New vs Old K frame

[London Shelby]

Ok I have a 89 ton shelby and a 91 shelby for parts, whats the advantage for the newer K frame I heard there is some just no clue, I gotta gut my engine and suspenion so it should be easy to get to, Q is is it worth swapping and why and if so how much work

[csracer]

they are both double pivot control arms which is good. the 89 control arms are stamped steel, the 91-up are cast. poly bushing are available for both now www.polybushings.com . the 91-up cast arms have a geometry change built into them which pushes the wheel a little bit forward, I can tell you from direct experience that they will not work on your 89 shelby daytona the tires will contact the the airdam. its best to stick with the 89 stuff.

[capev86]

you need to use the knuckles from the newer car too. i beleive they fix the problem. many people have put the newer k frame on their older cars. chrysler wouldn't be stupid enough to reengineer the entire chassis on our cars between 89 and 91! they just built the new parts to improve the existing engineering!

[csracer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by capev86 you need to use the knuckles from the newer car too. i beleive they fix the problem. many people have put the newer k frame on their older cars. chrysler wouldn't be stupid enough to reengineer the entire chassis on our cars between 89 and 91! they just built the new parts to improve the existing engineering!

Sorry, but that is not true. I have the 91-up knuckles on my car right now with 89 kframe/control arms, and the wheel positioning is normal. I tried it with the 91 kframe, knuckles and controls arms i still had the problem, many other people noticed it on their cars too. the knuckles have nothing to do with it.

I have heard that 91 daytona has different front end body panels, I know the hoods are slightly different and wont fit on an 89 so why couldnt the front fenders?, and the 92/93 cars definitely have a differnt front fender.

[iTurbo]

I have '91 K-frame, control arms, knuckles, 11" brakes etc... on my Shelby Lancer. Wheels and tires are 16" x 6" lace style from a Lebaron GTC with 205/50/16 tires and Eibach spring set. The wheels are a little farther forward in the well but it's hardly noticeable. It might be a problem if I had 225/50/16 tires though.

[csracer]

we discused this at length a few months back, this only seems to be an issue with the 89 - 90 daytona shelby and es bodywork. people with other cars such as the lancers, shadows, and spirits/acclaims have reported no rubbing.

[csracer]

iturbo, i just did a calc on your tire size, it is approx 3/4" smaller in overall diameter than a stock daytona shelby tire of 205/55/16 and also 3/4" smaller in dia. than a 225/50/16.

[Reaper1]

I'm going to back up CSRacer on this one. I have a '90 Daytona(base model with an '88 Shelby Z lower air dam). I put on a '91 K-frame and contol arms, and used '90 Shelby knuckles(11" brakes) with new Koni's, Eibachs, and KYB upper strut bearings. The wheels are definatly 3/4" too far forward. I had to downsize to 205-50-16 tire to clear the front of the splash gaurd.

As far as there being different fenders...I honestly have never heard this until now. I know the '92/'93 ones are different, but the only difference I saw physically was the holes that are used to mount the body work. I knwo their hoods are different. As far as the '91 hood being different...also, this is the first I've ever heard of this....

All the rest of it is correct info though...

BTW, I used '91 spindles on my '89 'Baron with '89 arms and did NOT run into the wheel moving forward...the difference is somewhere else...

[csracer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper1 BTW, I used '91 spindles on my '89 'Baron with '89 arms and did NOT run into the wheel moving forward...the difference is somewhere else...

The difference is in the control arm, I installed every combination of 89 and 91 kframes, control arms and knuckles (spindles) on my car and the only thing that pushed the wheel forward was the cast control arm.

[Koreth]

I have an '87 Shelby Z, could I benefit from moving to a newer K-frame and control arms or something? Wasn't it the '88 and up were the beefier K-frame? I know the anti-sway bar on there now is 1 1/8" (which I believe is the stock size for the 87 Shebly Z)

[Reaper1]

Chris, I know the difference is in the arm...I was mearly stating another set-up I have personally used that didn't run in to the problem of the wheel moving forward, that's all. Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers...

[csracer]

Reaper1, its cool, no feathers were ruffled, I just wanted to reiterate my findings since there has been alot of confusion on this suspension swap.

[minimopar]

I can also add that the P-body fender metal did NOT change, ever as far as I can tell. Yet, a P-body 91 K-frame and arms cause the wheels to move forward on my 86 Daytona as well. The wheels on my '87 CSX are pretty well centered, so that implies that any '91+ Shadow should have the wheels offset to the front a bit.

I was sure I noticed a difference in the design of the knuckle where it meets the control arm while poking around the yards, but I don't know for sure that it actually moves the wheel back again. I guess moving the wheels closer to the corners is not necessarily a bad thing.

[B.A.P.]

Good to read this. Will have to keep in mind when I put a '92 K-frame and LCA's in one of the '87 Shadows...

[minimopar]

Should be fine on a P-body...they seem to have big fender wells. It's just those darn G-body ground effects are *TIGHT*. Oh yeah.