Tire to body contact

[SkurdalenFox]

Somewhat recently I switched from stock springs to H&R Sport springs on my 92 two door. Other relevant items – 96+ rear end, 99 cobra wheels (17x8) with 245x45 tires. The factory bump stops are in place on the frame, but because this was a four cylinder car, there is no pinion snubber.

Going over large bumps, there was some tire to fender contact in the rear. So, I rolled the rear fenders a modest and equal amount. It only took a slight adjustment to get the LH fender clear, but for the life of me, I can’t get the RH side to stop rubbing. If I just keep beating on it I’ll eventually get it clear, so what I’m really concerned with here is why the LH side took minimal manipulation, while the right has been so troublesome. I know production tolerances are about a mile wide on this car, but I’m left wondering if this could this be a symptom of something else being wrong.

The first thing I checked was the control arm mounting locations on the frame. Everything looks intact, and as straight as it ever was.

Any suggestions for what else I should check?

[Italian LX]

I would guess most Mustangs don't have the rearend directly centered. I know mine is visually off and I remember Nathan actually had a measurement on how far off his was when he installed his panhard bar.

[slvrbullit]

Also Todd (rtgreen) had issues with his coupe on the passenger side being lower in the rear than the driver side.

[SkurdalenFox]

Also Todd (rtgreen) had issues with his coupe on the passenger side being lower in the rear than the driver side.

Hmm, was he able to solve this?

[QWKSNKE]

Another reason you are seeing this is due to using the 96 rearend. I can't remember the measurment off hand but the 96-98 setups were 'x' amount wider than the 94-95's which were wider than the foxes.

Seems like the average rearend is off center by up to 3/4"

[Sendero]

I know mine is visually off and I remember Nathan actually had a measurement on how far off his was when he installed his panhard bar.

About 1-3/8" to the passenger side.


Another reason you are seeing this is due to using the 96 rearend. I can't remember the measurment off hand but the 96-98 setups were 'x' amount wider than the 94-95's which were wider than the foxes.


I'm trying to find the measurements, but I thought 94-98 axles were the same length and it only changed in 99 due to the body.

[Italian LX]

I'm trying to find the measurements, but I thought 94-98 axles were the same length and it only changed in 99 due to the body.
It also changed in '93 with the introduction of rear disc brakes.

[QWKSNKE]

I'm trying to find the measurements, but I thought 94-98 axles were the same length and it only changed in 99 due to the body.

I know the front spindles are different between 95-96 (been researching for the SVO's big brake upgrade :D ) so I would think the rear may have the added offset

[rtusnake]

Pretty sure they went up 3/4 of an inch on each side in 94 because of the disc brakes then another 3/4 in 99 up

[ncontt]

Pretty sure they went up 3/4 of an inch on each side in 94 because of the disc brakes then another 3/4 in 99 up


:werd: http://svo73mm.cjb.net/ everything you'll ever need to know about brakes...have a nice day

[Italian LX]

Pretty sure they went up 3/4 of an inch on each side in 94 because of the disc brakes. . .
Actually, that additional 3/4" began in '93 with the Cobra. :D

[QWKSNKE]

Pretty sure they went up 3/4 of an inch on each side in 94 because of the disc brakes then another 3/4 in 99 up


guess it was just the fronts on the 96-98 then. They increased the track width by so many mm

[rtusnake]

guess it was just the fronts on the 96-98 then. They increased the track width by so many mm
Yeah can't remember the difference in those but was told a 94-95 spindle would work better than the 96 up when I done my five lug

[Italian LX]

Yeah can't remember the difference in those but was told a 94-95 spindle would work better than the 96 up when I done my five lug
The difference is the location of the streering knuckle.