Scotts hot rods or TCI ifs

[rjsjea]

Looking for any feedback on Scotts hotrods or TCI (total cost involved) ifs users........

I'm working on a new project (66 Rambler Classic wagon) and looking for a front suspension. I don't need a DSE, Roadster shop, or C6 type front......just a safe/reliable/good handling front end for street driving.

I've looked at AME's weld in ifs, but they will end up being $1000+ more than TCI's or Scotts by the time it's installed

I have an F-body LS1/4l60e takeout, Ford 8.8 rear and a Ridetech Tri 4 link already in my shop waiting to go in.

[coolwelder62]

Check out WWW.speedwaymotors.com for some weld in mustangII crossmember.

[ironworks]

We have used the Ridetech arms and wilwood spindles on quite a few low budget projects with good results.

[bret]

The TCI suspension now comes with RideTech coilovers. Just sayin :)

[rjsjea]

Seems like TCI or Scotts offers more than a basic MII. TCI uses there own spindle, with a ridetech coil over.

Scotts offers adjustable upper and lower arms, coilovers and a splined sway bar. There crossmember is made to my frame rail width and track width.

[Tony@Roadster]

Our new Revo IFS may be another viable option for you if you. I am unsure of the rail width or if you are planning on modifying your existing rails on the Rambler but we do offer it in a universal crossmember only that may work. Track width with standard brakes is 57.75" and is a great alternative stepping away from the traditional Mustang II crossmembers without going to something as aggressive as our Fast Track IFS. You can find more general info here, http://roadstershop.com/suspension/revo-ifs-crossmember/

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8274/8704092909_9fa694fbe3_b.jpg

[rjsjea]

Dang, that's close to the track width I wanted (59.5", inside rail 30.75")

[Chassisworks]

Rob, if you're looking for a hub width of 59.75" then we can get pretty close to that with our 33" crossmember. That would yield you 29" inside and a hub width of 60". I had a 65 Rambler 330 wagon until a couple months ago. IIRC I had measured out that a 30" outside width crossmember with 57" hub width was the best fit for the wheels I was going to use. Track width is more dependent on wheel offset.

A $1000 difference may sound like a lot, but in the scale of a whole car build it's the place where $1000 can make the biggest difference.

Our Street Machine Crossmember is available in 15 different widths with racks to match so if you need to go narrower that's easy too. It uses all new components engineered and manufactured in our California factory. It's neither the most nor least expensive crossmember out there but it's the only 'universal' system using proprietary geometry and components instead of Mustang II spindles and their variations.

You can get a PDF overview of the system HERE (http://www.cachassisworks.com/Attachments/DataSheets/7160_DS_WEB.pdf)and see details on individual components HERE (http://www.cachassisworks.com/cac_library_7160.html).

Here's one that was installed in a Maverick by Auto Edit.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/293132_376499055788524_1914494502_n.jpg

And here's one that's currently being installed in a Rolls Royce by Fesler Built. (Yes, it's right hand drive.)
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/283548_10151509692704030_1239194394_n.jpg

[rjsjea]

Thanks Carl,

Yeah, hub width, wheel mount surface, track width seem to be synonymous terms for different manufacturers. I have my wheels already, so I'm good with 59-60" width

[Chassisworks]

No problem, happy to help. With the Chassisworks system you can run a power rack on the 60" hub width but not the 59" so that's something to consider. There's a worksheet you can download at the bottom of the page here: http://www.cachassisworks.com/cac_worksheets.html Use that to help you figure out EXACTLY what size you need.