Fox vs. 94+ vs. FFR control arms

[lionelg9]

I tried doing a search but could not find a definitive answer. This question is about the front lower control arms. My plan is to build a donor FFR. I am still a long way our from purchasing a kit but I do like going to salvage yards to look around and find parts to clean and refurbish. The idea is to build up a nice parts collection so that when it is time to get a kit I should be mostly ready to go. This way I can still feel like I am working on the car without actually having it. My question is what are the differences or problems I will run into with each different style of control arms? Will they all work equally well with the FFR tubulars just offering weight savings? Are there performance differences? Assembly issues to be considered? I am not trying to build a cheap car but I would like it to be economical and I like the idea of restoring parts for reuse. I am just trying to build a mild fun little car for picking up gallons of milk and getting ice cream. Any comments or suggestions you might have would be appreciated. Thanks

lionelg9

[timmil]

When I originally built mine I used the donor control arms from an 89' Fox. Ran those for 1500 miles. I have to admit during that 1500 miles I was nervous about the donor arms. Never felt comfortable with the setup. I know there are others that have gotten alot of miles with them, but I personally never liked how the shocks mounted to them. Then I upgraded the shocks to the Koni's and replaced the lowers with the FFR tubulars. I have not been nervous yet.

My vote is with the FFR tubulars but that is just me. I have always thought suspension and brakes are the most important parts because failure of those areas can be catastrophic so I would never look in those areas for cost savings.

Just my .02


-Tim

[conger]

I'm using the LCAs from an 89. They work just fine. However.... I picked up a rebuilt set off a buddy for cheap. The ones off my 89 donor were pretty much done in. By the time you've stripped them down. Blasted them and replaced ball joints and bushings; you have pretty much paid for a set of new ones.
I'm doing my build like you planned yours. If you don't mind doing the extra work I think you can save some significant dollars. Got a pretty good write up on rebuilding a mustang steering rack. If you're interested, PM me and I can send it to you.

Gerry

[lionelg9]

Are the dimensions of the fox vs control different or is the geometry the same with just a difference in construction?

[Rich A]

Originally Posted by lionelg9

Are the dimensions of the fox vs control different or is the geometry the same with just a difference in construction?

All of them are different in length and shock positioning.

Fox donor, short
FFR tubular pin drive, shortest
FFR tubular standard, fox length
SN95 donor, long

[canuck1]

Originally Posted by lionelg9

Are the dimensions of the fox vs control different or is the geometry the same with just a difference in construction?

The SN95 (94-04?) lower control arms are slightly longer than the Fox models, so FFR has provided a pair of frame mounting holes to accomodate either model and retain the same track width. I don't know that there is much to recommend one over the other.


I ran front lower control arms from a 1995 GT while still in go-kart form but bought a set of FFR tubular LCAs off the classifieds. I did have some clearance issues around the steering rack tie-rod ends and the top surface of the 95 LCAs at full droop, but most told me that since it was only at extreme droop (car on jackstands) it wasn't likely to be an issue with the car on the road. They can also peel weights off the inside edge of your wheels at full steering lock, so you need to watch for that and grind clearance as required. There's lots of meat on them strengthwise, so I wouldn't be concerned if you have to shave them a bit.

If it were me, I would save my dollars for the tubular LCAs. Most true donor stuff is pretty high mileage and if you add up the cost of replacing ball joints and bushings, you will be most of the way to buying new tubular LCAs.

edit - I forgot to add that with the SN95 LCAs you need to drill the coil-over mounting hole (it's existing in the Fox models). You need to measure carefully and favor the rear edge of the spring pocket slightly so you don't end up mounting the bottom of the shock too far forward where the spring will touch the tie rod ends when the wheel is at full steering lock. You can ask how I know this but I may refuse to answer .

Sean

[lionelg9]

Is this why there are different mounting holes for if you are using FFR Standard/Fox length and the SN95 arms? The different mounting holes end up putting the shock mount in the same place for all types?

[lionelg9]

Thanks for the info Sean. You must have been writing your reply the same time I was asking about the frame holes.

[CraigS]

On either Mustang LCA you can replace the rubber bushings but I don't think you can change the balljoints. SO be sure the BJs are good if using donors.

[TAnderson]

I started out with the fox FLCA, changed the ball joints but I found that the mounting point for the coil over using the existing hole created a clearance issue when the tie rod at full lock. I tried drilling a new mounting hole rearward in the fox control arm but found that the arm needed significant clearancing to fit the mounting bracket. I ended up buying a set from a forum member. I know there expensive but I would really recommend them.