SN 95 Spindle width and interchangeability ?'s

[WarDamnEagle]

So I have been driving my donor build around in gelcoat for a few months with the stock mustang wheel and tires. Donor was a 1999 mustang.

I just received my FFR Halibrand 17" wheels with the staggered width 9" front 10.5" rear. I have already done the research and bit the bullit and bout a 98 model rear Axel and the fox width shafts to swap into the rear, but now not the front.

I bolted the front rims on and they stick out about .5" past the front fender.

I was happy with the way the stock 8" front wheel tucked inside the front fenders but these 9" look goofy to me. How much narrower would it be to put on the 94-95 spindles? Can I simply buy a set of used spindles on eBay and bolt them on with my hubs and brakes? I have heard that I will have to clearance the lower control arms or upgrade to the tubular FFR units.

Does anyone make a 8" x 17" halibrand so that I don't have to swap spindles and can keep the width and backspace of the factory mustang wheels, because I was happy with the stance?

Thanks for any help, I'm sure plenty of others have been through this before, but my searches seems to steer (no pun intended) towards conversations about correcting bump steer rather than width.

[Bill_VA]

Been there done that. I started with a set of 1996 SN95 spindles and thought they were fine until I fit the body the first time. Tires stuck out way too far.

What I really wanted was a 1994-1995 SN95 spindle set. These are 8mm narrower per side and help bring the wheels and tires in. Unfortunately you can't buy them new. I searched eBay and got a pair cheap and ordered new hubs, then painted the spindles. All good.

[Mark Reynolds]

Yes I concur with the 1994-1995 spindles.
You can also mount your lower control arms to the inboard mounting hole and remove the rack extenders, and mount your upper control arm to the underside of the upper mount. (required dissassembly of arm to thread it through and frame grinding to clear rear pivot). I works great!

[Paul2STL]

If you go with the FFR spindles you will not have that problem. Look at my car and you will see rim is at the edge of the body. It is the best look in my honest opinion. They won't look goofy. Post some pics for us to see what you are talking about. Also what spindles are you now 99s?

[SteveHsr]

Look at E-T Wheels model AC lll. It's available in 8 x 17, and 91/2 x17 with your choice of backspacing (within limits). You might find just a little more back spacing will work with the wider wheel.

[SteveHsr]

E-T also offers a set for Factory Five Roadster utilizing 17 x8 for fronts.

[weendoggy]

My MKI has SN95, lower 1st edition tubular and 1st edition SPC UCA (the straight ones) and have no issues with Team III wheels (strong 8" fronts). 245/40x17 tires. No rack offset bushings, no bumpsteer issues. If your tires are sticking out 1/2" now, putting the dogleg spindle on will only lessen it about 1/4", so it'll still stick out. Check your BS on wheels to make sure that's right. I also run 245/45x17 track tires on F500 wheels without issues.

[WarDamnEagle]

Thank you for the replies.
I think from what I have gathered the 94-95 spindles and the FFR spindles correct some bumpsteer issues, but have the same width that I have now. Fox spindles would mean a totally different brake set up and would narrow me by 8mm on each side.

I did get some advice to run 245's and adjust the Upper COntrol Arm in for all the camber I can get and they should tuck into the fender.

If they do not, then I will ditch the factory Lower control arms and buy a set of mustang LCA's and shorten them up as needed to get the exact width I want.

[Norm B]

The 94/95 spindles are narrower than the later ones. They also have a drop in the steering arm that improves steering geometry reducing bump steer. Here’s a couple of pictures. One during the build that you can see the drop in the steering arm by zooming in and the other of the completed car with 17 inch FFR Halibrand wheels and 245 width tires on the front.

HTH
Norm

[Jeff Kleiner]

Thank you for the replies.
I think from what I have gathered the 94-95 spindles and the FFR spindles correct some bumpsteer issues, but have the same width that I have now


No. Fox, 1994/1995 and FFR spindles all result in the same track width which is narrower than what you have now. Yes, the amount of camber comes into play as far as the tire to body relationship goes. For a street car I wouldn't feel bad about going to a full 1 degree negative camber which might get you closer to tucked under. You are far from the first to have discovered this issue with the '96 and later spindles.

Good luck,
Jeff

[CraigS]

I wouldn't go for other LCAs. Anyone w/ a bandsaw, a grinder, and a welder could shorten your LCAs. Mustang tubular LCAs are not designed to have the spring load run through them. The spring is on the strut. Also the holes in the frame mount ears could be moved.