1964-1966 Mustang 9\" into 1967 Mustang

I'm looking at swaping out my 8" for a 9" from currie.
I see at summit they have the housings for 64-66 mustang and 67-70 mustangs.
Can I put a 64-66 housing under my 67 coupe? Will this give me increased space for wheels or just more headaches?

Thanks

It won't really give you any more space for wheels you will just require a different offset..Personally I would rather keep it original and then you can compare with other people for known combo's that work instead of having a custom piece..
[addsig]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2007-03-07 07:48, strtcar wrote:
I'm looking at swaping out my 8" for a 9" from currie.
I see at summit they have the housings for 64-66 mustang and 67-70 mustangs.
Can I put a 64-66 housing under my 67 coupe? Will this give me increased space for wheels or just more headaches?

Thanks
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

Yep, and because of the slightly narrower 64-66 flange to flange dimension, it does give you a small amount of increased space for the wheels. In fact it's a great swap.

I bought mine directly from currie, and they needed certain measurements like register and things like that if you plan on using aftermarket brakes. But the fit was perfect.

[/quote]

Yep, and because of the slightly narrower 64-66 flange to flange dimension, it does give you a small amount of increased space for the wheels. In fact it's a great swap.
[/quote]


The limit of the tire size is the distance between the spring(and/or inner fender) and the inside lip of the outer fenderwell..Changing where the flange in the rear end is does not change this measurement..Putting the narrower rear end in will only help if you have wheels with a large offset to the outside but it won't allow a larger wheel to fit within the fender.
[addsig]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2007-03-07 13:27, frdnut wrote:
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

Yep, and because of the slightly narrower 64-66 flange to flange dimension, it does give you a small amount of increased space for the wheels. In fact it's a great swap.
[/quote]


The limit of the tire size is the distance between the spring(and/or inner fender) and the inside lip of the outer fenderwell..Changing where the flange in the rear end is does not change this measurement..Putting the narrower rear end in will only help if you have wheels with a large offset to the outside but it won't allow a larger wheel to fit within the fender.

[/quote]

Sorry, I thought that was his question [img]/forums/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif[/img].......... it allowed an 8" wide 4-3/4" back space wheel with a P265-50-15" on the king's car (a '67) that would not fit otherwise. But, yes, if you are looking for total clearance, it makes no dang difference. You would have to move the springs and mini-tub it.

I would recommend the swap, not because you will gain any room, that is not true, but because the rear end is one inch shorter on both sides, you have more options as far as wheels go. A 10 inch wheel becomes much more doable because you don't have to get a custom backspace wheel. A 15x10 with a 5.5 backspace will fit with the 65-66 rear as long as you don't mind rolling the fender lips.

If you ran a 67-68 rear and wanted a 10 inch wheels, then a 6.5 BS is requred, good luck finding a decent wheel selections though, there aren't many 15, 16, or 17x10 inch wheels that carry a 6.5 Backspace.

Decide on the wheels you intend to use then choose the rear.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: mikemustang289 on 3/8/07 7:10am ]</font>