Now that ive got my front end done, Im gonna focus on the rear. Im looking for about 1-1.25" drop. My plan is to use the stock springs from a 95 convertible. It shows they are cargo coil 827, on the MOOG site. Will those hit it about what I want? :hick:
http://www.moog-suspension-parts.com/proddetail.asp?prod=MOOG-CC827
Specs are at the bottom.
Nobody has used SN95 GT convert springs in the rear?
I used standard SN-95 springs in the rear and got the 1.5 inch drop I wanted. I would wonder if the convertible springs are stiffer. Maybe not as much of a drop, but I can't say for sure because I haven't used the convert. springs. The standard SN-95 springs are great.
I knew you used the standard ones, I think Ill try the convert springs. Thank you Vinnie.
They may turn out to be a little stiffer. Not a bad thing. Post your results. Heck, they be the same. I know the V-6 and V-8 cars (coupes) shared the same springs.
I had the spec's from MOOGs site, the converts were a little higher load rate and spring rate vs. the reg SN95.
Ill post the specifics later.
Convertible springs are heavier and normally have a higher spring rate. Convertibles are normally heavier than non convertibles. If moog shows a different number for convertibles the springs are heavier and will most likely raise the car. My choice would not be a cargo coil. They are a heavy duty spring and normally raise the car a bit. Thanks
Here is what we do and some might flame me on this practice but it increases the spring rate while lowering the car. This is the maximum amount we would ever cut
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt88/tomrenzo/Kitties244.jpg
The IRS cobras used rear springs with less spring rate and higher load rate vs. their coupe counterparts. Apparently Ford wanted a bit softer ride for the 'vert w/o loosing the height. This very well could be different for the live axle springs you are looking at, however it sounds like you have all the info on MOOGs site to figure it out.
Load rating is what will determine ride height. So if that is your main target, that is the number you will need to concentrate on. There is a specific number floating around here someplace that gives a relationship between the amount of change in load rating vs. change in ride height. I'll see if I can locate that.
I would also stay away from the cargo coils as a preference. I dont like variable rate coils if I can avoid them.
*edit: found the info
I wont flame you, I do, and have done the same thing before, I just cut my front springs 3/4ths a coil with the grinder just like that.
The cargo coil is supposedly the stock coil. It is a progressive rate and the specs on it are much less than the stock Cougar coil, which is currently on it. I think it will lower it about perfect for what I want?? We'll see.
The convert rear SN95 springs have 235lb less load rating, and 75lb less spring rate than the stock cougar 8599 springs.
I think (hope) it will lower it about right. If the stock coupe SN95 springs dropped it 1.5" , Im guessing this will do what I want.
If not, I will go with reg SN95's and drop it a little more.
Just because they are CC's, doesnt mean they wont lower a Cougar, remember these cars have a thick heavy booty compared to the Stangs.:D
Spring rates and loads
5190 wire diameter .541 convertible
load height 10.50
number of coils 9.38
load 650
rated load height 174
free height 13.57
5367 Wire .541 cobra
LH 9.63
coils 9.37
load 650
rated height 174
free length 13.57
5372 wire .540 coupe
LH 11.00
coils 9.28
load 322
rated height 162
free height 13.00
Im not sure what the 5190 is, but it has a installed height 1" higher than the Stang or Cougar.
Just posting what the rates are . This is moog specks. That is a convertible spring. Its a higher spring as i suspected.