Fox T-Bird/Cougar Forums

Technical => Suspension/Steering => Topic started by: zerokool on April 12, 2010, 10:18:08 PM

Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: zerokool on April 12, 2010, 10:18:08 PM
What's everyone's opinion on lowered vs stock height? I've always been a big fan of lowered cars, but for some reason I'm diggin the ride height of my car with the tc wheels. It kinda reminds me of old school muscle cars
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: Whiteboy on April 12, 2010, 11:14:15 PM
Idk man I like lowered and my friend just got a foxbody thats lowered and it like it alot... I know our cars must have been made for grandmas who couldnt get out that low but im denying everything.... they were made for US.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: sarjxxx on April 13, 2010, 12:08:06 AM
I've always thought it could stand to be {raised} a couple inches...or lowered, idk I like the beefy look that a tiny raise gives it, but it is sleek lowered....tough call, then again, just leave it stock and be done with it's what I say :D
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: Beau on April 13, 2010, 12:42:52 AM
Opinions wouldn't matter from someone like, say myself, who has to drive 3 or 4 miles on gravel just to get to a highway/street.

Our roads are shiznitty here, so a very lowered car would se.
Depends on driving habits as well. Do you slow down for, or avoid speed bumps, squirrels, pedestrians, or 'gators?

If you're vigilant, and avoid the py roads, potholes, and pulling up too far to curbs and the like, then lowered a bit is the way to go.

I'm going to run either Mach 1, or Bullitt springs on mine this summer, but around here, I can't go any lower than that and not tear stuff off.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: Whiteboy on April 13, 2010, 01:04:50 AM
Agreed on dirt roads. It really depends on the roads on which u live
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: zerokool on April 13, 2010, 07:55:52 AM
All makes sense. I love the lowered look, but I also like bein able to see some underneath the car from behind sittin at a light. Some 295s or 315s would really look awesome sitin up stock height. HAHAHA speaking of dirt roads, I was watchin the dukes of hazzard movie the other day and it got me to wondering.....
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: blu84302 on April 13, 2010, 06:12:18 PM
I recommend lowering the front only.  It will improve the ride.  For the back don't use Eibach Mustang Convertible springs in the rear, I did and it was to low.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: 50tbrd88 on April 13, 2010, 09:31:59 PM
I lowered my car a few years ago and while it looks totally bad ass, the ride sucks.  I used Steeda fox Mustang springs and they are not suited to the Tbird/cougars.  It sucks...BAD.  I am going back to stock suspension soon with a set of 15's or 16's.  I had big dreams that someday I would make the car handle, but now I just want it to ride and drive nice while looking good. 

I think 17's look cool, but 15's or 16's with beefy tires give it that sweet old school look.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: Whiteboy on April 13, 2010, 09:35:43 PM
yep my 16's will look good i hope, they have grown on me alot lately...and Idk about how lowering just the front would help the ride.... i mean...maybe for drag but for a curvy old highway like i have plenty of around here....idk how that'd feel.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: zerokool on April 13, 2010, 10:18:02 PM
yea i fell all of ya. I was think of 17x10.5's for her. I'm  not to interested in handling. I live in florida. It's fairly straight roads here. But that's what i got a cbr1000 for:fart:
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: vinnietbird on April 13, 2010, 10:29:22 PM
You can lower a car without lowering it to the ground.Mine was lowered two inches all around.Lower,but still at a realistic height that I can take a speed bump,or whatever.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: vinnietbird on April 13, 2010, 10:32:12 PM
Here's the Sport at stock ride height (different wheels but same size I have now)...

(http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/Vinnietbird/DSCF0576.jpg)

Here it is after I installed the SN-95 (1999) Mustang springs.It still sits up,but not as high.I could immediately tell a difference in the cornering,yet the ride is still smooth and comfortable.......

(http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/Vinnietbird/DSCF3637.jpg)
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: DVP on April 13, 2010, 11:38:15 PM
Drop it. Bumper might not like it but I think its worth it.

(http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn65/cougar86_89/img1242171259344.jpg)

Rear is still has Factory suspension.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: zerokool on April 14, 2010, 07:41:36 AM
lol check out this 89 sc http://okaloosa.craigslist.org/cto/1687584993.html that's pretty low
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: ProTouring442 on April 14, 2010, 08:28:35 AM
Quote from: vinnietbird;318130
Here it is after I installed the SN-95 (1999) Mustang springs.It still sits up,but not as high.I could immediately tell a difference in the cornering,yet the ride is still smooth and comfortable.......


Hey Vinnie, what size tires are you running?

Shiny Side Up!
Bill
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: vinnietbird on April 14, 2010, 08:47:06 AM
I have 255 40 17's up front on 17x9 wheels.

        275 40 17's out back on 17x10's

No spacers.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: ProTouring442 on April 14, 2010, 10:53:11 AM
Quote from: vinnietbird;318179
I have 255 40 17's up front on 17x9 wheels.

        275 40 17's out back on 17x10's

No spacers.


Maybe that's the difference.... I'm running P225/60R16 which equates to a tire height of approximately 26.64" while your 255/40R17 equates to approximately 25.04". I say that's the difference because your wheel to fender clearance looks to be a fair bit larger than mine and mine isn't lowered, or at least it isn't as far as I know. I'll try to post a pic later to show what I am talking about.

Shiny Side Up!
Bill
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: vinnietbird on April 14, 2010, 11:31:59 AM
The tires on the car before I lowered it a little (the first pic) had 255 40 17's out back,and 245 40 17's up front.I may have a pic with those same wheels after the new springs were installed.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: vinnietbird on April 14, 2010, 11:33:59 AM
Here it is.As I said,about a two inch difference....

(http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/Vinnietbird/DSCF0004.jpg)
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: V8Demon on April 14, 2010, 12:16:55 PM
Slight lowering up front....

(http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/kk191/V8Demon/IMG_4466a.jpg)

Front tires:  235-60/15
Rear tires:    255-60/15

Rear tires have about a 1 inch larger overall diameter.....
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: ProTouring442 on April 14, 2010, 02:43:40 PM
OK, here are a few shots of mine and, judging by the pics of some of the other cars, it may be lowered. Then again, maybe it isn't... who knows!

Don't mind the filth, it needs a bath very badly. The pollen here has been crazy! Every morning the car looks like it has been hit by thousands of little pollen bombs.

Oh, and the cracked driver's side tail light... yeah, I did that. Can you believe it! I misjudged with the shopping cart; argh. Fortunately, I have another in the garage.

(http://www.fquick.com/images/vehicles/full/29435314670.jpg)

(http://www.fquick.com/images/vehicles/full/29435314671.jpg)

Shiny Side Up!
Bill
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: Kitz Kat on April 14, 2010, 04:13:54 PM
Looks like you got turbo coupe springs on,They do ride lower than the V8 spring cars.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: gumby on April 14, 2010, 04:57:20 PM
lowered.

(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c73/gmby23/87%20turbocoupe/953d518f.jpg)

/discussion :flip:
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: mcb82gt on April 14, 2010, 06:40:44 PM
Quote from: V8Demon;318215
Slight lowering up front....

(http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/kk191/V8Demon/IMG_4466a.jpg)

Front tires:  235-60/15
Rear tires:    255-60/15

Rear tires have about a 1 inch larger overall diameter.....


I just love that car, it looks so nice.  Mine is getting there,slowly:burnout:
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: 50tbrd88 on April 14, 2010, 09:42:39 PM
Quote from: gumby;318242
lowered.

(http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c73/gmby23/87%20turbocoupe/953d518f.jpg)

/discussion :flip:


That's not lowered, that's f'n SLAMMED.  lol.  Looks bad ass and handles great too I bet.:bowdown:
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: vinnietbird on April 14, 2010, 10:35:45 PM
How's the ride quality with the car that low?I was curious because most of the low cars (really low) tend to have that stiff bounce to them.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: gumby on April 14, 2010, 11:04:10 PM
Quote from: vinnietbird;318305
How's the ride quality with the car that low?

uh....firm...yeah, thats it ;)
my spring rates are far from what most would consider for a street car, but coupled with high quality dampers the ride is very tolerable IMO.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: vinnietbird on April 14, 2010, 11:18:21 PM
I was curious about that.I couldn't have the Sport that low.I'd wipe her out on the first train crossing or speed bump....plus,with the Mach 1 chin spoiler,it just couldn't happen.Yours looks great though.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: Whiteboy on April 15, 2010, 01:11:54 AM
I like Gumby's!!!! but with where i live i'd have to raise it about....maybe 2 inches or a little less... Heck maybe i should just pay for a bagg job by Baggbirdz and cruise like normal anywhere and on friday nights, slam it.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: gumby on April 15, 2010, 06:26:36 AM
Quote from: vinnietbird;318318
I'd wipe her out on the first train crossing or speed bump....plus,with the Mach 1 chin spoiler,it just couldn't happen.Yours looks great though.


its time for some fresh pics of my car, i put a mach1 chin spoiler on it about a week after that set of pics was taken.

i handle rail crossings and normal speed bumps just fine. takes diligence and careful attention, but works well.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: ProTouring442 on April 15, 2010, 07:27:54 AM
Quote from: 50tbrd88;318298
That's not lowered, that's f'n SLAMMED.  lol.  Looks bad ass and handles great too I bet.:bowdown:


Slammed?!? Hell, I thought maybe he forgot to reinstall the springs! :eek:

Looks great though!

Shiny Side Up!
Bill
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: Chuck W on April 15, 2010, 10:30:24 AM
Quote from: gumby;318315
uh....firm...yeah, thats it ;)
my spring rates are far from what most would consider for a street car, but coupled with high quality dampers the ride is very tolerable IMO.



Well, the IRS on the rear helps with ride quality, as do the coil-overs on the front.

Mine is currently lowered with FMS C-Kit springs on the front (with maybe a 1/8" spacer on top of the upper isolator) and SN-95 convert springs in the back with the rearward mounting point of the RLCA dropped 3/4".

(http://www.turbochuck.com/images/Tbird/10_17_09_3.jpg)
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: Kitz Kat on April 15, 2010, 03:11:12 PM
So what springs do you have? If there turbo coupe there about right. Everything on your car shows TC.
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: gumby on April 15, 2010, 04:43:59 PM
Quote from: Chuck W;318376
Well, the IRS on the rear helps with ride quality, as do the coil-overs on the front.

well, yeah, theres that too :hick:

i really need to get bustin on mine, and get it back together....
Title: opinion on lowered vs stock stance
Post by: thunderjet302 on April 16, 2010, 12:51:55 AM
Quote from: Chuck W;318376
Well, the IRS on the rear helps with ride quality, as do the coil-overs on the front.

Mine is currently lowered with FMS C-Kit springs on the front (with maybe a 1/8" spacer on top of the upper isolator) and SN-95 convert springs in the back with the rearward mounting point of the RLCA dropped 3/4".

(http://www.turbochuck.com/images/Tbird/10_17_09_3.jpg)

Chuck can I have your C spring set? Please:D

Your car is awesome.