Looking at control arms on Rock Auto....How do I know if I have a handling package?

[SouthGaDawg74]

I see them for with and w/o handling package. And IYO should I change the complete assembly or just the bushings and the ball joints?

[FordMan77]

From what I recall the GMQ HPP cars had the lacey spoked BBS wheels, factory dual exhaust and a different rear axle ratio.

Not sure what year you drive, but usually replacing the entire control arm is a better bet as it's easier to install the entire assembly vs. fighting w/ the factory stuff. Haven't had to replace those on my 03 CV yet so there may be better opinions.

[gadget73]

The factory way is to do the whole arm. Reason is they figure if the ball joints are dead, the bushings are too. I can't say they are wrong. SHould be able to use handling package arms on a non-handling package car. If there is any difference, it will be that one of the bushing is a different size. probably its the police arms. Frame and ball joints and all that are the same though.

[IPreferDIY]

I did the various front steering/suspension joints and bushings (except the stabilizer bar bushings) and the rear control arms and Watts link in my 2000 Grand Marquis LS recently, and the front control arm bushings (both upper and lower) were a HUGE PITA. If I knew then what I know now, I would have went with a good deal on complete control arms with greaseable ball joints. Some people leave the outer shells of these bushings in place and just press in the 'guts' of the bushings, so you might not want complete arms if you go that route. In any case, you should definitely do the bushings while you're doing the ball joints. The ball joints themselves are easy enough to change, and I did the various joints first hoping I would not have to bother with the bushings. But, I quickly learned how important the bushings are to the suspension and steering in these cars. (Even now, I still have to replace at least the front stabilizer bar bushings because they have become the proverbial weakest link.) If you're not planning on reusing the outer shells, removing the original bushings from the front control arms PROPERLY requires you to do a lot of cutting and grinding so you can get direct contact between your press piece and the outer shell of the bushing. Then you have to be careful not to bend the arms when pressing the bushings out and in. I can provide further guidance if you go this route, but the time you would save using complete arms would probably more than make up for the cost of the complete arms if you get a good deal.

Keep in mind that when you tighten all the bushing bolts back up, the car should ideally be sitting on its wheels at normal ride height on a level surface (like on an alignment rack). I resorted to putting a ramp under each wheel, and that gave me barely enough room to maneuver and use my torque wrench where I could.

If your car is like mine and you have to remove the front fender liners to get at the rearward of the two bolts on the front upper control arms (under the brake stuff on the driver's side and the air conditioning stuff on the passenger side), you should turn the rearward bolts around so that the nuts face forward like the other bolts. That way, you can put the fender liners and everything else back in and have your car operational (particularly the air suspension, if equipped) for the final tightening, which would then only require wobble extensions and a u-joint.

[IPreferDIY]

Here's some photos showing how much easier it is to remove the rearward bolts on the front upper control arms when you reverse the direction of those bolts. I don't recall the order of the wobble extensions that I used, but I do know that I only needed the U-joint on the passenger side. IIRC, putting the U-joint after the first extension instead of at the socket provided more stability.



I found that standard size sockets fit better than metric in some cases. Instead of 21mm on the upper and lower control arm nuts/bolts, I used 13/16". Instead of 24mm on the lower ball joints (and I think the pivot nut on the Watts link), I used 15/16". Instead of 13mm on the bottom of the shock absorbers, I used 1/2".

Incidentally, if the top nuts on the shock absorbers won't loosen, you're best bet would probably be a nut splitter if they actually work well. I've heard about them and seen them but never used them. I resorted to filing part of the nuts down and went into the threads on the top parts of the shock absorbers, but not fatally. I ended up scavaging two nuts from my old stabilizer links.

[gadget73]

oh thats right, silly later model car with the U brackets on the frame. Older ones use a cross bar bolted down to the frame, and you just take that off and mess with it once its in your hand. The big brake swap uses the magic transition part, which is a 92-94 upper arm featuring the old style cross bar, and a later style upper arm to make all the pieces fit together.

[IPreferDIY]

oh thats right, silly later model car with the U brackets on the frame. ...

Do you insult me, sir? Just kidding.

I've seen a lot of people talking about the "big brake swap" but don't know the background. Did Ford start using larger stock brakes around the time they changed to the hugely inconvenient upper control arms?

[87gtVIC]

I believe Scott and Thain know the history fairly well. From memory....Scott was told by some guy that designed the chassis that spindles and calipers from this year, control arms from this years and ball joints from these years would all swap onto a box bodied panther for some upgraded brakes. That is the extreme second/third hand version of the origins.

[gadget73]

Do you insult me, sir? Just kidding.

I've seen a lot of people talking about the "big brake swap" but don't know the background. Did Ford start using larger stock brakes around the time they changed to the hugely inconvenient upper control arms?

Basically yes. The 1998-2002 brakes are a dual piston caliper (46mm??) and I think a 12.1" rotor. The boxes had a 10.5" rotor and a single 63mm piston. I could rattle you off the ins and outs of when some of the various pieces changed, but its not that interesting or useful unless you are actually doing the job. Suffice to say that the larger rotor, larger total caliper piston area and larger pad produce much improved braking over the stock design.

[IPreferDIY]

Basically yes. The 1998-2002 brakes are a dual piston caliper (46mm??) and I think a 12.1" rotor. The boxes had a 10.5" rotor and a single 63mm piston. I could rattle you off the ins and outs of when some of the various pieces changed, but its not that interesting or useful unless you are actually doing the job. Suffice to say that the larger rotor, larger total caliper piston area and larger pad produce much improved braking over the stock design.

Nice to know. Thanks.

[Lincolnmania]

it was 88grandmarq that talked to the panther engineer. Everyone was too chicken to do the swap on a daily driver.
as far as i know, i was the first to put 98-02 front brakes on a box.

[IPreferDIY]

it was 88grandmarq that talked to the panther engineer. Everyone was too chicken to do the swap on a daily driver.
as far as i know, i was the first to put 98-02 front brakes on a box.

From what I've seen, that would only be a part of your legacy. Nice to meet you (in a manner of speaking).

[87gtVIC]

it was 88grandmarq that talked to the panther engineer. Everyone was too chicken to do the swap on a daily driver.
as far as i know, i was the first to put 98-02 front brakes on a box.

Ahh.

From what I've seen, that would only be a part of your legacy. Nice to meet you (in a manner of speaking).

He has preformed a lot of firsts when it comes to these cars.

[sly]

and some of those firsts will not be repeated... (OBD-II hacked in PI swap in a pre-OBD-II car for one... my 93 is the only PI swapped half OBD-II car I know of)

[slack]

What was the reason to swap to OBD-II?