Anyone running a 475/375 coilover spring rate? - Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum
 1Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 12:26 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Princeton, IL
Posts: 1,436
Anyone running a 475/375 coilover spring rate?

I am looking to upgrade from my current 325/225 spring and Bilstein HD strut/shock setup to the race valved Bilsteins and stiffer springs.

My car weighs about 3400 with me in it, and is about 59/41 for weight split because of the 351W with iron heads. I mentioned that I was thinking about running 425 springs in the front cause a guy at the track with a 95 Cobra R had them, and he mentioned that 475's would be an aggressive track setup.

I only drive the car a few hundred miles a year in the summer, plus 3 or 4 track events. Street manners aren't a big concern since i don't drive it on the road very much. Is anyone running 475's up front? How does it ride?


1991 Mustang LX - PDub K&N, 1.7 RR's, BBK equal lengths, off-road H, flowmaster 2 cat-back, Pro 5.0 shifter, smog removed 190rwhp
1984 Mercury Cougar rebuilt 3.8L V6 POS w/blown headgaskets, 3.27's, currently rusting into oblivion
1986 Mustang LX 351W .040 over, 10.55:1, Vic Jr. intake, Neil Erickson ported Windsor Sr's, Lunati solid flat tappet cam, 850 QFT carb, 9 inch, C4 w/4500 stall converter, 333rwhp | 11.75 @ 114mph

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***Check out
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***
paul351w is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 10:12 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Almost Philly
Posts: 1,800
I have 475s in the front.

It is really stiff and I find myself trying to avoid incredibly rough terran like manhole covers.

ReefBlue is offline  
post #3 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 01:11 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Princeton, IL
Posts: 1,436
Maybe I will just go up to the 425's then and see how I like that. It will still be a large change over what I am currently running.

1991 Mustang LX - PDub K&N, 1.7 RR's, BBK equal lengths, off-road H, flowmaster 2 cat-back, Pro 5.0 shifter, smog removed 190rwhp
1984 Mercury Cougar rebuilt 3.8L V6 POS w/blown headgaskets, 3.27's, currently rusting into oblivion
1986 Mustang LX 351W .040 over, 10.55:1, Vic Jr. intake, Neil Erickson ported Windsor Sr's, Lunati solid flat tappet cam, 850 QFT carb, 9 inch, C4 w/4500 stall converter, 333rwhp | 11.75 @ 114mph

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***Check out
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***
paul351w is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 01:55 PM
Registered User
 
tigerdrvr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alamo, CA
Posts: 488
I'd be more concerned with going to a 375# rear spring...in effect, you're raising the rear wheel rate a bunch more, as the motion ratios are significantly different f/r...I'm also not sure why you think running that much spring is needed?

Last edited by tigerdrvr; 03-04-2009 at 01:57 PM.
tigerdrvr is offline  
post #5 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 02:26 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (14)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 157
I agree with tigerdrvr...375 sounds a little stiff.

I am running 450/300. I rarely drive the street, but I wouldnt say 450 is too stiff. Maybe I've just gotten used to it.

98 Cobra - NASA Time Trial Car - For sale
09 CTS-V - Daily Driver
06 F-150 - Hauler
BtwoG is offline  
post #6 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 03:00 PM
Registered User
 
Glenn's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Cocoa, Florida
Posts: 3,627
I'm only running 250# CO springs on the rear of my 95 GT with 425# CO fronts. I also have a TA and adjustable rear bar which makes a big difference.
Glenn is offline  
post #7 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 04:10 PM
Registered User
 
d90212's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: kailua, hawaii
Posts: 394
so what would some consider a good spring rate for the fronts for the street? im currently @ 325...was considering stiffening it up slightly with a 350 or 375 spring...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Let the Fox 4.6 Conversion Begin!
wifes ride
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

my fake snake 89 svt cobra-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
d90212 is offline  
post #8 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 04:33 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
I'll toss my crap out there...

375 fronts with 300 rears on Bilstein MM Sport valved dampers.

I find the ride a little harsh, but I honestly attribute that to the Azenis tires in 35 series and 30 series sidewall tires.

However, it passes the "Girlfriend test" and she even asks if we can take it on trips when it's nice outside. Go figure.
2k2GT is offline  
post #9 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 04:38 PM
Registered User
 
Mark Aubele's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (7)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Trafford, Pa
Posts: 158
I ran 475lb. fronts and 375lb. rears on my fox with koni DA's up front and MM bilsteins rear. The rear springs were WAY too stiff, I would've gone with 275's or 300's instead. The car was barely heavy enough to compress the rear springs more than an inch or so at rest, had a lot of problems with the rear springs unloading during heavy braking and on corner exit.

Trafford, Pa
Mark Aubele is offline  
post #10 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 04:54 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Almost Philly
Posts: 1,800
But let me add to my 475# front springs. . . .


It is REALLY fun to drive and you can really take advantage of some entrance and exit ramps.

ReefBlue is offline  
post #11 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 06:01 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Princeton, IL
Posts: 1,436
The only reason I was considering 375 rears is because one of the guys at MM said they recommend a 100lb/in lighter rear spring compared to the front spring. My current combo is 325/225. The rear probably isn't too bad, but the fronts are too soft for open track use, the car rolls over onto the outside front wheel.

I asked about bigger front bars and they recomended running heavier springs instead.

1991 Mustang LX - PDub K&N, 1.7 RR's, BBK equal lengths, off-road H, flowmaster 2 cat-back, Pro 5.0 shifter, smog removed 190rwhp
1984 Mercury Cougar rebuilt 3.8L V6 POS w/blown headgaskets, 3.27's, currently rusting into oblivion
1986 Mustang LX 351W .040 over, 10.55:1, Vic Jr. intake, Neil Erickson ported Windsor Sr's, Lunati solid flat tappet cam, 850 QFT carb, 9 inch, C4 w/4500 stall converter, 333rwhp | 11.75 @ 114mph

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***Check out
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***
paul351w is offline  
post #12 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 06:15 PM
Registered User
 
tigerdrvr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alamo, CA
Posts: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul351w View Post
The only reason I was considering 375 rears is because one of the guys at MM said they recommend a 100lb/in lighter rear spring compared to the front spring. My current combo is 325/225. The rear probably isn't too bad, but the fronts are too soft for open track use, the car rolls over onto the outside front wheel.

I asked about bigger front bars and they recomended running heavier springs instead.
That's kind of interesting, the "100lb/in lighter in the rear" rule of thumb... As I understand it, a Fox/SN converted to coil overs has approx. .9f/1.1r motion ratios, so that would indicate, for every additional 1lb/in in spring rate, the rear picks up nearly 20% more wheel rate...unless I'm doing my math wrong, again...
tigerdrvr is offline  
post #13 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 07:09 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
I was also told/made aware of the "100lb spring rate rule of thumb front to back" statement.

I prefer to have a car setup more for autocross over open track, which is why I have the marginally higher rear rate spring. Couple that with the fact that the car really has no horsepower so this helps me rotate the car with the gas pedal when needed.

The MM adjustable rear swaybar i'm finding out is just pure awesomeness. Glad I have that piece.
2k2GT is offline  
post #14 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 07:35 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Herndon, VA
Posts: 305
I have 500's up front with rod ends for swaybar links. It rides stiff, but the swaybar links made a bigger ride impact than going from 400->500 lb springs. My car was 2950 lbs and 54% front weight when I last drove it on the street. I run 500 lb conventional springs on the rear (roughly equivalent to a 250 lb coil over) with a 9.5" panhard bar height and the car is pretty well balanced.

Justin
Fast92Coupe is offline  
post #15 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 07:54 PM
Registered User
 
tigerdrvr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alamo, CA
Posts: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2k2GT View Post
I was also told/made aware of the "100lb spring rate rule of thumb front to back" statement.

I just don't get making a linear assumption from a non-linear relationship.

E.G. at 375f/275r, front wheel rate is 337.5 and rear is 302.5 (using MM's given motion ratios for their coilover locations). The rear wheel rate is approx 89.5% of the front. Going to a 475f spring rate and using the "100lb/in difference f/r" indicates a 375r spring. Using the same leverage factor, I come up with 427.5 front and 412.5 rear wheel rates...or, rear equals 96.5% of front. I'm no mathematician or engineer, but I'd have to guess that would have a significant impact of f/r balance and promote oversteer.
tigerdrvr is offline  
post #16 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 07:56 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
I'm probably the dumbest person in this section, so I'm just going by what MM has told me/suggested. (why I run NON-adjustable dampers. )
2k2GT is offline  
post #17 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 07:59 PM
Registered User
 
tigerdrvr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alamo, CA
Posts: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2k2GT View Post
I'm probably the dumbest person in this section, so I'm just going by what MM has told me/suggested. (why I run NON-adjustable dampers. )
I might give you a run for the "dumbest" prize, but I'm not afraid of adjustable dampers...

I'm not saying that MM is "wrong", if that is what they suggest (the 100lb difference as a rule of thumb), hell, I don't know...I'm just saying it doesn't make any sense to me.
tigerdrvr is offline  
post #18 of 51 Old 03-04-2009, 08:02 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerdrvr View Post
I might give you a run for the "dumbest" prize, but I'm not afraid of adjustable dampers...

I'm not saying that MM is "wrong", if that is what they suggest (the 100lb difference as a rule of thumb), hell, I don't know...I'm just saying it doesn't make any sense to me.
It doesn't make any sense to me to run a softer front swaybar....but I did it because they said to(and smarter people on here said to as well).

I really hope MM doesn't start selling muffler bearings....
2k2GT is offline  
post #19 of 51 Old 03-05-2009, 12:05 AM
Registered User
 
tigerdrvr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alamo, CA
Posts: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2k2GT View Post
It doesn't make any sense to me to run a softer front swaybar....but I did it because they said to(and smarter people on here said to as well).

I really hope MM doesn't start selling muffler bearings....

Well...if you said your car was pushing or something, then someone might say something like, "hey, maybe you might try a softer front bar"...makes sense, to me.

But, the f/r spring deal (constant at 100lb difference), I don't understand.

Last edited by tigerdrvr; 03-05-2009 at 12:28 AM.
tigerdrvr is offline  
post #20 of 51 Old 03-05-2009, 12:43 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Austin
Posts: 346
I'm getting 400lb springs with my granatelli front end with Koni Yellow double adjustable fronts...

What should I be looking into for rear end mods? Car is 100% stock at the moment in the rear..

Anyone know where I can find the information I need to know to determine what setup I need?

Its looking like I'm going to be holding off on my tranny swap and finishing up the suspension before moving on to something else..

1994 Mustang GT
FRPP 70mm TB.. Typhoon intake .. GT40 Heads.. Paxton SN2000 @ 6lbs.. 42# FRPP injectors.. BBK Shorty Headers.. O/R H-Pipe.. No Mufflers.. Pro 5.0 Shifter.. AEM Plug-N-Play Standalone.. AEM EPM.. LS1 coils.. GM 3bar MAP
neoxaero is offline  
post #21 of 51 Old 03-05-2009, 03:10 AM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
A 3 link rear is what you need.
2k2GT is offline  
post #22 of 51 Old 03-05-2009, 01:14 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Princeton, IL
Posts: 1,436
I guess I should mention that I am running a Tri-Link in the rear with an MM panhard bar setup.

I'm starting to think that I might go with a 475/300 or 475/275 setup as my rear springs are pretty stiff right now, and they are only 225's. I have only put ~2000 miles on the car in the last 4 or 5 years, so I can deal with some roughness.

1991 Mustang LX - PDub K&N, 1.7 RR's, BBK equal lengths, off-road H, flowmaster 2 cat-back, Pro 5.0 shifter, smog removed 190rwhp
1984 Mercury Cougar rebuilt 3.8L V6 POS w/blown headgaskets, 3.27's, currently rusting into oblivion
1986 Mustang LX 351W .040 over, 10.55:1, Vic Jr. intake, Neil Erickson ported Windsor Sr's, Lunati solid flat tappet cam, 850 QFT carb, 9 inch, C4 w/4500 stall converter, 333rwhp | 11.75 @ 114mph

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***Check out
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***
paul351w is offline  
post #23 of 51 Old 03-05-2009, 07:00 PM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 68
I'm feeling a bit confused here reading what you all are saying that MM told you. What they have me using is 275 front and 475 rear. I have had others tell me a 325 to 375 front. Apparently, MM sells 475 as the lowest rate for an IRS.


Did I get bad info? Are they just selling me whatever they had? What are your opinions? I'm sorry to hijack the thread but it is the same type of question...I hope.

So, Am I gonna end up swapping out my front springs to get my car to drive correctly? Granted, my car will mostly see the street but I want it to be a spirited street car. Not a 66 Impala. Would the IRS make that much difference in spring rates? Seems like it should be a lower rate over a solid axle but I will gladly accept the "dumbest guy in this section" award.
4.6_82GT is offline  
post #24 of 51 Old 03-05-2009, 09:06 PM
Registered User
 
tigerdrvr's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alamo, CA
Posts: 488
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4.6_82GT View Post
I'm feeling a bit confused here reading what you all are saying that MM told you. What they have me using is 275 front and 475 rear. I have had others tell me a 325 to 375 front. Apparently, MM sells 475 as the lowest rate for an IRS.


Did I get bad info? Are they just selling me whatever they had? What are your opinions? I'm sorry to hijack the thread but it is the same type of question...I hope.

So, Am I gonna end up swapping out my front springs to get my car to drive correctly? Granted, my car will mostly see the street but I want it to be a spirited street car. Not a 66 Impala. Would the IRS make that much difference in spring rates? Seems like it should be a lower rate over a solid axle but I will gladly accept the "dumbest guy in this section" award.
I've never done anything with the IRS Mustang rear, so this is just based on what information is on the MM site (look at their FAQ section)...but, they give wheel rates at 50% of coil over spring rate, so that gives a wheel rate of 237.5 with the 475 spring rate. With the front coilover at 90% of the spring rate, that gives a 247.5 wheel rate. As the IRS has much different characteristics than a live axle related to compliance, having wheel rates close front to rear makes sense to me. With the live axle, all other things being equal, you would run a softer wheel rate in the rear than in the front.

But, I'm still looking for an answer as to why MM would suggest always running a 100lb differential f/r on coilovers, when the front and rear motion ratios are so different. That would alter f/r balance as you went up and down the spring rates available...unless, they suggest that differential as a starting point, to be changed after testing to suit the users preferences.
tigerdrvr is offline  
post #25 of 51 Old 03-05-2009, 11:16 PM
Registered User
 
BULLITT1992's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (12)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ocean Springs, MS
Posts: 3,363
Does anyone know what the spread should be between Front and Rear Wheel Rates for more freely articulating rear suspensions such as TA, 3-Link, Steeda 5 Link?

Is that where 100# is recommended?

2001 Mustang Bullitt #01992
BULLITT1992 is offline  
post #26 of 51 Old 03-05-2009, 11:27 PM
Registered User
 
BULLITT1992's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (12)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ocean Springs, MS
Posts: 3,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4.6_82GT View Post
I'm feeling a bit confused here reading what you all are saying that MM told you. What they have me using is 275 front and 475 rear. I have had others tell me a 325 to 375 front. Apparently, MM sells 475 as the lowest rate for an IRS.


Did I get bad info? Are they just selling me whatever they had? What are your opinions? I'm sorry to hijack the thread but it is the same type of question...I hope.

So, Am I gonna end up swapping out my front springs to get my car to drive correctly? Granted, my car will mostly see the street but I want it to be a spirited street car. Not a 66 Impala. Would the IRS make that much difference in spring rates? Seems like it should be a lower rate over a solid axle but I will gladly accept the "dumbest guy in this section" award.
275 Front works out to 247 wheel rate
475 Rear works out to 237.5 wheel rate

Per MM's calculation that front coil over wheel rate is 90% of spring rate. IRS Coilovers wheel rate is 50% of spring rate. The reason that it looks odd to you is because of the effectiveness of the spring (coilover app) in a Solid Axle (110%) vs IRS (50%)

This is all per MM's website

http://www.maximummotorsports.com/co...q_coilover.php

2001 Mustang Bullitt #01992
BULLITT1992 is offline  
post #27 of 51 Old 03-06-2009, 06:47 AM
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 68
Thanks Guys for the replies. It makes me feel better.

But, Im still not close to that 100# difference you are talking about.

I guess I will wait and see how it drives.
4.6_82GT is offline  
post #28 of 51 Old 03-06-2009, 09:12 AM
CSG
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Sulphur, La.
Posts: 1,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by BULLITT1992 View Post
Does anyone know what the spread should be between Front and Rear Wheel Rates for more freely articulating rear suspensions such as TA, 3-Link, Steeda 5 Link?

Is that where 100# is recommended?
the 100# deal (right or wrong) is for the aftermarket rear set-ups like the ones you mention.
CSG is offline  
post #29 of 51 Old 03-06-2009, 09:58 AM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Princeton, IL
Posts: 1,436
I think the 100# spread deal depends on the car. I have 325 front and 225 rears right now, I can bounce my whole weight (about 255) on the rear deck and the car hardly squats down.

When I do the same on the front I can get 2-3 inches of movement. I think I am going to do more like 150 or 175# spread when I switch the springs out to try to balance the car more. Right now the front outside corner is rolling over in the corners.

1991 Mustang LX - PDub K&N, 1.7 RR's, BBK equal lengths, off-road H, flowmaster 2 cat-back, Pro 5.0 shifter, smog removed 190rwhp
1984 Mercury Cougar rebuilt 3.8L V6 POS w/blown headgaskets, 3.27's, currently rusting into oblivion
1986 Mustang LX 351W .040 over, 10.55:1, Vic Jr. intake, Neil Erickson ported Windsor Sr's, Lunati solid flat tappet cam, 850 QFT carb, 9 inch, C4 w/4500 stall converter, 333rwhp | 11.75 @ 114mph

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***Check out
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
***
paul351w is offline  
post #30 of 51 Old 03-12-2009, 08:42 AM
Registered User
 
90lx86svo's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: DFW/TX
Posts: 630
I am running 450# front and 325# rear, both c/o's. I am thinking about going to 475# front and using a 4 cyl bar on my LX.

90LX,Griggs,Cobra Brakes,ABS,331
86 SVO
95 Lightning
90lx86svo is offline  
post #31 of 51 Old 03-12-2009, 04:17 PM
Registered User
 
cobraaph's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (11)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Independence, MO
Posts: 383
I am running 600# up front and 325# in the back with MM coil-overs. It's working pretty good but the ride is stiff. It's also my daily ride. Up front I have the big Steeda sway bar and in the back I have a Kenny Brown Panhard Bar with the Steeda 5-link 2 uppers and adj. sway bar and MM lowers. I removed the stock sway bar over the winter.

Can't wait too see how it all works at the first event in April.

1997 Cobra, Born 3/19/1997, #3978/6961
#49 CP, Mix of Maximum Motorsports, Agent 47, Fays2
2011 GT, Giving in to modifications
cobraaph is offline  
post #32 of 51 Old 03-12-2009, 04:27 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobraaph View Post
I am running 600# up front and 325# in the back with MM coil-overs. It's working pretty good but the ride is stiff. It's also my daily ride. Up front I have the big Steeda sway bar and in the back I have a Kenny Brown Panhard Bar with the Steeda 5-link 2 uppers and adj. sway bar and MM lowers. I removed the stock sway bar over the winter.

Can't wait too see how it all works at the first event in April.
Stock K-member/A-arms/stock location springs?
2k2GT is offline  
post #33 of 51 Old 03-12-2009, 04:30 PM
Registered User
 
cobraaph's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (11)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Independence, MO
Posts: 383
Quote:
Stock K-member/A-arms/stock location springs?
Stock K and A-arms. Coil-overs all around.

1997 Cobra, Born 3/19/1997, #3978/6961
#49 CP, Mix of Maximum Motorsports, Agent 47, Fays2
2011 GT, Giving in to modifications
cobraaph is offline  
post #34 of 51 Old 03-12-2009, 04:33 PM
Registered User
 
2k2GT's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (0)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 6,493
Wow...thats a jump in spring rate from front to back...
2k2GT is offline  
post #35 of 51 Old 03-12-2009, 07:06 PM
Registered User
 
cobraaph's Avatar
 
Trader Feedback: (11)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Independence, MO
Posts: 383
Quote:
Wow...thats a jump in spring rate from front to back...
While I don't think the overall weight distribution is this bad, the distributed wheel rates for those spring rates comes out to 60% front and 40% rear (540 lb. and 358 lb.). Even at 55%/45%, the spring rates would be 549 lb./367 lb. which would be closer to the weight distribution. I'm going to corner weight my car in a couple weeks so I'll know more where I'm at then.

1997 Cobra, Born 3/19/1997, #3978/6961
#49 CP, Mix of Maximum Motorsports, Agent 47, Fays2
2011 GT, Giving in to modifications
cobraaph is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forums : Corral.net Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome