67 Leaf Springs, Lowering?
#13
RE: 67 Leaf Springs, Lowering?
ORIGINAL: muggsy
more....
[IMG]local://upfiles/26761/002836F7A38A4908A2B764138BC530E9.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]local://upfiles/26761/347135775F24424C902528A4B3269701.jpg[/IMG]
more....
[IMG]local://upfiles/26761/002836F7A38A4908A2B764138BC530E9.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]local://upfiles/26761/347135775F24424C902528A4B3269701.jpg[/IMG]
Are you going to change that?
I'm about to buy a Grab-A-Track spring kit from Mustang Plus, what kit should I get to have the back raised just a tad higher than the front? Not hot rod high-rider, just a tad only, or perhaps just level, I don't know.
I'm also looking for a soft cushy ride, not the stiff and sporty one, my racing days are long gone.
Thanks.
#16
RE: 67 Leaf Springs, Lowering?
If I remember correctly, drop shackles reduce the pressure on the wheels from less of an arc on the leafs, causing wheel hop. New leafs arent expensive, so its best to get new ones...
Plus drop shackles look dumb from the rear...
Plus drop shackles look dumb from the rear...
#17
RE: 67 Leaf Springs, Lowering?
ORIGINAL: norcal mustang
I like the way the rear of Muggsy car sits - I think the front needs to be lowered a little. I like the slightly lowered, level look.
I like the way the rear of Muggsy car sits - I think the front needs to be lowered a little. I like the slightly lowered, level look.
#18
RE: 67 Leaf Springs, Lowering?
I really wish i could see how the car would sit with each combination. I like the 1-1/2 drop in the front, actually i would of liked to go more but the 1-1/2 is all i found. Maybe just new stock leafs would look good too, they're definitely cheaper. Its hard to tell my old leaf's were completely flat, and someone had some home made "drop shackles". I saw they make a raising and lowering kit, looks just like blocks you'd use with the leafs. Looks like the cheap, i.e. crappy way out. Decisions decisions
#19
RE: 67 Leaf Springs, Lowering?
ORIGINAL: Halz5
Thanks muggsy, being completely ignorant on the topic of leaf springs. I guess my next question would be whats the difference between, the reverse eye, mid eye, and standard eye? I can see that it changes the position of the mounting location on the leaf spring but what do they do different? what was originally on my car? Thanks again.
Thanks muggsy, being completely ignorant on the topic of leaf springs. I guess my next question would be whats the difference between, the reverse eye, mid eye, and standard eye? I can see that it changes the position of the mounting location on the leaf spring but what do they do different? what was originally on my car? Thanks again.
i'm not trying to preach to the converted here, but I think you are going about this slightly the wrong way.
firstly, what do you want the spring to do? Standard ride, race track firm, somewhere in between?
second, how do you want the car to look...standard height or lowered.
you can have various combinations of both.
A couple of principles...a leaf spring works by applying more force in response to the force applied to it. That is why they are curved. As you load up the spring, it starts to flatten out and work the next leaf and so on. In a road applicattion it is a fairly soft progression and in a race application it is a firmer progression, but in either case, the spring needs travel to work properly.
Second, be careful what you do at either end of the car as it is exacerbated at the other end. Lowering the front will raise the rear and vice versa. Its hard to get the mix right.
what they used to do to lower the rear of a car was reset the springs with less curvature. they then had less travel so, for example, a road spring would still be compliant on a smooth road, but under load it would rapidly get to the point of no further travel making the back end of the car skip around on the bumps and causing wheel hop under acceleration. the reason for mid or reverse eye in this case was to lower the car but maintain the spring travel.
the same principal applies to race or sport applications. you can add extra leafs to make the suspension firmer, but you still need curvature for it to work properly. Again, lower the car with reverse eye so even though it is stiffer, it still has compliance on rough surfaces. Result is much better traction particularly out of corners.
Personally, I would skip the mustang stores and go to the local spring manufacturer. I wanted a firmer ride and lowered. The guy measured the car height, took into account the camber of the roads (meaning you should get a different spring curvature for driver v passenger side) and also what I wanted to achieve. He reset the original springs, added a leaf and reversed the eyes. It works a treat. Cost was $250 Aus which is about $180 US. I got what i wanted matched to the front springs that were already on the car.
hope this helps your decision making.
#20
RE: 67 Leaf Springs, Lowering?
Its hard to tell in the pics above, but my driveway has a decline, so the rear lowered part is a bit exagerated...its not so bad when I'm on a flat surface. But as soon as it gets even slightly declined, it looks like its sagging in the back