.

Website · Post by **wideblock** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 7:38 pm

i have a 77 new yorker here in the drive. it looks to me that the track width is actually wider then my truck. but the frame rails do look pretty dang close. too bad the front end is too trashed to try it out.

Post by **CSS-Registry** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:03 pm

does the 77 C-Body use the long torsion bars or the later bent ones like the aspen/volare's?

Website · Post by **wideblock** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:33 pm

not sure id know the difference if i looked. splian it to me and ill check.

73_Adventurer_Sport · Post by **73_Adventurer_Sport** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:36 pm

CSS-Registry wrote:does the 77 C-Body use the long torsion bars or the later bent ones like the aspen/volare's?

They used the longitudinal type.

Post by **CSS-Registry** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:26 pm

the long ones are what people typically remember as the a torsion bar. they are on the older cars and run from the control arm back to the point where the tranny crossmember bolts in.

the bent bars found in the aspen/volare (i am not sure what the proper name chrysler assigned to this style) is more contained in the k-frame. this allows for a compact unit to be unbolted and modified into a hotrod as it is more self contained and does not extend to the unibody.

clear as mud? :o)

ben

Rusty_Quarters · Post by **Rusty_Quarters** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:57 pm

has anyone looked at the Volare front cross member deal, the torsion bars on these go from left to right of truck instead of front to back, Ive seen where they use these all the time in 55 & 56 fords. pretty common, I don't know about track width though

MBigDaddyM · Post by **MBigDaddyM** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 6:13 pm

I emailed Rick Ehrenberg tech editor for Mopar Action here is what he had to say:

Rick Ehrenberg wrote:The late B-body stuff is fine, just omit all the rubber isolation crap at attach it right to your rails.

Use the stock B/R body steering, complete. Just get typical aftermarket U-joints for column hookup. Be sure there's some provision for "sliding in and out" movement in the u-joint system.

I'd use '72-down T-bars (better availability), you'll need a custom T-bar x-member obviously. (Scap the hex sockets from any A/B/E Mopar, any year).

All chassis measurements are in the FSMs.

Rick

Someone who has access to 73 & up B/R-body needs to measure the distance across the framerails and confirm that the difference between our trucks is indeed a half inch and if so we are in business! -BD

Website · Post by **wideblock** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 9:36 pm

i have seen the volare under a 68 swept. fit real good. track width is a shade narrower, but wheel offset made up for the difference.

what measurments do you need, i got a 77 NY'er sitting here complete???

MBigDaddyM · Post by **MBigDaddyM** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:27 pm

wideblock wrote:i have seen the volare under a 68 swept. fit real good. track width is a shade narrower, but wheel offset made up for the difference.

what measurments do you need, i got a 77 NY'er sitting here complete???

A 77 New Yorker is a C-body, I don't know if that would work. Robin says C-bodies 68-71 work, for frame to frame, but that he hasn't measured 72 and later. If you want to measure from framerail to framerail on your Swepty and New Yorker and let us know what you find that would be cool. I'd measure from the edge of the lip on one side to the edge of the lip on the other side then right in the center of the frame from side to side and finally, how deep is the lip from the side of the frame to the edge?

Here's a chart of body styles. -BD
http://www.allpar.com/model/rwdbodies.html

mopardwh · Post by **mopardwh** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:22 am

My M-body car that I'm gonna pick up this weekend is suppose to be identical to the F-body Aspen/Volare chassis. I'll take pics and measurements next week if anyone is interested.

MBigDaddyM · Post by **MBigDaddyM** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:31 am

mopardwh wrote:My M-body car that I'm gonna pick up this weekend is suppose to be identical to the F-body Aspen/Volare chassis. I'll take pics and measurements next week if anyone is interested.

Someone has mentioned that those will work, however the stopping, road travel and geometry in the B & C body's suspension & brakes are WAY better. -BD

mopardwh · Post by **mopardwh** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:35 am

MBigDaddyM wrote:
mopardwh wrote:My M-body car that I'm gonna pick up this weekend is suppose to be identical to the F-body Aspen/Volare chassis. I'll take pics and measurements next week if anyone is interested.
Someone has mentioned that those will work, however the stopping, road travel and geometry in the B & C body's suspension & brakes are WAY better. -BD

Do you really think so?

I mean, I don't really know, but the M was the last RWD car. One would think it might have the better of the two.

The few C-bodies I've driven handled like submarines!!! And as far as the brakes, I would almost bet they are the same calipers. Not to mention they DID upgrade the torsion bars over the years.

MBigDaddyM · Post by **MBigDaddyM** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:39 am

mopardwh wrote:Do you really think so? I mean, I don't really know, but the M was the last RWD car. One would think it might have the better of the two.

I defer to Rick Ehrenberg tech editor of Mopar Action, if you think he knows his *#%^, which I do then you listen, if you don't (and there are those that don't) then you don't. He said that the Aspen/Volare/Diplomat stuff will work, but the B and C body stuff is way better. -BD

MountainMoparRobin · Post by **MountainMoparRobin** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:34 am

The reason the B & C is better is the width! Aspen, Volore and M body cars the wheels are considerably closer, not as wide, as the B or C. the C body frames are exactly the same width as the Sweptline frame, you can use the M body IFS and things will do ok, but you'll tell it in the handling of the truck in the cornering

MBigDaddyM, there were a couple of early members who did the swap, they used coil over shocks, and no torsion bars

Sweptline.ORG

New Idea For IFS?

New Idea For IFS?

Re: New Idea For IFS?

Alternative