1968 Front end sit higher than back end of GTCS

[Wild Willie]

anyone know why my GTCS has always had the front end sit higher than the rear end? I'm not aware of any srping additions or changes causing this and still see the condition even after replacing the shocks, lower control arms and steering suspension. Any thoughts? View attachment 13890

 

[davidathans]

yes, i had the same problem with my car. Cut 1/2 a coil out of each spring and she'll sit like she's supposed to

 

[Mosesatm]

For some reason that's how it came from the factory. The front was 1.3" higher than the rear, but you can level it out and still be within tolerances.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://californiaspecial.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6889

Ford specs for ride height

Here are the Ford specs for ride height.

Ride heights are measured from the ground to the highest most point of the wheel well opening (which should be though the center of the wheel).

For Mustang with standard suspension:

Front - 26.68 tolerance +1.00 and -0.70
Rear - 25.39 tolerance +1.00 and -0.75

For Mustang with GT and Special Handling Package:

Front - 26.49 tolerance +1.00 and -0.70
Rear - 25.49 tolerance +1.00 and -0.75

All dimensions are for Mustang with:

Full tank of fuel
All engine fluids at full
Spare tire with wheel in design position
Front seat at rearmost position
Jack and components in design position
Tires inflated to 24-psi front and rear (for ride height evaluations only)
6.95-14 tires

Adjustments for other tires:
E70-14 subtract 0.10
7.35 x 14 add 0.20
F70-14 add 0.30
FR70-14 same as 6.95-14

All dimensions in inches

 

[390cs68rcode]

yes, i had the same problem with my car. Cut 1/2 a coil out of each spring and she'll sit like she's supposed to

Exactly what I did. Works perfectly.

 

[franklinair]

In the photo, the front appears to be OK. The rear seems to squat. Measure the heighth as per Arlie's references. (The rear leaf springs may very well be tired & weak.)
I opted for 5 leaf rear springs for mine to give the stance I prefer (and supposedly better handling). Mine measures: Front fenders= 27", rear fenders= 28"

Neil

 

[NosAvrenim]

Agree with Neil.

I recently replaced the rear leaf springs with Eaton GT comp rated and it made a huge difference (both in ride height and drive quality). The old springs were only ~6yrs old but had become sprung. I know it can be a PITA to check out them out, but would definitely suggest that as a starting point -- particularly before cutting into or replacing the front coils.

~Nate

 

[rvrtrash]

+1 for rear springs. My rear springs were shot because the engine had been stored in the trunk for 25 years. I bought the Eaton GT springs and it leveled the car out. With that being said, I like lowered front ends for the handling benefits, but a lowered front and worn out rear don't really help you.

Steve

 

[CougarCJ]

Yup, 1965-68 Mustangs and 1967-68 Cougars were tail draggers from day one.

 

[GT/CS S Code]

It only makes sense ...

Oh come on guys, there is an easy answer for this one! They were "California" cars so of course they came from the factory with a "California Rake" ...
:grin:
(... at least that is what we used to call it around here when hot rods were "raked" higher in the front end and lower in the rear end ...)

 

[calspcl]

I just replaced my rear springs with NPD GT spec springs (GT car) . It did raise the rear up a little but the front end is still higher. Time to cut a coil or buy 1" drop fron coils.....

 

[NosAvrenim]

I just replaced my rear springs with NPD GT spec springs (GT car) . It did raise the rear up a little but the front end is still higher. Time to cut a coil or buy 1" drop fron coils.....

PO swapped out front springs with 1" lowering 600lb springs (big block engine). When I combined with the same leaf springs you put on, it achieved a much more balanced rake.

~Nate

 

[Mosesatm]

Wow, compared to Neil's mine is really low at 24.75 front and 25.5 rear. On the rear the GT springs I used raised the car so high I then added 1" lowering blocks.

 

[Wild Willie]

Great feedback, spec and comments.... glad I asked as I thought that maybe a dumb question.... :smile: once I get the car back from upholstry I'll measure the heights as suggested to see where I'm at. Best Regards....
Dennis

 

[admin]

+2 (or is that +3) on the rear springs being worn. Several years ago I took mine in to a shop and had them rebuilt. Less than 2 yrs later they were already back to sagging. Perhaps I just used a poor shop, but my recommendation would be new springs rather than rebuilt.

BTW, shocks should not affect your ride height, front or rear (unless they're air shocks, which I actually had on my first Mustang!) The shocks should not be supporting the weight of the car at all. Just dampening the travel of the suspension.