aftermarket rear suspension

[coloradoHCS]

Hi all, any recommendations on rear leaf springs? I looked at Tony Branda and found 3 that would work. I want a little stiffer ride over stock and also was thinking of installing gas charged shocks front and rear. What about rear stabilizer bars? I want the HCS to have a little more aggressive stance. Any suggestions or cautions would be appreciated, thanks, Mark.

 

[PNewitt]

As a general rule, the extra weight of the fiberglas, and taillights, you might consider getting '68 convertible rear leafs. The big list of OEM leafs for Mustangs didn't include the GT/CS. Ask Branda what the '68 GT-350 uses (both FB and Conv.).

I'd also use the poly bushings, and tighen them up while the car is still up on stands. It will give you some height, although they will "seat" after a while.

Gas shocks are OK. If you want to spend the $$, get Konis.

I'll go over the suspension mods in my new book.

Paul.

 

[Mustanger]

[quote author=PNewitt link=board=1;threadid=2173;start=0#msg14746 date=1127930363]
As a general rule, the extra weight of the fiberglas, and taillights, you might consider getting '68 convertible rear leafs. The big list of OEM leafs for Mustangs didn't include the GT/CS. Ask Branda what the '68 GT-350 uses (both FB and Conv.).

I'd also use the poly bushings, and tighen them up while the car is still up on stands. It will give you some height, although they will "seat" after a while.

Gas shocks are OK. If you want to spend the $$, get Konis.

I'll go over the suspension mods in my new book.

Paul.
[/quote]

I agree with Paul 100% ;D! I would research and compare what a GT/Shelby suspension had, and especially what a convertible had, and then go from there. I also agree if you're gonna try to keep your CS or HCS "vintage," then use "era-correct" mods that would aid your performance, i.e., Shelby goodies will really fit this definition (factory, dealer, or even over-the-counter) .

 

[coloradoHCS]

Thanks guys, I will head off in that direction. I did not think of checking converts or Shelby's, thanks again!

Mark.

 

[rvrtrash]

[quote author=PNewitt link=board=1;threadid=2173;start=0#msg14746 date=1127930363]
As a general rule, the extra weight of the fiberglas, and taillights, you might consider getting '68 convertible rear leafs.

Paul.
[/quote]

Oh Paul, have you forgotten already! I weighed all those parts 2 years ago and the difference was only a couple of pounds, remember? Anyway, I ordered "stock" GT springs for mine from Eaton Detroit Spring and put KYB Gas shocks on and and it sits right, is a little stiffer but doesn't beat you up.
Steve

 

[nfrntau]

[quote author=n.id.steve link=board=1;threadid=2173;start=0#msg14760 date=1127948969]

I weighed all those parts 2 years ago
[/quote]

Has it really been two years. I remember that discusion and that the weights were close. ....... Two years, How time flys.

I have a Stam-Bar rear sway bar but can't advise if it helps or not. Still a long way from being road ready here.

 

[rvrtrash]

My bad! It was 1 year and 7 months ago, dated 2/23/04 and the post was titled GT/CS weight. OK, someone tell me again how to include a link to the post.

Steve

 

[68gt390]

Steve;
Try this link:

http://californiaspecial.com/forums/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=816


Don ;D

 

[6t8-390gt]

You may also want to try EatonDetroit Spring, they are licensed by Ford and produce a hundred or more springs for the Mustang alone. They also produce springs that meet or exceed factory specs AND lower the stance of the car by an inch. They have a comprehensive web page. Sorry I don't know the web address off hand. Do a search, I am sure you will find them. They also do front coil springs.

I used the front coils on my car and I am happy with the product.

 

[PNewitt]

I had a bad feeling you were going to "remind' me of that thread..(dang!). Not to doubt you, but those fiberglass decklids are SO heavy! But! -- There IS the added weight of the T-bird lights & housings, backing plates, and the rear panel--all of this adds up. The slightest weight can drop a Mustang 1/4 inch.

Mustangs had quite a variety of rear leaf springs. When I worked at Sacramento Mustang (circa 1991), they had a long list of OEM leaf springs for Mustangs and Cougars. I think the same list is in the "Ford Parts Book". Today, what is unfortunate is that parts dealers like to offer only a "one-size-fits-all" rear leaf spring for as many models as possible. I'll research this further for the book...

Anyway--you all should get a look at this--even though it's for '69 Bosses, it's great info!

http://www.boss302.com/spring.htm
http://www.boss302.com/techmenu.htm

Paul N.

 

[PNewitt]

Tin Hat, huh?? ZZAAPP!! (poof!)...oh, look 'dere, your scale is a bit off...oh, well!?!? (kidding)

I don't doubt you, but I don't think anyone would say that the GT/CS weighs the same in the rear as a stock '68 Mustang coupe.

Anyway--can you see what Eaton Spring has to say for our cars? is there a part number?? Is there a Ford #?? I think a lot of owners would appreciate that.

Thanks!
PaulGuruGuy

 

[coloradoHCS]

I checked with Eaton Detroit Spring. They have 3 springs for our cars that would be considered period correct. The stock 289 hard top rear springs came with an 85 lb spring rate.

The 289 GT hard top Mustang rear springs had a 114 lb spring rate. The part number is ML507. The cost is $199/pair.

The Shelby used 135 lb spring rate rear springs. This part number is ML1389 and also costs $199/pair.

Mike from Eaton said if I was going with the 135 lb Shelby springs I would also want to go with gas charged shocks.

He claims all will fit on our cars and the trade off will be handling /performance over ride comfort, epecially on bumpy roads. He also stated that he believed all springs will supply a level ride height.

Eaton Detroits web site is www.eatonspring.com

I am leaning towards the GT spring set, Mark.

 

[rvrtrash]

Wow Paul, you are truly amazing! ;D I removed a post about 15 minutes after posting it because I decided to go in a different direction and you were still able to reply. Very impressive. Anyway, since I have the utmost respect for you and your work and I can understand you not feeling comfortable with my bathroom scale measurements, especially if it's going in the next book, I won't debate the issue with you. I look forward to seeing what you find when you research it and offer my assistance in any way I can. I was at FedEx today mailing some packages and brought in my spare tail light panel and tail light assemblies and weighed them on their scale and will send those numbers directly to you.
Steve

 

[PNewitt]

Oh, gosh, Steve..
I was just pullin' your chain.

I really appreciate the time and effort that you've gone through to weigh these parts. I will include this info in the new book.

Thanks--Paul.

BTW--the Eaton Spring info is also great stuff! Thanks for going to that trouble, too!

 

[rvrtrash]

OK, you got me. :-[ Man I hate it when that happens. ;D

Steve