Wichers123
Well-Known Member
So what's the idea of changing k members?
UPR K members..
- Thread starter Pitbull_SN95
- Start date
lsmustangx
New Member
3 things ive learned here.... someone has to much time to play with GIFs, someone here hates UPR and last i learned that if i was black and died due to a UPR part failing there probably would be a riot.... but if i was white and a MM part failed no one would believe it. am i wrong?
lsmustangx
New Member
Am I right? Or am i missing something?
lsmustangx
New Member
Btw Evil. Love your car... Im doing an LS swap and keep debating on what color to go with and with what wheels... but your car makes it hard to say no to black and fr500's (i think thats what wheels you got?)
Yep, satin black with black chrome fr500's.
Thanks, it's a work in progress!!!
This message courtesy of crapatalk!
lsmustangx
New Member
You by chance ever go to Grayson co? or breck co? thats where im originally from... i got back a few times a years to see friends. I got a buddy on the KY side of the bridge who is building a bad turbo 347 fox....
OnyxCobra
Post Whore
The K member is a critical part of the front end of the car and it's not something that should be built with weight savings in mind; not only does it hold the engine but it's the foundation for the entire front suspension as well.
There are many benefits of a proper K member some of which include overall increased stiffness preventing flexing, improved caster and weight distribution by moving the wheels forward, additional weight distribution improvement by allowing you to move the engine back, allowing higher mounting points for the control arms to reduce camber on lowered cars also improving the roll center height, better steering rack mounting position to improve steering geometry, also maintenance stuff like added oil pan clearance, added header clearance, easy starter access, etc. Weight savings is just a bonus.
slow90coupe
Well-Known Member
The only reasons I installed a k-member was to save weight and have more room to work on stuff.
Wichers123
Well-Known Member
The original k member is the strongest out there and more ridged.
cameron57
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2014
- Messages
- 454
- Reaction score
- 0
Im with slow 90
OnyxCobra
Post Whore
that's fine if that's all you want out of it, buy the cheapest one you can.
ok... I'll call BS.
It's actually true.
ttocs
Post Whore
[video=youtube;a1Y73sPHKxw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Y73sPHKxw[/video]
OnyxCobra
Post Whore
any real proof to support that? I find it hard to believe stamped steel would have more rigidity and strength than triangulated tubular steel that is actually designed for it.
No, other than everyone at the racetrack whose opinion I trust has agreed. But you're right, take that and two quarters and it's still only worth 50 cents. The stock k-member was designed by Ford to last forever, and is made of thick, very heavy steel. It's built like a tank. In my humble opinion, the only one that may come even close to matching the strength and rigidity of the factory k-member is Maximum Motorsports. Most normal manufacturers wouldn't come close.
Paul.
Paul.
^this. The whole point of the tubular k member is weight savings. Period. The goal being to get as close to stock strength but far below stock weight. Which I would imagine some companies do a good job at, others maybe not so much.
Edit: MM, while accomplishing the goal of low weight and almost as strong as stock k-member, said "what the hey, let's improve upon the spindle location while we are at it." So there are potentially other benefits in addition to weight savings. If so, then good on that company.
Just cause Ford makes something, i wouldnt put too much faith in it. Engineers are usually at the mercy of the bean counters. I just replaced some lower control arms on a 2000 Lincoln Navigator, and Im surprised how flimsy though were for such a heavy vehicle. They had rust holes large enough through them in 2 places on each lower control arm that would allow more fingers in it than a working girl.
While it is true that there are the bean counters to contend with, there are also the safety people to content with as well. If everything was to make the bean counters happy, then the cars would be built with as little material as possible - it would be cheaper, they would be lighter, they would get waaay better gas mileage, 250hp would be proper quick, so on and so on. So, yes, I agree that Ford isn't going to *waste* money on over-strengthening parts. Having said that, the k member on our cars is about as critical a component as you can get - it holds the engine, locates the front suspension, and steers the wheels. If Ford effs that guy up, people will die. And then the bean counters won't matter anymore. So I hear what you are saying; not every part is going to seem like it's "built like a tank" because frankly, not every part is. It's built to be strong enough for it's application to ensure the safety of the people driving the car. In this case, the k member, due to it's role, is pretty damn beefy.
OnyxCobra
Post Whore
I can respect that but without actual testing or proof it is just an opinion. MM built their K member to be a lifetime service part just like Ford OE. Even with that strength they still achieve a 28% weight savings.
If others want to spend less money on a weaker K member just to save a few more pounds, more power to ya.
