[torqhead]

Originally Posted by bulletpruf

(bottom of rocker to ground)

Scott, dumb question... can you provide more detail as to what this means? Would the measurement be taken for instance right behind the front wheel starting at the bottom of the fender to the ground and then on the rear in front of the rear wheel same process?

[moparcolt]

We had a Camaro that we put all new springs in. It sat so high we had a hard time getting the shocks on it.
Once we drove it a bit it settled down to near stock height.
You need to drive it for a while before you go cutting things

[bulletpruf]

Originally Posted by torqhead

Scott, dumb question... can you provide more detail as to what this means? Would the measurement be taken for instance right behind the front wheel starting at the bottom of the fender to the ground and then on the rear in front of the rear wheel same process?

Yep. There's a factory diagram that shows you where to measure and what the exact measurements are (9.6" and 9.1" rear), but what you mention above is where you measure.

Scott

[bulletpruf]

Originally Posted by moparcolt

We had a Camaro that we put all new springs in. It sat so high we had a hard time getting the shocks on it.
Once we drove it a bit it settled down to near stock height.
You need to drive it for a while before you go cutting things

Yeah, that's a good point. If I can get the brakes working (installing new hard lines) this weekend, I'll try to put some miles on it.

Thanks

[bulletpruf]

Ok, since the last post, I put the car in storage, went back to Italy (had to finish up my 3 year tour), then came back to the states last December. Picked up the car in North Carolina a few months ago and brought it to San Antonio, where we live now.

Also bought a house that needed a lot work, moved in this past June, got my Alfa Romeo shipped over from Italy, picked up my 66 Fairlane GT in Georgia, bought an older Suburban 3/4 ton 4x4 that needed a bit of work (daily driver and tow vehicle), coaching my daughter's soccer team, got my new garage set up (4 post lift and the usual accoutrements), working full-time, etc, etc.

Is that enough justification for just now getting back to work on the car???

Anyway, the rear appears to have settled a bit but not a whole lot. Still had 2" from the top of the tire to the wheel well lip. I ended up just swapping the original springs back in, which dropped it 1" and it looks pretty good.

On the front, there's 4" between the top of the tire and the wheel well lip, so it has a gasser stance. I have a set of spare OEM springs, but they came off a 68 GTO with A/C, so they may be a tad high. I may end up just swapping them in for now.

Headed out of town for a few days, but hope to finish the front end when we get back.

[Charlie Brengun]

I thought I'd lower mine in the front and leave the rearend more or less stock using those cargo springs but they raise the rear a bit...
The result was not what I wanted and because I don't have or want a mullet I ended up putting lowering springs in the rear as well...

Lowering springs in the front plus cargo coils in the rear -> http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...O/IMG_0698.jpg

[dataway]

The original springs look great ... just the right stance in my opinion.

Before you cut any coils off ..... grind the tails as flat as you can like the OEM springs ... that might get you 1" all around.

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by bulletpruf

In '69 it was 9.1" at the rear and 9.6" at the front.

Those numbers are with the OE tires - which would have been about 27" tall. I don't know what tire sizes you are running, but that would have an impact on what the correct height would be.

Say for instance you run 235/60/15's up front - those are just over 26" tall - so the corrected front number would be 9.1" on the front (half of the increase/decrease in diameter).

That said, if you are running shorter tires up front, I would want to bring the front height down further so I didn't have such a large gap between the top of the tire and the fender lip.

JMHO...

[shaker455]

Originally Posted by bulletpruf

So I yanked the tired stock springs on my 68 and installed some stiffer Umi springs front and rear. Supposed to be "stock height." But that doesn't look like stock height to me.

I can remove the front coils and trim them to drop the front a bit; currently it's sitting a tad higher than the rear, so I definitely want to do this.

The problem is the back -- it looks pretty high here. And the springs have a pigtail top and bottom, so you can't trim them. Think I need to return them and ask for the springs with a 1" or 2" drop.

Car is a cruiser, but I would like it to handle reasonably well. Also has tubular control arms front and rear with Bilstein's all around.

Or I could leave it as-is, install some Buckshot Mudders, and go hit the mud...

Thanks,

Scott

After spring swap:


Before spring swap:

You could use some Super Swampers!
You could try some Beltech springs & there street 55mm shocks to match...I use them in mine.

[TedRamAirII]

I can't see a problem with the old springs. That's how I like them to sit!

[bulletpruf]

Originally Posted by Charlie Brengun

I thought I'd lower mine in the front and leave the rearend more or less stock using those cargo springs but they raise the rear a bit...
The result was not what I wanted and because I don't have or want a mullet I ended up putting lowering springs in the rear as well...

Lowering springs in the front plus cargo coils in the rear -> http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...O/IMG_0698.jpg

Yup. Not a big fan of stink bug look with the air shocks + N50/15's hanging out in the breeze....

[bulletpruf]

Originally Posted by dataway

The original springs look great ... just the right stance in my opinion.

Before you cut any coils off ..... grind the tails as flat as you can like the OEM springs ... that might get you 1" all around.

Yeah, that's what I may end up going back to. I replaced them because they're 50 years old, but the stance is right.

[bulletpruf]

Originally Posted by The Champ

Those numbers are with the OE tires - which would have been about 27" tall. I don't know what tire sizes you are running, but that would have an impact on what the correct height would be.

Say for instance you run 235/60/15's up front - those are just over 26" tall - so the corrected front number would be 9.1" on the front (half of the increase/decrease in diameter).

That said, if you are running shorter tires up front, I would want to bring the front height down further so I didn't have such a large gap between the top of the tire and the fender lip.

JMHO...

I'm running 235/60/15's front and rear so 26.1". Need to measure once I get the original springs installed.

Thanks

[bulletpruf]

Originally Posted by shaker455

You could use some Super Swampers!
You could try some Beltech springs & there street 55mm shocks to match...I use them in mine.

Nice looking truck! Is that a '71? Yours?

[bulletpruf]

Originally Posted by TedRamAirII

I can't see a problem with the old springs. That's how I like them to sit!

Yup. Stance is good, but springs are worn out. Plan to run them for now and then maybe swap to coil-overs at a later date.

[amcmike]

I prefer the more aggressive look of a modern larger rim. A set of 35x12.5R20LTs should fill the gaps nicely.

\

[bulletpruf]

Installed my used OEM springs today. First I spent an hour or so cleaning them up and then hit 'em with a fresh coat of semi-flat black.

Looks like it's still sitting about 1" higher in the front than in the back -- it could be because these springs are from a GTO with A/C and I don't have A/C and also have an aluminum intake.

Whatever the case, I'm going to run them for now, especially since I'm itching to see what the car will do in the quarter -- older worn out springs should be good for weight transfer.

I have some options if the front doesn't settle a bit -- I can trim these, I can trim the aftermarket Umi springs that I have, or I can go with coil-overs.

[67GTONUT]

I would also call UMI ..... they are wonderful to work with

[dataway]

If I am not mistaken the front is supposed to be about 1" higher than the back if you are talking about as delivered from the factory height.

[bulletpruf]

Originally Posted by dataway

If I am not mistaken the front is supposed to be about 1" higher than the back if you are talking about as delivered from the factory height.

If measuring from the rocker, it's actually .5" taller in front from the factory.