Now that my front suspension has settled, the rear seems to sit about 2" too high. I'm going to make some wood blocks to make sure (don't worry, it'll never hit the streets that way), but if I'm right and 2" blocks are needed, are they safe? I'm thinking that will add to the wheel hop problem, with the added leverage of the blocks.

For reference, I bought a "stock" rear spring set, knowing that the stockers sat low in the rear. But with 620 springs with 1" lowering, and the Shelby drop, my front suspension is looking perfect. I just want it to sit level, or as close as possible without it sitting *** down.

How much do mid-eye springs drop it? How about reverse-eye springs????

All opinions welcomed, so chime in .....

 

Where did you get the 'stock' height springs, and which 'stock' height? There are lots of leaf springs out there that claim to be factory ride height, but really aren't.

I have the commonly available Grab-A-Trak .620" 1" drop lowering coils with the Shelby drop and Grab-A-Trak 4.5 leaf mid-eye leafs and I'm mostly happy with the way it sits. I really like the way the rear sits, but it does sit about 3/4" lower than the front. I'm probably going to cut the front coils down a bit to even things out.

That said, I'd recommend new leafs vs lowering blocks. You're quite correct in that the added leverage from the blocks will increase axle wrap tendencies.

 

I got them from Laurel Mountain Mustangs. They are 4 leaf standard eye.

What would you recommend, having them rearched or buying 4.5 leaf mid eye's? After all, you seem to be one of the suspension experts on this forum .....

 

No way will a properly-made spring be that high. These new springs show how it should sit:

 

^^^^
I believe that is exactly what he considers to be high ....

I have 5leaf (very stiff, too stiff) mid-eye in the back. the car shouldn't be any lower in the back I find. as otherwise I'll probably only get trouble with rubbing when someone is in back.

the standard eye soprings that you have should make your car sit like the picture alright.
Is it higher? if it is, are you using shanks?
send picture of side of car and picture from where the leaf springs are attached to chassis in the back


Kalli

 

Are those GT springs? I was under the impression that GT springs sat a little lower.

Anyway, I'd recommend new leafs. I've never really agreed with getting springs re-arched. New springs don't cost enough for us to warrant that.

Glazier's and NPD both offer OEM leaf springs that will actually sit at the proper stock ride height. Whether you actually want that stock ride height is a different issue. I can guarantee that the M+ 4.5 leaf mideyes I have will lower the rear 1/2 to 3/4" below the front. It's like that on my car, and I know several people who have the exact same setup that have the exact same issue.

4.5 leaf springs are also a bit more stout that stock or GT 4 leaf springs. I like them because I drive hard on occasion, but if you're looking for a better ride quality, you may be happier with an OEM 4 leaf GT spring.

 

2+2, that's about how the back sits now, and it is too high for me.

kalli, I'm using the stock shackles. Using a 2' level, I need to raise the front 3/4" to be level. Considering the wheelbase is ~9', that equates to about 1 1/2" at minimum (if I'm doing the math right).

Starfury, I don't mind a stiff ride at all, as long as my fillings don't get jarred loose.

Like I said, I'm going to make some blocks from wood to see what I need as far as lowering, then I'll make my decision on how to proceed. And again, don't worry, they'll never see the road, just doing it for mock-up purposes.

I think I should've bought reverse-eye springs, but I was afraid of it being too low in the rear. Since the ones I have are from Laurel Mountain, I'll probably call them to see what their opinion is, since they sell the springs they should have a proper frame of reference.

Thanks for the replies.

 

Today most early Mustangs, even when seeking originality, are too low in front and too high in back. These cars had a noticeable nose up stance when new as evidenced by this factory photo.



The Mustang wasn't breaking new ground here, many cars in the '50s and '60s had this nose up look.

 

That's exactly what I'm trying to avoid. I don't mind it a little higher in the back, but I don't want it lower. In a perfect world, I want it to sit dead level.

 

Avoid blocks if you drive hard. Like the plague.

They give the housing more leverage against the spring, so wheel hop will be a bigger problem. But they also allow more housing squirm when cornering which can work the u-bolts loose and result in broken springs.

I'm running 620 front 1" drop springs with the 1" a-arm drop and mid eye 5-leaf rear springs. Stance is perfect and it has razor sharp cornering.