There have been many answers to this q. There is some confusion as to the real solution. I am putting together a '78 volare as a stock eliminator car with a super six. When i am finished with the motor and trans i will break the 8.25. Ive done this before. I have a b body rear. The issue is what springs can i use that will fit the f body with the 8 3/4? My sixes produce lots of torque and i would like to use a ss sring for this set up. Thanks
8 3/4 swap
- Thread starter CM360
- Start date
bremereric
FMJ Body Moderator
Someone had some for sell a while back...I think they were SS leaf springs from a E-Body with special hangers for a F-Body. Probably from Firm Feel
440 Volare
Member
E body SS springs will give you the wrong shackle angle. The B body SS spring has a longer rear segment the will give a good angle (rearward with wheels on the ground). I use P3690454 and P3690455 springs and front hangers P4120081 from Mancini racing (www.manciniracing.com). There is a small bulkhead that has to be removed for the hangers to fit the car. Also, I ran a 8 1/4 behind a 440/727 (12.80s ET with slicks) with a Power-Trax No-Slip Traction System replacing the axle and spider gears with no problems!
Shorty Thompson
Well-Known Member
Done this a couple of time during demoderby era . You can use "B" body springs on a FMJ , but I think you have to use the FMJ front hangers .
bremereric
FMJ Body Moderator
I went back and found the post...The front hanger kit for SS springs for 76-80 F-Bodies is part number P412008. It does require some hacking on the car just like 440 Volare mentioned. I would also box up the front hangers cause they place the front bushing way out in the air.
http://www.forfmjbodiesonly.com/classicmopar/attachment.php?attachmentid=2127&d=1303783634
dakota springs are available in several load ratings (read tag on door) and have the same front segment length as FMJ, and 2 " shorter rear segment, and slightly smaller diameter bolts at the ends, so a bushing change at the rear (easy) and a shim or something at the front....or drill new holes in the front bracket, or buy some front hangers from me that have 3 sets of holes already done with dakota bolt size.
I also have sturdy steel rear plates that fasten from the old shackle location to the big bolt for the bumper shocks, allows you to relocate the old shackle, or almost any shackle, where you want. Dakota rear shackles are probably better than FMJ....
I also have sturdy steel rear plates that fasten from the old shackle location to the big bolt for the bumper shocks, allows you to relocate the old shackle, or almost any shackle, where you want. Dakota rear shackles are probably better than FMJ....
bremereric
FMJ Body Moderator
nice. I saw one in a junkyard with only a few parts missing, they wanted way too much for it as a whole car, nobody would buy it, so it got parted out.
I read somewhere that the FMJ platform was originallyy being considered for the dakota chassis, with FMJ front and rear subframes being morphed to a full frame, but that didn't happpen. 4 door FMJ are same wheelbase and track as std cab short bed dakota.
I'm a little bummed out that chrysler is discontinuing the dakota....
Will probably be down your way in late March or early April....
when are dewberries ready to pick?
I read somewhere that the FMJ platform was originallyy being considered for the dakota chassis, with FMJ front and rear subframes being morphed to a full frame, but that didn't happpen. 4 door FMJ are same wheelbase and track as std cab short bed dakota.
I'm a little bummed out that chrysler is discontinuing the dakota....
Will probably be down your way in late March or early April....
when are dewberries ready to pick?
77RTNJ
Well-Known Member
Bill, your right about the m chassis was originally being used as a test mule. When they were first developing the truck it was suppose to be a Uni-body truck like the little rampage, but rear wheel drive. Later development put a frame under it. I now looks to be the way they are going with the dakota replacement, uni-body truck, no separate frame. I had hoped they actually had used the M-body k-frame at least,since the dakota has Rack and Pinion and was hoping it would be a swap, but found they never used it.
Kevin
Kevin
Ever think about dropping an M body onto a Dakota frame?
77RTNJ
Well-Known Member
that would be too much work. you would have to try to remove most of the unibody frame rails from an m to get it to fit and then basically weld the two together. Otherwise the M would be sitting up real high off the road.
I would love to find a way to do Rack and Pinion without changing out the whole k-frame.
Kevin
I would love to find a way to do Rack and Pinion without changing out the whole k-frame.
Kevin
77RTNJ
Well-Known Member
I have got my Aspen R/T to finish up before I would try something like that. Maybe when I finally move out of NJ to Pennsylvania in about 7 years and get some property. Then I will have more space and more time.
Kevin
Kevin
What is your source of info on the M being a Mule for the dakota? I had only heard that it occurred, but no details. It would be a good read...
Certainly the dakota frame would be a good base for future hot rods, cheap and plentiful. I know the FMJ front is used under old Ford pickups, and wonder just how many other places.
BTW, I saw once what should be a cardinal sin, a 57 chevy perched on the top of some kind of 4x4 chassis, going down the freeway....
77RTNJ
Well-Known Member
I used to get AutoWeek Mag and it was one of those spy photo things. it was kinda like a aspen wagon with the top cut off and some sort of squared off front like the dakota became. I tried to find my Mags recently, but I think the wife got rid of some stuff while I was away on a trip recently. She doesn't understand why I keep old mags, this is why. I believe it was around 83 or 84 when they were doing it. I was trying to find it recently because of the thought of using the rack and pinion on my aspen. I think on the dakota the engine sits up higher on the K-Frame than it does on the FMJ's so that gives it the clearance.
Kevin
Kevin
ramenth
Well-Known Member
And while you were posting that here, I was looking it up to post it in the other thread. :icon_cool:
77RTNJ
Well-Known Member
Ok, that looks neat, but has anybody used it on one of our cars. I am pretty sure on the trucks that they use the K-frames on they use different motor mounts. I think the engine sits up higher so there would be room for the rack.
res1vw21
Well-Known Member
If you guys want better steering there are a few easier ways to do it. Firm feel is now offering a 3rd bearing (not for F body yet but it's just the mounting plate you would need to fab) Use a C body manual box with the big bushing and 5 tooth engagement, C body tire rod sleeves, skid plate the K member and weld the steering box area, weld the K member seems. I think Helwig? recently came out with a kit to eliminate bump steer.
Anyway it's not to hard to have a really nice steering car with addons thats cheaper then trying to convert to a rack.
Anyway it's not to hard to have a really nice steering car with addons thats cheaper then trying to convert to a rack.
