About Us

marauder · 03-24-2005, 06:01 PM

Keep in mind that my right front spring is not presently seated correctly now. This was how I bought the car but didn't notice because there was a spacer in the left rear spring pushing the right front down.

All measurrments are the vertical distance between the tire and wheel well opening.

Passenger front 3"
Driver front 2"

Passenger rear 2"
Driver rear 1"

Before I replaced the rear springs the rear wheels came to the bottom of the wheel wells.

I'm hoping to end up with about 1-1/2" all the way around with the new front springs....find out tomorrow.

FYI - 235/60-15 front, 295/50-15 back

marauder · 03-25-2005, 04:19 PM

The saga continues...the Hotchkis springs brought the front down approximately 3/4" on both sides however I'm still not symetric.

The gap between the top of the tire is now:

Passenger front 2-1/4"
Driver front 1-1/8

Passenger rear 2" unchanged
driver rear 1-1/4" increased 1/4" from before most likely because the new front right spring is seathed correctly.

I will probably take it back to the dealer, maybe a different dealer next week.

Ken K · 03-25-2005, 04:49 PM

There are too many variables to ever make it perfect. One side of the body could be made different than the other side. They make tolerances built into the car. How does it ride with the new front springs? I'm surprised it only brought the front end down 3/4 inch.

marauder · 03-25-2005, 05:05 PM

Yeah, I'm surprised too. It definetly handles better but I did replace a lower ball joint and some a-arm bushings as well.

This has me confused, the rear tires are now rubbing from the outside tire when I make a tight turn. This didn't happen before. Perhaps the body would lean in before raising the outside fender and now with firmer front springs this in not happening?

Ken K · 03-25-2005, 05:15 PM

When the front end is stiffer than the rear, you will get over steer. Use a rear sway bar, it should solve the problem.

marauder · 03-25-2005, 05:24 PM

I've been meaning to buy a book to figure out exactly what oversteer and understeer mean. Any chance you have a condensed definition or a good web site to reference?

mchell · 03-25-2005, 05:33 PM

yep, those damn front springs.

I feel your pain......3/4" is actually a pretty good reduction....of course like yours mine neede to drop at least an 1 1/2"

The only way the rears are going to rub are with big tires and/or a backspace of less than 4 3/4". If you are also running a bigger tire and the rear wheel well opening is below the tire, the body/suspension/tire flexing will make the tire rub around corners.

marauder · 03-25-2005, 08:27 PM

I'm using 4-1/2" backspace and 295/50-15s. The rear did not rub before so I'll try sway bars before buying new wheels since bars were on the list anyway...

Might just try and return these springs and try the "small block" ones.

What was I saying about doing it more than once!

mchell · 03-26-2005, 06:45 AM

Wow.........I can't believe you are running a 295/50/15 tire with a 4.5" backspace, and it worked before!! I would think you would need at least a 5.0"- 5.5" backspace to fit that tire under there. I couldnt fit my 275/60/15 under my car with a 4.5" backspace (I tried). Your rear must have lowered some to make the tire start to rub.

Anyways, save your money, cut 3/4 to 1 coil off the moogs and you will be good to go. Scrap the 295/50s and run 275/60s or get a rim that has more backspace. Your Goat will then look and drive like you want it.

been there done that...

mchell · 03-26-2005, 07:44 AM

Here is an old pic of mine before I lowered it properly.

mchell · 03-26-2005, 07:49 AM

again, AFTER I lowered it

marauder · 03-26-2005, 03:37 PM

Yep, the front is about as high as mine was. Just not right is it!

marauder · 03-26-2005, 03:44 PM

It does looks good in the second pic.

I like the firmness of the new Hotchkis front springs so I might just keep them as it did lower the front some. At least the right front tire doesn't rub anymore (just the back). I'll try a couple things and report back.

mchell · 03-26-2005, 04:47 PM

yeah, everybody was calling me high-boy for a while. What was funny tho is some guy's liked the look and others hated it. I never got used to it myself.

GREATGTO · 03-28-2005, 05:56 PM

I prefer my cars to sit low, i know header clearance is a problem with some cars.I always thought around an inch to an inch and a half height difference from front to rear was a good starting point for a good looking stance

marquemarc · 03-29-2005, 06:49 PM

If you guys keep back issues of "High Performance Pontiac" magazines, look at May 2003, vol. 24, no. 5, pg. 58-59. That's the way I want my 69 GTO convertible to sit; the front tires' top "just" under the lip of the fender and the rear a little under stock height. The look has the right rake, not too extreme. The article tells everything the guy used, very interesting and creative (he claims that it handles like a late model Firebird). Marauder, those big tires in the back makes your car look great. Fill them wheel wells anyway you look at the car. As long as they don't rub and sacifice the ride quality, that's all right by me.

marauder · 03-29-2005, 07:24 PM

Thanks Marquemarc, I'll have to see if I can purchase back issues of that mag. I was Pontiacless and without a subscription back in 2003.

It was pics of Mike Massey's yellow '68 with the 295/50-15s on the back that made we want to go that route. I like the way that car sits.

http://ultimategto.com/1968cvcars24.htm

Today I received an email from one of the tech guys at Hotchkis who informed me that I could trim the springs 1/4 coil at a time to get the proper level without losing the integrity of the springs. I'll be doing this after I resolve the lean issue.

Bob Hall · 03-29-2005, 08:39 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ken K:
The way a variable rate spring works is, you get a normal ride until you get a load on the spring. One end of the spring is wound tighter than the other end. Rear springs are different than the fronts, they don't use as high a spring rate. Springs from 78-87 G body cars also fit on the 1967 and latter, I'm sure there are other that will also work. Once someone figures out the exact combination of front and rear springs, everybody can use it. The latter cars are easy, you can just buy springs that you know will work. Back then then didn't care how the car handled, it was built to go in a strait line and have a soft ride. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ken,

I will be purchasing new springs for my 72 Lux LeMans shortly. Basically, I would like to have at least an even looking stance on it. The car is equipped with a 350 2 bbl, A/C, and AT. The part that intrigued me was your comment about the 78-87 G Body cars. My 84 Monte SS is equipped with the F41 suspension (whatever that means). I've owned the car for about 10 years now and as far as I know, the coil springs are still the original.

I'm guessing with what you said, I could in theory buy springs for my Monte and throw them on the Lux LeMans? The only thing about that is I'm not all too happy with the stance on the Monte either. My Monte weighs 3,550 lbs and I'm sure the Lux weighs a bit more.

This pic was taken about 3 years ago and it sits the same way today

The sad thing about all of this vehicle stance issue is my wifes car. She has an AWD Olds Bravada that has the perfect stance in my opinion.

Basically, right now, my car scrapes my exhaust when ever I go over a speed bump unless I gently roll over at a speed that does not register on my speedometer. I don't even have headers installed yet because of this. I also scrape if I pull into an establishment that you have to enter through a ramped sidewalk. I would like to stay in the $250 range for a set of coil springs and not have my front end sticking up in the air. Is this possible?

Here is a link to the current stance of it.

Current Lux LeMans stance

Thanks,
Bob

Ken K · 03-29-2005, 09:29 PM

Monte Carlo SS springs front springs won't work on a 72 A body. The front springs for a Monte Carlo SS are Moog #5608, they are good springs. I ordered a set and they came in a box that said "Matched Pair Of Peformance Springs" I used CC627 for the rear of a 79 El Camino.

Ken K · 03-29-2005, 09:40 PM

The problem Marauder is having revolves around the big block springs. A Pontiac weighs less than a big block so it's harder to figure out what the spring height needs to be. They only make a few springs for an A body with the big wire diameter so if it does not sit right they will need to be trimmed. There are numerious spring heights avalable with a wire diamter that is right for a Pontiac engine so if you need one trimmed you can start with the right height spring and cut 1 coil out to drop the front end.

Menu

About Us