Does anyone have a picture of a Volare/Aspen front subframe? I've never looked at one close. Do the upper control arms attach to the subframe? For swapping, is it simply a matter of putting it in the right place, and bolting it in? Any info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Bob

It is a very easy install,4 bolts,some hoses ,,brake lines.....line it up properly. I have it in my 56..torsion bars and upper control arms come with the K frame.P/S box and the disc brakes all together..

When you install the subframe into something other then a Volare/Aspen, 5th Ave or Diplomat, you will need to make the locations for the k-member to bolt to. The front 2 mounts are 4" on center wider then the rear 2 mounts are. Seems like the rear 2 mounts are 34" on center, and the fronts are 38" on center, but I may be wrong on the measurements, its been a while. Also, to sit correctly I think the rear mounts are an inch lower in elevation then the front mounts, from level. I also think you have to notch the top outer sections of any tubing for clearance at the upper control arm mounting brackets.

Once the frame is modified to accept the subframe, you have to remove the steering box (3 bolts) and both upper control arm brackets (4 bolts each side) to install the k-member to your newly modified frame (4 big bolts). Once the subframe is bolted to the frame, you can bolt back on the steering box and the upper control arm brackets.

What are you thinking about putting the subframe on? Gene

I have a 51 Fargo pickup. Its in rough shape, mechanically, and I would like to redo it, with modern parts. I will keep it all Mopar, I just hate when I see one with a 350/350 combo. I have access to an Aspen for reasonable price, which would provide the clip, motor, trans, rear end, brake booster, and miscellaneous other pieces. Thanks, Bob

I have the book, "how to Volare anything" great book. but I can't seem to locate a current vender for it. but here's a link I have saved into my bookmarks

http://dodgepilothouseclub.org/know/frontend/volarie_survival.pdf

Actually there IS something wrong with the Volare swap - it's a horrible suspension. It was designed when Chrysler was sinking in the '70s. The transverse torsion bars were put there so they could keep bragging about "torsion bar ride". The suspension has bump steer and other problems when the car is in motion. In short, its a bad design.
My friend who was a board member had a mid-50s ford truck that had this suspension. He said it took him many trips to the alignment shop and a lot of $$$ to get it to go down the road straight.
Now the setup may be as tough as nails, but an ill-handling car is an abomination. I have to believe the Dak front end is better.

R.

Having built 3 rides with the Volare/Aspen clip, and having done 2 Dakota clip/full frame rides, hands down the Dakota wins. Its easier to find, easier to mount, fits better, is more modern then the Volare, and when your done, the Dakota handles and rides better (OK ,maybe not ride better), but much more firm and stable ride, the Volare was a nice soft ride, unfortunately, it felt like mush if you took a corner too fast.

That 51 Fargo will fit on a Dakota frame very nicely. The Volare would be worth grabbing if it was priced right, there are a lot of do-dads that come in handy from them.

I have a complete Volare k-member sitting here that will probably end up scrap, I'm not building another Volare clipped car. Gene

I replaced the rubber bushings with cast iron. Rides just a little stiffer, but handles much better. I have a Mopar Performance kit if anyone is interested.

Before you knock the aspen type sub frame ..why not talk to one of the guys who designed it for Chrysler..Mr P Body.... he's on here all the time..

To each his own, I'm happy with my install..(.Mr P body was a moderator on here for a long time)..I installed a Chrysler 5 th ave subframe in my 56 plymouth for $ 250.00...Now my 56 rides like a 1986 Chrysler.. got disc brakes and P/S..it rides smooth and straight..I bought the whole car for 250.00 with a hurt motor..got the steering colume and anything else I could take from the car..sold trans and interior and scrapped the rest and made money..and the 56 runs a consistant 11.7 @ 114.. very happy at that speed,car is well known on here..

what do complete subframe assemblies usually go for?

best way is to find a car complete,,,I have seen many 5 th aves and furys around for only a few hundred dollars...The aspens and Volares are getting rare,but the diplomats and others are still on the road..IMO

RE: Chrysler problems in the '70s
The first fuel crisis hit in the early 70s. Chrysler had the antique A-body and nothing else to sell economy. They did have a lot of large engines and tanks. Sales fell.
The A-body at the time felt like an antique, no matter how good it might have been. Most Darts and Valiants looked like Grandma cars, and to drive one with a thrashy 225 was a chore. Seats were flat and uncomfortable. Dusters with 360s got all of 13 mpg, and they were pitched to the youth market not making up a large portion of sales.
The transverse torsion bar front end was dictated by the advertising department, not wanting give up years of advertising the superior "torsion bar ride". Using the end of the torsion bar as a suspension arm was an easy way to get it built, but at a sacrifice of bump steer and camber change with wheel movement. Chrysler engineers who worked on the project would probably look back on the project with disgust, maybe some pride at making the best of a bad situation.
The F-bodies were released a year early and it showed. Fenders rusted right off the cars, they were terrible. They got better but weren't so right out of the box. It took Chrysler several more years of death spiral to need the government loan guarantee, but there's no doubt that the '70s were a crisis time at Chrysler.

R.

So what does fenders rusting have to do with the subframe...an 86 Chrysler 5th ave rides very well,,,as good or better then other manufacturers high end cars...ever drive an 86 lincoln ,,or The front wheel drive Caddy.. ????bottom line is for the time the FMJ sub frame worked well...newer stuff should be better and improved handeling..but for the dollar the FMJ does a good job ...I'll say no more !!!

I resemble that last remark. Please allow me to state my point of view and I’ll bow out. I own a 1977 Volare Road Runner. I bought my car off of the lot in East Liverpool Ohio in 1978 as a leftover so I’ve had it from brand spankin’ new. Car had power steering, 14” bias ply tires, 318 two barrel and a 3 speed with overdrive transmission. My impressions are as I remember them. Clearly. Bone stock, the front suspension was adequate. Soft, but not firm. I wasn’t “canyon carving” in those days. Any sharp turns would result in a lot of body roll and tire squealing. Car went great in a straight line and was safe in most other conditions. No wandering and no “bump steer”. Steering was light but not quick. Shock damping was also good. In other words, a perfectly adequate setup for an everyday grocery getter.

In my case, things started to go wrong almost immediately. Fenders started to rust out, rear window de-fogger wire broke off, rear view mirror fell off, transmission would stick between gears, driveshaft vibrated. Fortunately for me, I’d invested in a new Craftsman tool set and most of these issues were put right (except the fenders which got taken care of by a Mopar recall). The front suspension held up nicely however…. Until I started to modify the car. I pulled the 318 with overdrive and swapped in a slightly warmed over 360 with a proper 4-speed. Rear end got replaced with an 8 ¾ out of a 69 Super Bee. Tires got up-gunned to FR70 15’s on Cop wheels. This was in 1979 or so. Things got bad. Car went faster in a straight line, but, still rolled and still squealed in tight turns. In 1980 I replaced the 360 with a warmed over 413. Had to swap to manual steering to get the exhaust manifolds to fit. Things went from bad to worse. As I’ve said previously, car became a nose heavy pig. Unpleasant to drive. Clearly the front transverse torsion bar suspension was out of its depth. It’s not the cars fault, but it is what it is and that’s the way it sits 33 years, 58 K miles and two wives later.

I’ve explored a multitude of options and settled on the Dakota front end for a swap. It’s more modern and can take the weight over the front wheels. Anyway, this is MY opinion. Your mileage may vary.

I might also add the following notes. In 1978, when I ran this car, I was a 23 year old steel mill worker with a fat wallet, a full head of hair and big dreams. In those days, after modding the car, I would have said: “This car sure is fast now, but it SUCKS to drive it! Gotta be something better!”. Nowadays, through good fortune and the grace of God, I’m a 57 year old Software Quality Assurance Engineer (still with a full head of hair). In “engineering speak”, I might amend that analysis and put it this way: “Problem: The vehicle’s front suspension parameters have been overwhelmed by demands placed upon it by customer modifications (in which we have no control over). This has led to a dramatic degradation of its performance. Since this particular design has reached EOL (End of Life), we have impressed upon the customer to upgrade to a more current product which CAN be serviced and will assuredly give him far more satisfaction than his old unit. Recommendation: Go Dakota…”

Greg

you have hair ? when i was 57, my ol man was bustin me all the time because he still had hair and i didn't ! [ he was 84 at the time...]