I did a search and found that SN-95 springs are a way to lower the sport birds. Has anyone tried a set of Mach 1 or Bullit springs? I have a set laying around and thought about putting them on..
I got Mach 1 springs all around in my 88 cougar. I used CHE adjustable control arms in the rear to bring the height up, but the front is real low I can only fit one finger between the tire and fender. I haven't driven it yet so I can't comment on the ride yet..
I have a set of FMS 1.5 inch drop springs for a 88 mustang I installed in my 85 TC, the front fenders now cover the tire by about 3/8 inch and that is running a 225/50/16 tire
I have bullits on the rear, with che adjusted up. Didn't put the fronts on yet, still not sure I want to. I may go with what V8 Demon has on the fronts.
I'm using the SN-95 springs.I like the overall look,and the car can still take a speed bump without having to slow to a crawl.
Have any pictures of car with them?? I went through your build post and didnt see any...
Seen you car when I did search, and thats looks good. Thats what me got to thinking about the Mach 1 springs.. Since I already have them. If they drop it to far then will just wait to lower it. Only reason I am considering the Mach 1's is because they are a FREEBIE.... And free is alway's in the budget..:D
Thats little bit too low , for my comfort..
I'll have the car outside this weekend or maybe next weekend I take a side profile pic for you. In the garage it's hard to take a pic of the side
I have the same as Vinnie. Of course I have no motor in.
(http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/yy121/daminc-pics/puttin%20it%20back%20together/IMG_0100.jpg)
The drop in the rear was pretty noticeable after it was done
Stock SN-95 springs?? I like the way Vinnie's set, but I already have a set of mach 1's sitting around.. But if they slam it, then not going to put them on.
They will probably sit like Bob's about 1". They also have the poundage to handle good.You may want to change the struts to mustang type. I don't think it's required though.
Mach 1 springs all around. CHE adjustable ht. rear control arms. Looks good, rides bit stiffer - wide wheels give a slight touch of the inner fender on big dips in road - nothing I can't live with.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e360/Domeskull/DSCF1565.jpg)
It looks good! What che's did you go with? I see they have a couple different types. I have the FMS lowering springs on mine but the rear sagged so I tried the rears from an sn95 stang, they sagged even worse, then tried the rears from a fox stang, they brought it up a little but not enough. So I thought I'd put the rears from the FMS kit back on and get the upper adj. control arms I keep hearing about on here.
I forgot to add that I have CHE non adjustable in the rear. not sure if Vinnie did
Here you go, I didnt get the cat outside so I took the best pic I can of the front.
Mach1 springs,strange 10 way struts, and MM caster camber plates is my setup for the front. Rear is mach1 springs and CHE adjustable control arms.
The gap upfront is about 1 1/2 finger- almost 2 fingers wide.. keep in mind this is with a 351w based stroker so if your running a 302 block I think it will be a little higher.
Is the adjustable rears a must when doing the Mach 1 springs?? Not looking to put that much into the car at the moment. But when my son gets tired of the car, I plan on keeping it for myself and build a hot rod out of it. Been building mustang for years and after I get my new convertible for wife & I to cruise in, want a car to play with. Always like T-birds and now I have a decent one to start with, it maybe around for awhile. Hopefully it survives my son since he has just started driving..
I'm not sure how the rear is without the control arms, mine is high right now cause I'm not sure what size tire I'm gonna go with so I didn't bother adjusting it yet.. But the control arms were pretty reasonable and very good quality so you might want to get them anyway.
Which control arms did you go with? I've checked cheperformance.com and they have a few listed. I have the FMS lower springs for the T-Bird but the rear sags so I'm thinking about going with the che's.
mine rides better than I thought it would , due to how low and as much poly is in it...
(http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii49/BogusSVO/1985%20Thunderbird%20Turbo%20coupe/DSCF4708.jpg)
(http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii49/BogusSVO/1985%20Thunderbird%20Turbo%20coupe/DSCF4709.jpg)
(http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii49/BogusSVO/1985%20Thunderbird%20Turbo%20coupe/DSCF4710.jpg)
But there is almost no body roll when you hang a corner hard.
Time to get at some cones!
.... thats some rake!
yes it dose have some of that.....
the "fun " part from dropping it so low was getting all the negitive camber out (-4*)
thats a nice lookn cat u got there, some factory style foglights would really set it off in my opinion
I have a question for all you people using the CHE adjustable control arms. How much adjustment did it take the get a level ride. Their site says it has 1-1/2 of adjustment .
I can't answer that, but I will say this: if you plan to do any sort of spirited driving, then CHE's are a must. After putting a set on mine, I'm very impressed. Really took a lot of rear end squirm out, and of course, when I get new shocks and finish the front, it should handle like it's on rails. I'm gonna use Mach 1 springs when I get the $ to get a set...they're pretty much the last thing I need for the suspension..
Look around, occasionally you can find someone selling their CHE's here..I did, got a great deal from a great guy..:bowdown:
With bullits on the rear I have about 1/4" maybe a 1/2" left. The front's are mooge, I still need to replace them.
Sn-95 springs = perfect drop in the rear IMO
One thing to take into consideration is the condition of the shocks and struts...
Its A good Idea to replace those at the same time, and worn shocks and struts will affect your ride height. When I swapped out the rears for some KYBs and the SN-95 springs the height was relatively unchanged because of the amount of sag from worn suspension components.
Frankencoug... that not quite right...
shocks and struts are not load bearing compents, so they should not attect ride height.
the coil springs carry the weight, the shocks/struts are there to dampen the coil spring cycling, so the car dosnt bounce going over bumps.
even new, you can compress shocks/struts with just your human body weight of around 150-200 lbs, so they are no way strong enough to support a 3000 + cars weight with out them bottoming out
Just posting from my experience...
I installed the sn-95 springs on shocks that had a lot of wear and the car had a noticeable amount of sag. When I replaced the shocks, the ride height had increased around an inch on both sides as well as having a firmer ride. When a shock is blown or worn too much, it will not return to its original height when compressed.
if i understand what you said correctly, it increased your ride height because it helped "ease" the load on your worn shocks a little. The worn ones compress much easier than the new ones, which is why it helped your ride height, and firmed it up, it didnt allow the springs to compress as quickly and rebound easier.
Exactly
:mullet:
I have a pair of used BBK 5.0 Mustang front lowering springs in my car (unsure of the actual drop on a Mustang), and SN95 springs in the rear with overload airbags.
I like the stance (sits a little lower in the front than the rear), but it seems to drag the lower lip spoiler thing a lot and sometimes the exhaust tips...I wouldn't want it any lower. Also I've experienced no unusual tire wear with the lowering.