Appreciate all this info. What about the bracket the idler arm is bolted to? Shouldn't it be something along the line of this picture on this Moog instruction manual? Where it sits between two ears?That’s a:
- 67 K-member
- 67-72 centerlink
- 67 only idler arm (looks newish)
- 67-72 pitman arm (looks newish)
- 73-76 disk brake conversion with rear mounted calipers **
- 73-76 lower ball joints
- 73-76 upper ball joints
** looks like Slider Type Calipers. Need pic of end of caliper to ID
You need to check if caliper hits upper control arm when turning lock to lock. If it’s a Pin Type Caliper; it will hit when mounted in rear. But I’m not sure about slider types
Like was said before, with these 50 year old cars and especially with motor and brake conversions…. You can’t make assumptions. Pictures to ID everything!
Appreciate all this info. What about the bracket the idler arm is bolted to? Shouldn't it be something along the line of this picture on this Moog instruction manual? Where it sits between two ears?
steve, you're more johnny snake eye than i am, but is that the tip of the slider caliper adapter bracket and the shadow from the anti-rattle clip?
View attachment 1716202520
There is up and down movement in the idler. This pretty much the reason for starting the rebuild process. Unfortunately, I purchased a 68 idler arm from Moog (K7042), which looks identical to a 67 but has a bolt through pattern. Any good suggestions on a 67? I really didn't see many options out there with the exception of this from Andersen Restoration.No.
That is a 67 only stud mounted idler arm. It just has that single flange with a machined tapered insert that a tapered idler stud wedges into.
That’s because you have a 1967 only K-member. Yes it’s a little inferior to the U-shaped bracket with through bolt idler design they used in 68-72 and 73-76 A-body K-members.
This is a B-body K-frame, but same idea
View attachment 1716202518
Check for up and down movement like any other idler. Looks very new, should be good. But don’t assume anything.
The 60-66 A-bodies and 62-67 B-bodies also used that stud mounted design.
Yes, the UCA's are adjustable but a bit a b**** to adjust since they have to come off completely. They look to be Hotchkis per the following link. The idler needs replaced.+1 to the rundown from Mr. Wall
you've got a hodge-podge of parts there, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. the aftermarket adjustable(?) upper control arms are a nice touch and evidently somebody put some money and effort in on that.
besides the annoyance factor of having to piece together the rebuild bits all the stuff there is functionally decent items.
don't beat on the idler arm. if it's in good condition reuse it. thems be expensive and difficult to source good quality these days!
Will check clearance on these.You need to check if caliper hits upper control arm when turning lock to lock. If it’s a Pin Type Caliper; it will hit when mounted in rear. But I’m not sure about slider types.
** Must check at ride height with wheels on ground **
Could limit turning radius and even cause the caliper to compress the disk like pressing on brakes.
View attachment 1716202519
Good question. I didn't get around to fully removing the idler until I have more info from this thread. And yes, the idler arm is fairly new and about 1yr old. I called the guy who sourced/installed it for me and he can't remember where he got it from.Is the idler loose or the bracket worn? The bracket should have a machined tapered hole that fits the tapered stud on the idler arm locking it in position. Your idler looks pretty new.
if the fit is all sloppy in the hole or the action is all wobbly bobbly. like 66fs said, it's a machined hole that matches the stud taper, so it should be toit.How would I tell if the bracket is worn?
How would I tell if the bracket is worn?Is the idler loose or the bracket worn? The bracket should have a machined tapered hole that fits the tapered stud on the idler arm locking it in position. Your idler looks pretty new.
I would first try to tighten the arm to the proper torque. Sometimes you need to clean up the threads on the stud. Then see if there is any movement in the arm.How would I tell if the bracket is worn?
I did that and there is still play.I would first try to tighten the arm to the proper torque. Sometimes you need to clean up the threads on the stud. Then see if there is any movement in the arm.
Another thought here. Would I be able to replace the 67 bracket with a 68-69 version? Seems like that would add more rigidity.
You could, but I would not bother. There is nothing inherently wrong or weak with the 67 down idler cantilevered beam design. Your problem is the cheap or worn out idler arm. I run that design on my 66 Barracuda and on my 67 383 K Frame, but use a kit to make it a Roller bearing instead of a rubber bushing. I've run this roller type idler arm since the 70's and it is still good.
[/URL]
Both of the things you mentioned are in fact inherent problems with the '67 down design. A cantilevered beam design is an inherently weaker design, its engineering 101. That is not to say they can't be used or that they're dangerous, but in this case the '68+ version is a better design.
And sourcing the idler arm is a problem too. The '67 only version is expensive, and if the quality of the reproduction arms has dropped then the steering will suffer.