What would these be called?

[Kats66Pny]

I know they are springs, and u-bolts. I took these off my mustang. They were attached on the rear axle, I guess used to tighten up the suspension back there.





I have no plans on putting them back on so just going to sell them to help buy other parts I need but I have no idea what to call them or how to price them. Iv'e looked online different places, and I keep seeing similar things for off-roading suspension. I'm confused. Nothing new though!

[johnpro]

They are coil springs for the rear.  Good luck in selling them.  Anyone that would put coil springs on a leaf spring car, leaving the leaf springs on, should have their back year mechanic's license revoked, and should be forced to hand over all of their tools to prevent this kind of mis-behavior in the future.

When you advertise them, just call them Redneck Hack Job coil springs for the absolute laziest of shade tree mechanics.

Good for you on removing them.  That's one of the worst P.O. hack jobs yet!!!

[Kats66Pny]

Well I do live in Texas and the PO did all the stuff himself. So yeah, redneck hack job is a good description.  I think the PO was just being lazy when it came down to certain things. And of course, I get to be the lucky one to unFUBAR everything he did.

[AzPete]

Those are the standard after market over load springs available at a lot of parts stores. Most people used then to assist a weak set of leaf springs. They normally had a load increase of 500 to 1500 lbs. Those look like the 500 lb. ones based on the coil diameter. I have used them on old home made trailers used to haul trash and such. If you got $10 for them, I would be shocked. Other than what I have used them for on junk trailers, they work good to hold down a trash can.

[Kats66Pny]

Ahh ok. Thanks guys! Maybe I'll just use them as paper weights instead.  :lol

[AzPete]

As mentioned before by Dave, it appears that you possibly have air shocks on the rear. If so, have you lowered the air pressure to about 5 psi to see how the car sits.

If one chooses to run air shocks, one may have problems with the upper shock mounts as the body is not designed to hold the weight and load of the rear of the car. They are frowned on in most locations.

[Kats66Pny]

Is there a sure way to tell if those are air shocks? If they are, what's recommended instead of them?  And not really sure how to go about lowering the air pressure.

[AzPete]

Look at the shock body from under the car. Air shocks will have a hard plastic line screwed into the side of the shock body and a rubber air bag may be seen around the shock.

Follow the air line away from the shock and locate where the valve is mounted. Normally in the trunk floor or around the lic. plate. It is nothing more than an air valve like a tire has. Remove the cap if there is one and depress the valve button. Air shocks have been known to hold 5 to 200 psi but it is a very LOW volume of air.

[Kats66Pny]

Ok I see what you're talking about. Didn't see any rubber air bag. Saw the lines, one from each shock body, and both go to a valve near the license plate area.

If one chooses to run air shocks, one may have problems with the upper shock mounts as the body is not designed to hold the weight and load of the rear of the car.

What helps limit the problems with upper shock mounts?

Someone send me a mustangs for dummies book please.  :lol

[AzPete]

When running air shocks with them aired up, it transfers the weight of the car from the spring mounts to the shock mounts. You could air the shocks up full and actually remove the rear shackles and the car would not drop. Of course you would not want to move the car any at this time.

The top mount for the shock is simply not designed to take that weight. They can crack. On yours, I would recommend checking real good for cracks around the mounts. There is not any correct way to make the body capable of handling air shocks to carry the weight.

Use the proper style springs to set the rear ride height and a good, quality set of shocks.

If you look at my sig. pic, the rear of my car is raised 5" over the front, comparing the wheel well measurements. This is done by the correct rear leaf springs, no long shackles or air shocks. The PO had air shocks and once I got the springs on, I just let the air out so there is no load on the mounts.

That is another item....does your car have long shackles on the rear spring mounts? I do not remember from past pics. If it does, they just flatten out the spring and end up ruining them and the ride and handling.

[Kats66Pny]

does your car have long shackles on the rear spring mounts?

I have no clue.  :shy

[AzPete]

In this pic, look just below the back up lights for two long pieces sticking down. The rear spring is attached there.

Stock shackles are about 4" long with no extra holes in them.



Here is a close up

[Kats66Pny]

Nope, no long shackles under there. But there was a HUGE frickin spider that scared the crap out of me.



You can also see those lines and valve you told me about coming from the shock body.

[AzPete]

Well, that is a good point.

The spider will be one of many small things that will wake you up fast. Really nice when both hands a holding a part and the spider shows up close by. Might want to do a bug bomb....

If there is any air in the shocks, let it out and see where the car sits. If it has wide tires, the body could sit down on them.

[tarafied1]

I know how Dave feels about air shocks. (I believe it's something like "If I bought and old Mustang and it had air shocks and an old rotting dead cat on the dash, I'd get rid of the air shocks first") I have never had any but I know it's an old drag racer's trick to load one (the right rear) more to help keep the rear planted on a hard launch. They are a "band-aid" and as Pete says, not good for the upper shock mount area. Since your car was set-up for racing the coils and shocks may have been an attempt to get the car to "hook-up". I feel the same about long shackles as Dave feels about air shocks, they actually ruin what's left of the spring arch and look incredibly stupid sticking out from under the car. One thing classic Mustang's (even restored cars) often have is bad stance, the front sits way to high and the back too low. For the time and money invested in coils and air shocks, the PO could have just put on better leaf springs IMO

[Kats66Pny]

After doing some googling for rear suspension stuff - damn of insomnia  :po I figured I might as well replace the shocks in the rear with the KYB GR-2. As for the leaf springs, I'm not really sure which ones to get. 4 leaf? 5 leaf? Mid eye? Want I would like to do is have the rear sit slightly higher than the front of the car. I think it just looks cooler.  

Edit: Ok I think I know what I need. I'm in love with look of AzPete's pony and it's what I want!  :vic

[silverblueBP]

Good lord, we have another "skyjacker" in our midst  :amaz

[Kats66Pny]

Bite me!  :bart :lol

[AzPete]

Edit: Ok I think I know what I need. I'm in love with look of AzPete's pony and it's what I want!  :vic

I can save you some work.....it is for sale.........

The springs I used... http://www.jcwhitney.com/extra-high-lift-rear-leaf-springs-for-cars/p2005960.jcwx

Then you buy shocks that are three inches longer to have full travel. Stock shocks have been used with mount extensions which I don't like.

[Kats66Pny]

If I could afford it, I'd take it in a heartbeat! Unless you want to trade it for my shitty 66 coupe.  :lol

I showed hubby the picture.. his response was 'you don't need it that high'. Such a hater.

[AzPete]

If I could afford it, I'd take it in a heartbeat! Unless you want to trade it for my shitty 66 coupe.  :lol

I showed hubby the picture.. his response was 'you don't need it that high'. Such a hater.

One thing, the lift in the back is not an expensive thing since most buy new springs and shocks anyway.

Hmmmm, don't need a trade (having just bought JohnPro's '66) but prices are flexible......

[Dne']

I remember helping my brother install some air shocks on his '67 Mustang coupe, in about 1975 ish. When done, the car sat up nicely, but when going over bumps or speed bumps, the rear end would hop off the ground, and rode like a rock! Funny, it wasn't even very old of a car at that time! He traded it in on a Triumph spitfire(i think), they gave him 500 trade in! I could have strangled him! I would have given him 500, even back then~ it was a neat stang! sigh!

I bought my leaf springs from Laurel mountain, 1.5" above stock spring height and shocks. I like the stance of my stang, not too high, not too low~ settling may occur.

[70_Fastback]

Good lord, we have another "skyjacker" in our midst  :amaz

:Kburn

[Kats66Pny]

Haters!  :craz

I could always part out my 66.. might take me a year to sell everything + sell my kidney on the black market, and then I might be able to afford it .  :lol
I do have a question though about that set up. What's it ride like? Is it rough and bumpy if you hit a pot hole?

[daveSanborn]

Good lord, we have another "skyjacker" in our midst  :amaz

+2



 


Ride height on a classic car that is more for show than for go is a matter of personal preference.  ANY car will handle/perform much better when the front is equal to/a hair higher than the rear.  When the rear of the car is lifted it unneccessarily shifts weight to the front, which diminishes handling and slows weight transfer vital to achieving traction.  Does it look "meaner"?  To some people it does.  Does it improve anything?  No.  It negatively impacts the driveability of the car.