98-02 Upper Control Arms. Police vs Civilian. Please tell me why differ part numbers?

[87stars_stripes]

As some of you may know, when you search upper control arms and upper control arm bushings for a 98-02 Crown Victoria they list the arms and the bushings specific to Police or Civilian. I don't want to get into the 92-97 police vs civi arms/bushings information, and as you can see below, the stupidity is only further amplified when you realize that Ford lists the same upper arm for 95-02. I am well aware that some time in 95 they stopped using the shaft kit in the upper arm and began using the frame mount which explains a difference in the parts listings, but still doesn't explain why the difference in police vs civilian. As far as 98-02 listings, Rock Auto and Energy Suspension both list different part numbers for the bushings, Ford lists different part numbers for the arms.
I don't know why, because I am looking at a pair of 00 Town Car right next to a pair of 00 Police interceptor arms and I see absolutely no difference in the arms nor the bushings. I am going to get pics shortly if anyone would like to chime in now.

Energy Suspension gives no reason as to why they list their bushing kit 4.3162 strictly for the Civilian car siting that they have not tested/designed for the Police/Taxi.

Ford lists their part numbers as follows. (To add confusion, notice how they list arms for the Police/Hpp and not the Taxi? Usually it's Police/Taxi and the HPP falls under a Civilian package.)
Civilian 95-02
Driver:F7AZ-3084-AA . (LH170 Stamped on Arm)
Pass: F7AZ-3085-AA. (RH159 Stamped on Arm)

Police and HPP 95-02
Driver. F7AZ-3084-BA. (LH161 Stamped on Arm)
Pass. F6AZ-3085-BA. (RH164 Stamped on Arm)

http://www.idmsvcs.com/2vmod/suspens...ont/index.html

[turbo2256b]

I dont know why but the Police ones use to different dia bushings the civilian both the same dia. Other than that they are the same and can be as an assembly swapped but recomend as a pair not a civi one side and pi on the other.

[87stars_stripes]

I believe you are correctly referring to the box panther 79-91 police upper arms having the metal or solid bushings. In this case I see no difference in the police vs civi arms/bushing/ nor the bushing composition.

I dont know why but the Police ones use to different dia bushings the civilian both the same dia. Other than that they are the same and can be as an assembly swapped but recomend as a pair not a civi one side and pi on the other.

[turbo2256b]

71 to 91 police are metal bushings and I dont think anone makes kits for them, from 92 on all the bushings are rubber but as I stated civi are smal dia both ends PI are differt diameters larger in the front smaller in the rear or maybe the opposite.

[87stars_stripes]

In these 98-02 bushings, i see no difference in the diameter of the bushings but I'll check again. Maybe you're right.

71 to 91 police are metal bushings and I dont think anone makes kits for them, from 92 on all the bushings are rubber but as I stated civi are smal dia both ends PI are differt diameters larger in the front smaller in the rear or maybe the opposite.

[88grandmarq]

talk to scott... he has done this at least a dozen times.

basically the catalog has incorrect information.

[87stars_stripes]

98-02 Arms have the same larger diameter bushings front and rear within the control arm. I can testify to that. THe older ones, (92-97) civilian had different size bushings front and rear. When using Energy suspension kit on the 98-02 arms you need 4.3153. 92-97 arms use 4.3150.

[kishy]

I was going to make my first post an introduction, but maybe I'll make it here...after harassing Scott and a couple other folks as well as the collective body of box drivers on another site, it's still clear as mud, but pretty obvious that ES' catalog has an error (or at least omission causing lack of clarity). I have two cars that will be getting bigger brakes (one just being bigGER and the other being the conventional big brake upgrade) and my confidence level is still about negative 5 on a 1-10 scale. I'd like to see a photo of a 98-02 arm mounted on a shaft rather than bolts just for the peace of mind of seeing it actually exists. Don't get me wrong, a lot of useful info was given (indeed by people in this thread here) but words only go so far.

I don't know what the accepted practice is for linking to CVN here but this is my thread over there asking about this exact topic (perhaps not your application, but the cross-referencing is the same): http://www.crownvic.net/ubbthreads/u...28#Post2806728

Don't take anything I've said as reliable without third party verification...

Going to edit again: there's a reply at the end of my thread I linked that I hadn't seen previously...it does tie up some loose ends and between everything that confidence level is more like +3...

[87stars_stripes]

If you want to see a pic of a 98-02 arm on a 79-96 cross-shaft you can come take one of my car. It's real. The 92-02 Arms are all the same. Refer to the above info I posted for Ford cross referencing. The issues that were unclear were 98-02 Police Vs Civi bushing application. I have undoubtedly verified that the arms and bushings are the same arm and same diameter bushing in the 98-02 Police vs Civi applications. I know because I had 2 pairs of arms from a 00 Town Car and a 00 Police car. They all contain the same "larger" style bushings front and rear. Energy suspension does not list their 98-02 civilian kit for the police spec application because I believe there is a different in the lower arm bushings. I believe there is an oval bushing in the lower of the 98-02 police/taxi. Otherwise all 79-97 lower control arms use the same bushings. 92-02 is the same arm. Throughout 92-02 the only differences in upper control arm bushings is that the 92-97 cross-shaft equipped vehicles (prior to the frame mount changeover) use one smaller bushing in the upper.

I was going to make my first post an introduction, but maybe I'll make it here...after harassing Scott and a couple other folks as well as the collective body of box drivers on another site, it's still clear as mud, but pretty obvious that ES' catalog has an error (or at least omission causing lack of clarity). I have two cars that will be getting bigger brakes (one just being bigGER and the other being the conventional big brake upgrade) and my confidence level is still about negative 5 on a 1-10 scale. I'd like to see a photo of a 98-02 arm mounted on a shaft rather than bolts just for the peace of mind of seeing it actually exists. Don't get me wrong, a lot of useful info was given (indeed by people in this thread here) but words only go so far.

I don't know what the accepted practice is for linking to CVN here but this is my thread over there asking about this exact topic: http://www.crownvic.net/ubbthreads/u...28#Post2806728

Don't take anything I've said as reliable without third party verification...

Going to edit again: there's a reply at the end of my thread I linked that I hadn't seen previously...it does tie up some loose ends and between everything that confidence level is more like +3...

[turbo2256b]

Kinda funny that 92 or 93 to 97 with cross shaft list different bushings for the PI modles than the civilian. Cilvilian being the same on both ends and different on PI. Had an opertuiniy to measure both were i purchase my uppers but could only find one PI upper so used civi ones.

[87stars_stripes]

I believe you have it backwards Turbo! As far as I am aware it's the 92-97 Civi that has two different size bushings, and the Police has the same size bushings. This is why the 4.3150 energy suspension kit specified for 92-97 civilian has two different size upper bushings.

[turbo2256b]

Could be as its been a couple years since I PUT MY KIT TOGEATHER FOR THE big brakes on creamy but havent installed the brakes yet as ones on the car are working good still so why replace what ain broke. Everything is assembled and ready to go though.

[87stars_stripes]

Yeah. I found that my old 11" brakes stopped very well. Very powerful and heavy duty. I think they clamp better than my new big brakes and I'm trying to figure out why. I think these Centric Semi Metallics don't have any bite to them.

[turbo2256b]

I have been thinking of using some DOT approved braded brake lines thinking some of the issue might be cheepness of replacement brake hoses. Some of my cars seemed to brake wores after hoses were replaced and nothing else changed.
It the only parts I havent purchased for the big brake upgrade but know were to buy them and what fittings needed.

[87stars_stripes]

Ohh. While on the subject of brake lines. You'd be humored to know that I ended up using 1987 Mercury Topaz brake lines. I attempted to use the original 2000 Town Car hoses as well as the 87 Town Car hoses but neither set reached and stretched with the wheel turned. The Topaz hoses are a great fit. The Topaz hoses are listed as being side specific (L/R) but have no difference in the curviture or length of the hose. Only difference is that one of the hoses uses a 3/8 and one uses a 7/16 so I had to use an adapter. I don't know why ford decided to use 2 different size fittings on each side of the 87 Topaz, but I made it work with a 7/16 female to 3/8 male adapter. To anybody else doing the big brake swap I highly recomment getting yourself two Topaz hoses and preferably both from the same side so you don't need the adapter. Problem solved.