Vintage Mustang Forums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So, I am finally getting around to ordering parts for the front end of my 69 Mach. It's a 351W, automatic with PS and AC just for reference.

I just want a decent handling car that rides good. Not looking for anything crazy and not concourse correct. I like the factory stance though, with the front end sitting a tad higher than the rear. Lowering the front an inch or less would be ok, but not required. I'm running original 14" wheels now and likely will not go over 15" ever.

Here is what I am getting so far:

Moog upper Ball Joints
Moog Lower Control Arms
Opentracker Roller Perches
Opentracker Roller Idler
Gas-a-just front shocks
GR-2 rear shocks
1" Addco front sway bar

Obviously, anything else I find loose or cracking bushings will get changed. Btw, all bushings will be rubber except the sway bar bushings.

Now I had planned on just reusing the original springs but for what a set of new stock Detroit/Eatons cost, I may just throw in a new set. BUT, now I'm thinking I might want a little stiffer spring up front. Can anybody say for sure, if I get the Heavy Duty application Eaton spring for a 69, will it keep the stock height? If you look at the application chart (on the NPD site) they list a stiffer rate spring as HD. I DON'T want to deal with cutting the coils so if there is question, I will likely go with stockers and call it a day.

Any opinions? Thanks,
Dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,866 Posts
I like the factory stance though, with the front end sitting a tad higher than the rear. Lowering the front an inch or less would be ok, but not required.
This is a misconception, the cars were supposed to be level. Variations did occur, of course. Mostly, they sagged, 6 cyl and standard V8 cars were known to sag within a few years of being new.

You should investigate progressive-rate springs. Smooth ride, tighten up immediately when they begin to compress.

Everything you list is a good idea, but you also need to to this:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I always thought the front sat a tad higher from the factory, but I certainly am not an expert.

I have considered the Shelby drop. I love the idea, I really do. But I just am not sure I can bring myself to drill the extra holes in an otherwise original car. I know that is a stupid reason, but I have a hard time getting past that.

The prog rate springs are a good idea. Again though, I am having a hard time finding a brand and/or vendor that will have the desired height results. I have read so many posts here about people who buy new springs and wind up with the wrong ride height (IE: not what they wanted).

Any consensus on the best prog rate springs?

Oh yeah, great Mach ad. I have not seen that one before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,121 Posts
I went with 620 performance springs 1" drop springs when I did my suspension. Since you are doing all this you may as well change the 40 year old saggy springs. Even with 1" drop springs it still may sitter higher in front then previouslly. Mine did - I just cut a 1/4 of one ring off and looks fine. Rides fine - not too stiff. You may want to check on progressive springs before you buy them. If you don't have the right height and want to cut them I don't think that is recommended for those types.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,866 Posts
I have considered the Shelby drop. I love the idea, I really do. But I just am not sure I can bring myself to drill the extra holes in an otherwise original car. I know that is a stupid reason, but I have a hard time getting past that.
Klaus Arning developed the "drop" as part of the IRS prototype for Ford, to match the front suspension to the IRS. It turned out the handling improvement was mostly due to the "drop", although the IRS was excellent. The IRS was axed because it would have cost, as an option, more than the 289HP engine. Shelby noted the drop, and used it on all 65, and early 66 GT350's.

The drop improves handling of any Mustang so much it was absolutely stupid of Ford not to relocate the holes immediately. Imagine Ford's reputation if stock, non-GT Mustangs had out-handled SS Camaros.

I share your reluctance to drill holes in a nice car, but unless your car will be a trailer queen, and is never actually driven anywhere, you should do the drop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,184 Posts
I did the Arning drop with the roller perches and love the handling.
Tried the 620 springs but it was WAY too low as the front spoiler was 3/4 inch off the ground, so I went with the BB 800# stock springs to hold the 351CJ up some and stock leafs in the rear.
This is my Mach with 14's but will be going 15 later.

:eek: Please excuse the bump to her nose, it will be repaired as soon as I get some time.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,384 Posts
Maybe you should consider a set of Boss 302 springs. That will give you a slightly lower and slightly stiffer ride, but still reasonably close to stock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,991 Posts
i would say just stay with your original springs. you don't sound like you're overly interested in changing the performance and in addition it sounds like you don't want to screw around with possibly cutting coils.

NPD claimed the HD spring you're speaking of are 428 lbs/in which is the spring i'm installing. i wouldn't be surprised if i end up cutting a little bit of the coils.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Stay with the stock coils. Using the the gas adjust shocks up front will stiffen it up plenty. Good idea with GR2 on rear. Removing my rear gas adjusts this month and installing GR2 also.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Thinking about the NPD 550# "Contour Coils" that are powder coated silver. Anybody have good or bad luck with these? Can anybody compare them to the Grab-a-track 620's? Btw, is that a 620 wire diameter or 620#?

Or...the Global West 1" lowering springs? They are "linear"...my head hurts now. How do they compare to the others?

I guess I'll have my stock springs if all else fails. BUT, I think my stocks are probably not original. Ride height is pretty high for 40 year old coils.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,749 Posts
I have tried a few things. Here are my findings
1. The roller perches are a great change.
2. KYB-Gas-Adjusts are far too stiff. Use the GR-2s or even better the Bilsteins from street or track or Maier.
3. Street or Track strut rods make the front end seem more "supple" for lack of a better word.
4. The Grab-A-Track 620 coils are really 580 according to opentracker. I use them and they work great on the street.
5. Do at least the Arning drop or better, the Pro-Motorsports negative wedge kit.

My 69 mustang rides pretty well and handles way better with the above mods.
The roller perch and the strut rod really reduce the binding in the front end.
The 620 is a LB per inch rate. Note that many springs have a different rate than advertised.
Great folks to deal with:
Shaun from Street or Track www.streetortrack.com
John from Opentracker racing products www.opentrackerracingproducts.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,991 Posts
does anyone else find the spring ratings annoying (if they even indicate a rating)? Why can't vendors just clearly specify the nominal spring rate (lbs/in) and maybe the wire diameter. It seems like a very confusing topic.

For the 620's i've seen 620 lb/in, 580 lb/in and 560 lb/in. Are these really different springs? Or is a difference of 60 lb/in negligible?
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top