Ford Galaxie Suspension Upgrades
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 มิ.ย. 2021
- Suspension upgrade for 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968 Ford Galaxie
Episode 125 Manic Mechanic
The front suspension was engineered to eliminate dive under braking and squat under acceleration. It was beefy enough that NASCAR’s front suspension design had its roots in the ’65 Ford for decades. The 9-inch rear axle was secured with coil springs, lower control arms, an upper arm only on the passenger’s side, and a track bar.
The 1965-spec chassis also managed to be 200 pounds lighter than the 1964 unit.
new boxed perimeter-frame chassis, with four cross members, was more compliant.
Ad copy described the full-size ’65 models as possessing a “liquid-satin ride.”
Stock suspension:
rebuild kit from Auto Krafters
Eaton Detroit GT springs
Hydraulic shocks
1.25 in front and 1 in rear sway bars Hotchkis or PMT Fabrication
Urethane bushes on all rear components
Front disc brakes
Aftermarket suspension:
Tubular a arms
Eaton Detroit GT springs
Hydraulic adjustable shocks.
Talk about what to look for.
Box tube rear trailing arms. To reduce flex.
Adjustable panhard bar.
Possible adjustable upper arm
Parts:
www.autokrafters.com
www.eatondetroitspring.com
www.hotchkis.com
www.pmtfabrication.com
www.unisteer.com
Manual Disc Brake Kit 1959-69 Galaxie shown: DB1513M - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
Jay Leno to thank for the Hotchkis kit. He built a great 7 Litre car
I didn't know that! Nice info.
If you like Ford’s, that’s a Must Watch Video. Especially the part where Jay fills out the motor option on the car.
66 Galaxie owner here! Thanks for the good info. I used PMT suspension parts to rebuild my stock front suspension. Good stuff!! I went with the OEM style and it rides and drives like a dream.
Glad to hear that!
Loved my 65 XL i dragged it out of the weeds and i made it mine and it’s my favorite of all my Galaxies.
Love the Hotchkis suspension on my FE 65 Galaxie! Expensive, but you get what you pay for!!! AWESOME VIDEO!!!
Thanks! 👍
Lol I hate that saying. Just because something cost a lot doesn't mean its the best. And vice versa, just because it's cheap doesn't mean it's not the best.
With that said, I have looked at the Hotchkis stuff for my 68 country sedan.
I own a well-maintained 65 Galaxie 500 Convertible. I don't drive it too often, but when I do, I relish the "liquid silk" ride that is still present. Very appropriate description.
Loved that and tried to find the actual copy Hemmings got that from. Spent like two hours looking through ads and brochures...not gonna lie that was fun.
I owned a 1966 Galaxie & the body parts were also interchangeable. I put the doghouse from a 1955 onto my 1966, in one piece & it was a perfect fit.
I just got done with this on my Bonneville! New inner/outer tie rod ends and adjusting sleeves, control arm bumpers and bushings, ball joints, and Viking double-adjustable coilovers. Also, front disc brake conversion, but pushrod distance/caliper pressure is giving me a run for my money ATM. I need to set ride height, then go for laser alignment. Got 15" polished aluminum Torq Thrust IIs as well. Big project for someone like me, but I was adventurous and have a good support system. Loved the video!
Right on! Thanks for the kind words.
This is awesome 👍 I’m working on my 66 that I put in a barn 25 years ago
Awesome, follow along with our 63 it's been a sitting idol for 25 years.
I just bought a 67 LTD model, it needs a little more work before it becomes road worthy, this video helps a lot! I'm going all out on this model
Great video! Great information,,, Thank you
Thanks for posting!!
No problem!
A locker fixes the need for a rear sway. You steer with the throttle! I also used Moogs 427 springs all around Police application with air. It has a 425 hp 390 I built years ago. It flies!
I bet!
Hotchkis is the way to go. It's pricey but worth it.
I really started liking the 66 after seeing Leno's beast. I love that car. I think he kinda got the ball rolling with Hotchkiss to make those shiny new control arms ect.
Thanks for the Vid bud!!Bogenson makes a steering box for 65..
It works well 😊
I loved the oil imaging just go what with what you love 10w-30 or 5w-30 ....lol
I did all of mine and it runs on rails! I put the big sway bar and tuned the rear to be even side to side with the panhard link. Unreal!
Nice!
Really good quality videos here. I own Chevys but certainly can use all of your information for my Chevys. BTW the Ford 9-inch rear axle is the "small block Chevy" of axles. At least on that we do agree. Haha, I really like your channel presentation
Thanks, we appreciate you watching!
I have a 67 Parklane instead of an LTD. It already had factory disc brakes but good luck finding brake hoses as they were last made in 1985. The entire suspension was rebuilt two years ago with new ball joints, tie rods, pitman and idler arm, and rubber bushings all front and back. Aligned myself as every place declined my car. Tracks straight and true. Later added a 1 1/8" front bar and 1" rear bar. Car is a real pleasure to boulevard and highway drive. When a freeway exit says 35 the car can do it without needing to go slower than 35 or heel way over if I don't. Other than 12 mpg I love driving this car which is a different experience from my 68 Cougar, Mustang, and 65 F-100. A true highway car.
The big cars were made for that highway experience for sure.
I recall hearing about the '65 Galaxie suspension being used in NASCAR, but had always thought that needed the clarification found here.
Like your perspective on brake upgrades; will keep that in mind on my (non-Galaxie) car. Personally though, on mountains I prefer discs.
In your case, if you are running the mountains, the "90%" would be the full discs.
owner of 2 64 galaxie's here. I gotta say, those cars had some stupid design features in the suspension that were addressed in the 65-model year, however once the offset shafts are eliminated, new control arm bushings, ball joints, new leaf spring bushings, and a rear sway bar is added it makes a huge difference in how those cars drive and how straight they stop. I did my 64 4 door suspension front and rear and it's the nicest driving car I've ever had. The frames on those things, at least in the rear are THICK. I had to drill some mounting holes for the rear sway bar kit, and it's fully boxed all the way front to rear best I can see. One downside to the 65 and later are the frames are a lot more susceptible to rotting out (I see a lot of 65 and later galaxie cars being parted out for rotten frame reasons) that the 64 and earlier don't seem to have that issue.
We'll be diving deep detail into suspension updates and fixing those horrible offset joint joints on the front of the Galaxy suspension on our 1963 hard top
I've got a 68 Galaxie and let me tell you I have been struggling to find parts for this thing. Ot seems like every company like MAC'S makes parts for everything but a 68 year model. Thanks for the tip on year interchangeability!
Glad we could help!
Yay some info on the 65 Thanks Jeff. Now if I could just sell my first born for a set of Pyrex headlight covers. ~drool~
Those things are NOT cheap.
Cast iron headers too!
Sway bars are the biggest bang for the buck
Your right jeff, the Galaxy is a sweet car....
I Love them.
Spohn Performance also offers fully adjustable rear suspension components.
Thanks for the heads up!
@@AutoRestoMod your working your way back
Now .... Starliner suspension upgrades!
Am I right
Ami I right
I am restoring a 67 XL Convertible FE390 car with the Hotchkis kit and Wilwood brakes. Top quality and fit.
Hotchkiss certainly makes really good stuff. As does Wilwood
Got any pics.. I just installed wildwood also on my 68 galaxie xl
I have a 71, first of the new shape where the suspension is similar but NOT the same. Here in Oz not a common car so performance parts are rare. They have virtually no caster and I have cocked the top wishbones around more than ideal but have 4 deg of caster. And about 1/2 degree of camber. It is more stable in a straight line, turns nicer and for a 2 tonne tank will outhandle many smaller cars. The only issue is the steering box is 22-1 so not much road feel at best. Though the caster helped that. From what I under stand the Saginaw RHD box has no better ratios. LHD have 6-1 to 22-1 available in the aftermarket. 8" wide American rims shod with 245x60 tyres too help a lot
I have AFCO 7 rate street stock front shocks bought on special and the rears are Aussie Falcon gas sports [cast off from my race car!] for coil rear and both are vast improvement.
My advice after seeing dozens of failures is never to use 'poly' bushes anywhere on a road car. Ever! They do not ever bond to steel sleeve bushings and on things such as sway bars cause pick up point failures. Often! Caster arm bushings as well' I have seen numerous failures with those. Broken arms, and pull the pickup point to the chassis out. This on numerous makes and models. And so often the bushes themselves fall too pieces. OEM Used rubber and so should the aftermarket.
A friend has a 7 litre 66 Galaxie. And that still has ram steering. BUT also has 12" rotors with 4 spot Kelsy Hayes callipers. 11" drums rear and stops as well as the tyres allow.
My 71 has similar rotors but big single piston callipers front and 11" 'finned' style rear drums which are damned heavy,, but work extremely well. Probably better than any disc brake conversion in normal 'spirited' driving through the hills
I use poly on the end links, But not places like strut rods unless the system is designed for it. Very good tips from OZ!
Just watched this video today, as for RedHeadSteeringbox, they do make them for Galaxies now 1965+
Im doing a 1965 Build, dropping a 429BBF into it. (its....become a true challenge and test of patience at its a lot harder to do than in a 66-69)
Went with the Hotchkis TVS on my '65. Holy Moses. Painful in the ol' wallet, but it feels like a well-sorted modern car on the road now, is not "slammed", and rides beautifully.
Better than PMT. Did you see their stuff? The Up/low control arms are 3K alone, at least with the hotchkis kit you get every single piece you need for 4.5K Compared to well over 6K-7k total with PMT.
Use 1966 - 67 front disc brake for upgrades. Put airlift bags in rear springs and a rear sway bar.
Great vid. Thx I have a 1965 all new sus next week. I am slammed adverse. Going Old School, any ideas on how to raise the rear end 2". Thank you in advance and keep up the great work!
Rear springs from Eaton, get them set up for stock ride height or you can spec them out taller.
To raise my 65 rear . I used Mevotech springs and Monroe adjustable air shocks at approx 50lbs. A little firmer ride and a nice raked stance
I totally get the strut rod eliminator. Rubber bushings allow the caster to move back and forth way too much. At the same time for street use the heim joint-based replacements concern me a bunch. Heim joints/rod ends on the street pick up grit and wear out quickly. Even on a race care they should be constantly examined, cleaned, and relubed. I'd like to see someone take a completely different approach by using something like a tie rod end instead. Tie rod ends are sealed a lot better and last a lot longer than heim joints..and a lot of that noise you mentioned can come from slop in the rod ends.
Good points.
I put Heim joint ends on my strut rods. I was home built by me from when I was working on circle track stuff. I like the adjustable moments angle without binding the control arms.
@@fenatic7484 there are multiple variations on ways to put spherical joints on these strut rods. To me this says a lot about how strut rods worked fine in the 1960s but they can't provide the handling and feel of a more modern car.
I am used to the old style, I used throw it around anything at stupid speeds. It is really good and tight yet supple!
@@fenatic7484 I did that with my 2 Cougars, but they needed to be eased into the corner gingerly or manhandled with throttle-induced oversteer. They weren't point and shoot cars. Since my cars were automatics I usually would crank in the steering carefully, wait for the suspension to load, and then I could do pretty much whatever the tires would tolerate.
Cool and informative video! Some day I want to buy a 64 Galaxie. So as you mantioned, the frames are completely different. But is there any way to add the rear setup of a 65 to a 64? That would be huge.
You would do better etting an aftermarket setup that is designed to fit the '64. Ride Tech offers an air ride system, but I think it will work with coilovers too. www.ridetech.com/product/1960-1964-ford-galaxie-airbar/
I have always wanted to stub a 66-7 Fairlane with a Galaxie stub like GM did on Camaros and Novas.
I'm wondering if anyone has designed a setup to install the crown vic front frame and rear8.8 4 link system in the 65 to 68 galaxies?
Great info, thanks.
I read some comments below and here in Australia parts are scarce
and info even more so.
I have a 1968 Mercury Marquis and apart from the wheelbase do you
think if I chase 1968 Galaxie suspension bits, I will be on the money?
Appreciate any advice or info.
Cheers.
I would say that you would be safe using Galaxie stuff.
@@AutoRestoMod Thanks for the heads up.
What suguestions do you have for a 1972 LTD convertible, I have not been able to find any updated rebuild kits for a daily driver Thanks Danny
www.autokrafters.com/c-16-steeringsuspension_ford-ltd-1972.aspx
I just bought a 67 Mercury Monterey and from what I'm told galaxie suspension parts should be a direct fit, is this accurate?
Yes. the Merc and Fords shared a chassis.
Awesome vid. Are the 1965-1968 Galaxies parts interchangeable with a 1968 Ford LTD?
Yes the ltd was a fancier model of galaxie they just dropped the galaxie name in 67
I've heard Granada spindles will lower car almost 2 inches. so no need for Hotchkiss lower arm's but I don't know for sure. Anybody know for sure
Do these suspension and brake upgrades work on the 1966 T Bird? I would like the dual brake system and better steering.
Did this improvement carry through to '69, '70, etc?
I honestly can't find anyone that is doing stuff that lists '69-'70.
quick question is the 1965 Galaxie suspension identical to the 1965 Mercury Monterey Marauder?
Yes. Back then Mercury would sometimes tweak things but overall the cars were only different cosmetically
Hey do you guys have any info on Imperials? I have a 1964 Imperial Crown Coupe
Are you are drugs, this is a ford show
Brent! Brent. Brent. Even a Mopar guy knows better. ☺
But, let's be nice: If u look at the more info for the video drop-down, they list all the parts/companies.
@@Paulie1232 Haha. (Be nice. ) lol
Nope. It is a Ford show...However your best option is an air ride system. Not much out there for these cool cars.
Would you say you can use the same for an 72 LTD ?
The reason why Hotchkis has it's Galaxie kit is because Jay Leno asked them to.
I thought the 1960 to 1964 frames were boxed on four sides and the 65 to 68 were only three sides which is why they rusted out so much I had a 66 four-door and the frame rotted on both sides right in the middle of the car🤨
The body is a lot like a unibody and the frame is really light, if you drop the rear axle you can walk it around like a wheel barrow. It was built to fight the intermediate body HemI cars with a light frame very good adjustable suspension and a stiff solid car the was as light as Mopar intermediates in 65-66 but the frame rust was the price in northern states.
Is the 69 ford galaxie not the same suspension as a 68?
It is.
@@AutoRestoMod okay good then i can make my suspension work like I need it to thank you.
Think oak tree... strong because it's flexible.
Oooo good one!
Sorry I missed the last Patreon meeting...I kick myself..lol
Don't do that. I put my back out the last time I did...
Front disc. Free
OK.
Everything?
Not really. But close. I did miss a aftermarket manufacturer
100000% Agree, my 64 suspension is the dumbest, worst, bad built NON-Ford better idea design. Your convincing me to buy a frame for the 64... :(
That one can be fixed...probably cheaper than buying a frame too.
@@AutoRestoMod Please tell me more, I have been looking for a good solution...
My 62 galaxie has a full box frame so the u frame claim is false
Sorry, I miss spoke.
I always called them the Cowbelly frame. They are really heavy and adjustable components were adapted to them. The front could be dialed in with the screw jacks you could weld in to load the front bias. The leaf springs depended on what bank angle the track was and the shackles could be swapped for less push to keep the rear from trying to get in front of the fronts. The did the best on high banking with consistent corners. Darlington, Pocano not so much as the attack angle varied enough to have to compromise on the setup. The coils and trailing arms really had better composure. I have always wanted to build a 65 Galaxie chassis to fit a 68-70 Mustang Fastback like Dick Trickle did to run 427 Tunnel Port FEs on 1/2 mile tracks, with a cigarette hang in one corner of his mouth and an electric cigarette lighter to punch and light another one and muscling the 427TP beast with a top loader on 1/2 mile to the Milwaukee Mile ! But I always wanted to do that on a Fairlane or a Mustang fastback. Just clip each end with boxed connectors. I looked under Trickles car, Larry Phillips ran two stubs in his Camaros. Great cars and racing!
@@fenatic7484 RIP Dick Trickle, a mans man.