The cougar is a DIRECT swap. No changes in the tie rod ends. No change in geometry.

 

Another victim, I tried to clue him in to the potential problems, but as you see he will continue on........

http://www.mustangsandmore.com/ubb/F...ML/013265.html

 

Geez, all of this for that silly granada setup. As Bob said, anything of a high performance rating should NOT use the granada setup. And yes it does change the geometry. IMO, it was in back then, just not so hot right now...

 

I have TTD's on, 15"ers... Oooh, I know... i'm sooooooo behind the times if I don't have 17's, or 16's or whatever...

I don't have the Shelby drop either. I have a pretty much STOCK setup and the Granada brakes have worked fine... and I've gone on a couple 50 mile drives... (round trip) No problems other than that shuddering I was having and that was due to the centering thing not working, not due to some geom issue...

As for your setup Jay... I don't have the V8 spindles... I had 6 cyl drums up front. Nothing I had on my suspension woulda worked with that... So I would have had to get the spindles, AND then that setup... we're talkin' $400+ now for a setup.

I had a Granada setup for... get this now... don't pee your pants... FREE.

I think it's pretty much a no brainer here.

If I go for a more high performance setup, I'll get the spindles and do something more radical. yes, the Granada setup would go. But c'mon, let's compare apples to apples here.. No one ever said the Granada setup was a high performance setup.. anyone trying to set it up as such will quickly find out the problems.

EDIT: Sorry, that stuff above comes across as a little strong but c'mon folks... No need rippin' the Granada stuff for what it isn't.

 

What width tire are you running on the front?

 

205-60/R15.

 

Hang on a sec for yourself. While you're busy defending your granada setup, let's not go dissing the drums so badly either. For a non race setup (less than 300hp) drums ain't exactly the flintstone braking system everyone makes them out to be. Sure disc's are better, but drums them self are not faulty, usually the less than desirable results are due to improper maintanence of the brakes, not the unit themsleves. I have had to come to a sudden stop on more occasions than I care for and sure a little less fade may have meant the difference between soiling my shorts and not, but if you know how to handle your car then you will stop just fine. Every 1500 mi or so I drive the car in reverse around my block a few times while hitting the brakes to reset them and that is about all the maintanence they require between inspections to keep them functioning properly.

I do plan to do the switch some day myself don't get me wrong, but only when the system needs replacing. With so many items on my want list I am very carefull about replacing functional items. So that Rod kit shown above, it seems to end at 67'?!?!?!? Do they have a set up for the 69" as well? That seems a most reasonable price. I thought for certain that I'd be looking at a grand at least to swap the front set up to discs. :scratch:

 

FWIW I think the width of the tire and perhaps the profile could contribute to this effect. More thought maybe involved than I am willing to expend ...

 

What effect?

That they work with no problems? You make it sound as though what I am getting with my braking is not the norm...

 

Like a lot of things (351 D00E heads come to mind) , Grenada brakes were a low-cost answer that was appropriate for its time - when there weren't many answers to be had. When this swap was first popularized, there weren't any reasonable aftermarket alternatives (just like there weren't any reasonable aftermarket Windsor heads for years, either).

Its still not instant death to do it but if one is starting from scratch, it makes sense to go to the various aftermarket options, like R&C. That's just taking advantage of progress, and the ever-expanding Mustang aftermarket
________
California medical marijuana dispensary

 

Hmmm, I'd say more like taking advantage of a simplified method, otherwise to make this statement true we should all be also converting to 6 speeds and EFI setups and all the other so called "progress" that has been made over the years on just about every inch of a car.

 

Rich,
Read Cloney's experience again. You are talking 205s ... I'm talking 225 - 235's on 16s and 17s with more grip that does not allow the tire to "scrub" back. It's a theory...

If it's working for you rejoice! But like LMan points out it was a solution at the time of limited solutions. Now there are more options, and why push people into a method that has known problems as well as known successes.

 

Additional bumpsteer problem solving information. http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/forums/s...&gonew=1#UNREAD

 

How about using '70 Mustang spindles and discs? I still gotta change out my outer tie rod ends, but are they as bad as the Granada?

 

IIRC, they are pretty much the same spindle and have the same geometry problem with the tie rod position.

 

You could be my unused wilwoods for 500...I hate to make another post about them.

 

The '75-'80 Granadas/Mercury Monarchs share the same front suspension dimensions and geometry as the '67-'70 Mustangs. The 'Granada' front disc brake swap has no adverse affects on these models, even when the suspension is altered (lowered).

Some '65/'66 models do experience problems with this swap --particularly when the car has been lowered.




www.ultrastang.com

 

Hmmm, you must not have actually done this swap ! Instead of making subjective comments or making statements of faith, how about we use real data? I challenge anyone to take toe measurements with the granada spindle using a bump steer guage from +/- 2" @ 0.5" increments. Compare that to a 67-73 Mustang spindle. Then take both sets of measurements again with the 1" Shelby drop. I suspect we will find there is measureable bump steer with a stock spindle and stock location upper arm, it gets a little worse with a Granada spindle and stock upper arm, a stock spindle with the Shelby drop is significantly worse, and the Granada spindle with the Shelby drop is horrid. I have a Longacre bumpsteer guage, and am willing to take measurements on anyone's car that has any of the above configurations. (I am developing my own front suspension using Granada spindles with my own design upper arm that is neither stock nor the Shelby drop, and my own centerlink to get negligible bump steer so measuements on my car will not be valid for comparison, but I will gladly publish my results )

 

Hmmm, you must not have actually done this swap ! Instead of making subjective comments or making statements of faith, how about we use real data? I challenge anyone to take toe measurements with the granada spindle using a bump steer guage from +/- 2" @ 0.5" increments. Compare that to a 67-73 Mustang spindle. Then take both sets of measurements again with the 1" Shelby drop. I suspect we will find there is measureable bump steer with a stock spindle and stock location upper arm, it gets a little worse with a Granada spindle and stock upper arm, a stock spindle with the Shelby drop is significantly worse, and the Granada spindle with the Shelby drop is horrid. I have a Longacre bumpsteer guage, and am willing to take measurements on anyone's car that has any of the above configurations. (I am developing my own front suspension using Granada spindles with my own design upper arm that is neither stock nor the Shelby drop, and my own centerlink to get negligible bump steer so measuements on my car will not be valid for comparison, but I will gladly publish my results )
[/b][/quote]

Hmmm...well lets' see now...I've installed the Granada setup on (1) '65 Mustang, (2) '66 Mustangs, (1) '67 Mustang, (1) '68 Mustang --my own, and on (1) '69 Mustang.

Of all these, the ONLY one that had problems was on one of the '66 Mustangs. I installed the Pro Motorsports Neg. Wedges on it, and had a terrible problem with the tires wearing out on the inner edges. Ended up taking the wedges out and returning the UCA's back to their stock location to stop the excessive tire wear issue.

My '68 is lowered 1" and I cut 3/4 of a coil off the front springs and I made and installed 1½" lowering blocks in the rear. All Mustangs will have some degree of bumpsteer in its stock form, but the Granada conversion did not add any more to the bumpsteer in my '68.

http://www.ultrastang.com/Images/Main.jpg

The red '68, pictured in the link above, is my car (my high school car --owned it for 22 years). I installed the Granada front discs and Granada 15/16" front swaybar on it in 1992. The Blue '65 belongs to a friend. I installed the Granada front discs on the '65 in 1996. Have had no problems with either one of them.


The main problem some experience with Granada discs on a '65/'66 Mustang is its narrower track width. --They are two inches narrower than the '67-'70/'75-'80 Granadas/Monarchs, and the Granada spindles have a little different geometrical configuration from the stock, early ('65/'66) Mustang spindles.

 

Bravenrace,

I'm in the same boat you're in.
Granada brakes, no noticable problems from the spindles.
Even at 110 MPH