Talked to a man at the Springfeild swap meet that uses the 2 wheel drive Ranger frames under his street rods and swears by them. He says they are more narrow than a Dakota or a S-10. Does anyone else have any info on this set up, or does anybody else use these frames?

Haven't heard of Rangers being used. I have a personal aversion to them, so it isn't something I'd do but would remember.

The S-10s are the popular one for most newbies.

I've seen a 34 Ford PU on a Toyota PU frame. Torsion bar front so ride height adjustment is there and the suspension is smaller to fit within the fenders.

I have seen a few well done frame swaps, but it tends to be the first grasp of the uninformed. To do it right is as much or more work than adding the updated stuff to the original frame.

The HAMB is all about trad stuff, so there probably isn't much there.

http://www.hotrodders.com/forum/
has a lot of traffic and info. I don't go over there much, but have found great info from time to time when I do.
You can also build your own frame like a T-bucket, with any suspension, drivetrain, steering and body mounts you want. This would be more suitable for a stripped down light car like a rat rod. For a 35-up full fendered car, you are better off with something more substantial.
http://www.tbucketeers.com/forums/frames-and-chassis.54/

The Rangers are pretty narrow, I think they would work OK for something like an early '30s ride. The Dak was always bigger and would probably go better under mid 30s and up cars as they got bigger and bigger.

Here's the problem: It's much much easier to screw up a frame swap build, especially for a novice. So many things can go wrong.....quite a few of them end up unbuilt out behind the barn.

Unless it's one of those weird Knee-Action Chevies of the '30s, it's always better to keep the stock frame and suspension for the first rod or two that you build. Then when you have your wings you can try frame swaps. That's my opinion, old-fashioned as it may be.

R.

I have recently seen pictures of a Ranger clip on a 40s Mopar body, 2 things struck me right away:
1) The upper shock/spring mounting a-frame is pretty ugly and stands high above the suspension. Apparently the Ranger mounts the coil spring above the upper control arm. The guy commented he always used a coil over shock for the front spring it "improve" the looks. The one shown only had a shock mounted to the bracket and it still looked goofy, to me.
2) It looked like the frames were inline with each other where they were spliced. They were spliced right behind the control arm rear mounting locations. There seemed to be a lot of transition at that location, the junction is not a smooth change in direction, but a rather dramatic change, almost like the Ranger frame moved in a different direction then the Mopar frame. Probably not a structural issue, but it sure doesn't improve the clip in the looks department.

On a 40s Mopar, a Dakota frame looks like it belongs there, the Ranger frame looks like an unplanned event.

Maybe I need to look under a Ranger to see if the visual issues are a result of the builder's inexperience or a matter of that is the best its going to be.
Gene

The Dakota frame works great on my 39 Plymouth Pick Up. Lifting up the truck up eliminates wheel well clearance issues. My truck will run the steelie spares up front with hubcaps and widened steelies in the rear.

moparpollock,

Do you have any pictures to share of your 39 on the Dak frame? I'm thinking about doing the same to a 41, but I want the front to be "in the weeds"......thanks

I'm working on build a thread for the truck. The Dakota frame doesn't leave a lot of room for offset on the front wheels. On the good the suspension travel is not a lot, what diameter tires are you going to be using? Right now the tires are stock 27" tires thus I can't go as low because it scrubs the fenders. The bottom of my fenders and running boards will be 8" not to low for a hotrod. The front nose will be 7" but I have to add a front bumper which will chage the ride height appearance.

So when I get shorter tires it can easily sit 6" off the ground. This is my wife's truck and she didn't want it too low.
There's also 2" drop spindles which is an option if you want it really low. Also you will be cussing everytime you need to mount the front tire on the hub. They look cool low but anything below 6" will be a nightmare.

My truck will sit like member 54 caddy's in this thread.

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=653916&highlight=46+dodge+pick+up

hi; I had a idea of using the upper and lower a arms from a 98-99 ranger and grafting them to my 55 coronet arms and use the ranger spindles. wasn't sure they would be heavy enough. this was before I heard about Dakota stub clip. I have a 88 5th ave donner for motor trans etc.

When you start swapping parts like control arms & spindles in places where other control arms & spindles were mounted, you can screw up the front end geometry real quick, which can give you a very ill handling ride. If your changing control arms, change (or duplicate) the frame section they were attached to as well.

One of the reasons the frame swap/clip or aftermarket sub-frames are popular is because the geometry has already been figured out (or was suppose to have been). Gene