Re: Dakota F-body swap - You there Poorboy?
[Re: poorboy]
#1247329
10/09/12 04:26 AM
10/09/12 04:26 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 31 United States
swisswill
member
|
member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 31
United States
|
Thanks for the info Gene, that is extremely helpful. I can do a weld-in clip from 32"-35" outside to outside width so should be able to make this work. What I'll do is cut the entire front rails out, fab some down tubes which will weld to the floor and back to the rear cross-member, similar to sub-frame connectors. Then I'll triangulate from the inner rockers to the the length-wise tubes so I won't have to worry about "splicing" in to the existing frame rails and trying to make things match up. Should work out pretty good. Once finished, I'm hoping to stuff a 10" wheel in there. Will
Will Ellis
1969 Dodge Dart Swinger, 1/2 Dart, 1/2 Viper
|
|
|
Re: Dakota F-body swap - You there Poorboy?
[Re: Greg55_99]
#1247333
02/18/13 01:28 AM
02/18/13 01:28 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,953 Freeport IL USA
poorboy
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,953
Freeport IL USA
|
Just want to be sure I'm understanding correctly, this Dakota set up is sitting inside the original F body "frame" rails and your going to attach to them, correct?
OR, when you cut your F body k-member out, you cut out the frame rails as well, and all I am seeing is the inner fenders for your F body?
If you are doing the 1st one, I believe your going to be OK.
If your doing the 2nd one, my concern is that you will need some sort of boxing or tubing outside the Dakota subframe. That subframe is designed to attach to the Ford "C" channel frame for support. If you cut your frame rails out, what will provide the support for the subframe? Gene
|
|
|
Re: Dakota F-body swap - You there Poorboy?
[Re: poorboy]
#1247334
02/18/13 08:38 AM
02/18/13 08:38 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 300 MA
Greg55_99
OP
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 300
MA
|
The fist one is correct. The Dakota crossmember is sitting INSIDE the F-body frame rails and will be attached to them. I'll have to cut out sections of the rails for the "top hats" but I will not be removing them. I will also be cladding the rails for support AND, adding a c-channel under the radiator for suuport. Something like this: http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t164/Freaks-Photos/70%20Dart/K-in-car2.jpgThat's the plan. Greg
Last edited by Greg55_99; 02/18/13 10:52 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Dakota F-body swap - You there Poorboy?
[Re: Greg55_99]
#1247346
07/26/13 11:19 PM
07/26/13 11:19 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,953 Freeport IL USA
poorboy
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,953
Freeport IL USA
|
Greg, are we having fun yet? I think your doing a great job, this stuff isn't as easy as some people lead a guy to believe, is it? As I understand, you are faced with lowering the MII crossmember so the tie rods would clear the tubing inside the frame rail. Now, because the lower control arms bolt to that crossmember, because you are concerned about the ride height?
Two things come to mind. 1) Since the tubing is extra reinforcing, can you put a notch in the tube, and box it back in so the tie rods clear, without lowering the crossmember? You can probably notch away almost 1/2 the vertical wall height on both sides of the tube without compromising the strength as long as the tube is not the only structure there, and you box the notch back in with at least 1/8" wall material and fully weld. 2) Another possible option is to move the mounting holes for the lower control arm higher in the crossmember, you may have to trim the crossmember for additional clearance for the control arm swing. I suggest this one because many MII setups only have 1/2 of the control arm mounted to the crossmember, and the other 1/2 is attached to the frame rail. Maybe a combination of these two options would work better, or maybe neither will work. These things are hard to figure when you can't look at the real thing. Keep at it, you will get there. Gene
|
|
|
Re: Dakota F-body swap - You there Poorboy?
[Re: poorboy]
#1247347
07/28/13 04:01 PM
07/28/13 04:01 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 300 MA
Greg55_99
OP
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 300
MA
|
LOL! You called it Gene. This is BIG fun! Sort of. :-)
Let's face it, you haven't lived until you take a look at the inside of an F-body "frame". All kinds of stuff in there I'll tell you. It's actually a bit stiffer than I thought it was. Anyway, I'll correct you on why I had to lower the crossmember. It was because the Dakota setup places the power rack and pinion slightly higher than the base of the crossmember. If you look at the pic I took, you'll see the truck rear sump oil pan has to clear the rack and lines. So, that's what threw me off in my first set of measurements. I'd originally done it without the rack. Glad I caught that. Man... this is work....
Greg
Last edited by Greg55_99; 07/28/13 04:02 PM.
|
|
|
|
|