new upper control arms do not fit

[dpariso]

I ordered the new FFR upper control arms and they are much different than the current ones on my Mark 3. They are wider, sit higher, the ball joint is kicked out at max and the adjustment sleeves are screwed in all the way. Did I get the wrong part? It just does not fit.
2018-03-17_21-34-44.jpg 2018-03-17_21-33-03.jpg

[dpariso]

also, I noticed as I searched the forum some of them are mounted on the side. Mine originally are mounted on the top.. I assume this still applies as if I changed it to the side mount it still would not fit.
top mount.jpg

[i.e.427]

The one you have pictured is upside down.

[Big Blocker]

Unless you have and are using the newer MKIV F5 spindles or an earlier SAI bracket, your upper control arm shafts mount on the upper holes with the bolts vertical. MKIV frames that utilize the newer spindles use the lower holes with the bolts horizontal.

When you state "wider", are you referring to the bolt holes or the complete arm assembly?

HTH

I think what Frank (i.e.427) is referring to is the ball joint plate - seems to be up-side-down causing an extreme angle of the ball joint at full droop. Might just be my bad eyes though . . .

Doc

[Jeff Kleiner]

I'm assuming that you are changing the uppers because the pivots seized on the cross shaft?

What you have are the latest version of upper control arms which are supplied by a different vendor than your originals hence a slightly different design.As Frank said you have them assembled incorrectly (yeah, I know, that's how they were delivered but it is not the correct configuration for our application). The ball joint plate must angle outward, not in as you have it. You'll need to remove the joint, reorient the ball joint plate and reassemble while keeping the grease fittings pointing up on the cross shaft links. It's a whole mix & match sort of puzzle!

As you are aware, I know your car. It uses Mustang spindles so the top mount position is correct. The adjustment sleeve lengths will change when you have the car aligned after changing the arms. You have manual steering so should not encounter the sleeve length problems that are common when trying to attain power steering alignment specs. BTW, when you align it or have it aligned you should be going for .5 degree negative camber, 3 degrees positive caster and 3/32" total toe in (very important that it is toe in, not out)

Good luck!

Jeff

[dpariso]

yep, I'm changed them due to the pivot's (both sides) seized. I was motived because I heard this really loud obnoxious creaking sound every time I went over a speed bump or driveway.

Per everyone's suggestion (thank you all), I removed the ball joint, flipped the adjustment sleeves and configured it the correct way and it fit nicely :-) I tried to match the new UCA lengths with the old ones. However, the adjustment screws are all the way in leaving no adjustment in that direction. I'm hoping when I take it in to be aligned (Jeff, thanks for the spec's) it will be able to be done without any modifications (cutting adjustment sleeve shorter).

I apologize about posting this in two different threads. I will use this thread and put a message on the other saying conversation here.

[dpariso]

Jeff, you are correct... I assumed my spindles were a FFR. Very important to know when it come time to replace the pads. Thanks for the heads-up! :-)

[dpariso]

Jeff, before I get an alignment, the Assembly Manual says 1/16 Toe in. But in your post 3/32. What do you suggest?

[Jeff Kleiner]

3/32". With the low caster that manual steering requires a little more toe in helps with straight line stability and in returning the wheel to center. The negligible amount of additional tire wear will be counteracted by the negative camber.

Jeff