1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing - Moparts Forums

Register Log In Moparts Forums Corners Are Best - Handling Tech 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing

Print Thread

1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing #1363351 01/02/13 09:33 PM 01/02/13 09:33 PM
Joined: Dec 2004 Posts: 88 Arizona 4 410mopar OP member
410mopar OP member 4 Joined: Dec 2004 Posts: 88 Arizona	I need a drawing (blueprint) of the front suspension. I need to know the mounting positions of all the parts, upper and lower arms, shock upper and lower mount positions. Any help appreciated.

Re: 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing [Re: 410mopar] #1363352 01/02/13 10:59 PM 01/02/13 10:59 PM
Joined: Sep 2007 Posts: 14,889 up yours Supercuda About to go away
Supercuda About to go away Joined: Sep 2007 Posts: 14,889 up yours	Quote: I need a drawing (blueprint) of the front suspension. I need to know the mounting positions of all the parts, upper and lower arms, shock upper and lower mount positions. Any help appreciated. Good luck, closest I've ever seen is the drawings in the FSM not sure that'll have everything you need. They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.

Re: 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing [Re: 410mopar] #1363353 01/02/13 11:40 PM 01/02/13 11:40 PM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 31,045 Oregon A AndyF I Win
AndyF I Win A Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 31,045 Oregon	Fat chance of finding a drawing like that unless you're willing to pay for it.

Re: 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing [Re: AndyF] #1363354 01/03/13 12:16 AM 01/03/13 12:16 AM
Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 3,456 Fly Over States P PHJ426 master
PHJ426 master P Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 3,456 Fly Over States	how much of that info might have been supplied with a frame alignment machine for the purpose of unibody alignment? That probably shows something but not all the measurements your looking for.

Re: 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing [Re: PHJ426] #1363355 01/03/13 12:33 AM 01/03/13 12:33 AM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 27,468 So Cal autoxcuda Too Many Posts
autoxcuda Too Many Posts Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 27,468 So Cal	Quote: how much of that info might have been supplied with a frame alignment machine for the purpose of unibody alignment? That probably shows something but not all the measurements your looking for. Not much info. Those charts don't define the suspension pick up points. I assume the O.P. wants to plot the suspension geometries on paper or proabably a computer program. . . . Break out your rulers, calipers, plumb bobs, height indicators, etc, etc..! Actually you should check the circle track parts industry. They may sell some tools to do this type of measuring. I helped a guy do it to chassis years ago, but don't remember the brands or names of the equiptment. It's much harder to do to a stock bare chassis compared to a race car bare chassis.

Re: 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing [Re: 410mopar] #1363356 01/03/13 02:07 AM 01/03/13 02:07 AM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 27,468 So Cal autoxcuda Too Many Posts
autoxcuda Too Many Posts Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 27,468 So Cal	You are looking to this? http://www.circletrack.com/chassistech/ctrp_0809_moment_center_location/viewall.html http://www.circletrack.com/howto/1816_front_roll_center_location/

Re: 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing [Re: 410mopar] #1363357 01/03/13 01:23 PM 01/03/13 01:23 PM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 28,068 Irving, TX feets Senior Management
feets Senior Management Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 28,068 Irving, TX	Stuff a 69 k frame under the car if you're concerned about handling. It will move the engine back and down but the suspension geometry stays the same. As a bonus you will get the improved idler arm mount with top and bottom brackets. The 65 uses a cantilevered bottom bracket without any support on top. It just kinda flaps around under stress. We are brothers and sisters doing time on the planet for better or worse. I'll take the better, if you don't mind. - Stu Harmon

Re: 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing [Re: feets] #1363358 01/05/13 12:33 PM 01/05/13 12:33 PM
Joined: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,688 Marlboro, NY, USA R Rick_Ehrenberg top fuel
Rick_Ehrenberg top fuel R Joined: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,688 Marlboro, NY, USA	Quote: Stuff a 69 k frame under the car if you're concerned about handling. It will move the engine back and down but the suspension geometry stays the same. As a bonus you will get the improved idler arm mount with top and bottom brackets. The 65 uses a cantilevered bottom bracket without any support on top. It just kinda flaps around under stress. The Firm Feel ball bearing idler kit mitigates this to a considerable extent. Rick

Re: 1965 B-Body Front Suspension Drawing [Re: Rick_Ehrenberg] #1363359 01/05/13 01:20 PM 01/05/13 01:20 PM
Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 28,068 Irving, TX feets Senior Management
feets Senior Management Joined: Jan 2003 Posts: 28,068 Irving, TX	Quote: Quote: Stuff a 69 k frame under the car if you're concerned about handling. It will move the engine back and down but the suspension geometry stays the same. As a bonus you will get the improved idler arm mount with top and bottom brackets. The 65 uses a cantilevered bottom bracket without any support on top. It just kinda flaps around under stress. The Firm Feel ball bearing idler kit mitigates this to a considerable extent. Rick True but that won't move 700+ lbs of weight in a favorable direction. We are brothers and sisters doing time on the planet for better or worse. I'll take the better, if you don't mind. - Stu Harmon

Moderated by Al_Alguire, Hotwheelsjr, moparts, not_a_charger, RangerDan440, tboomer, tommoparts

Hop To

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1