I have a friend who may be giving me some Sn95 New Edge Mach 1 stock springs. If anyone has used them on their 1987-1988 Bird, did it work out well? What's the height difference if I were to use stock GT springs rather than stock Mach 1 springs?
Only if you have adjustable lca's in the back. It does drop the car quit a bit.
Did you use LCAs for a New Edge or for a TBird?
CHE makes LCA's that are specific to our cars. http://www.cheperformance.com/ProdList.asp?scat=30
Thank you!
I have the CHE adjustable on my Bird.
I have a little negative camber on the front wheels using the mach springs. I don't know if I'll need MM caster camber plates to fix that. Yeah, the rear sits lower than the front but I'm running big and littles which compensates for it a little. Next set of tires I'm going to go to a little larger diameter in the rear tires and I think it will sit just right.
Are you running a bump steer kit?
No bump steer kit yet. My future plans for the car may include corners so I may have to worry about steering!
Here's mine with SN-95 springs on it (all from a '99 Mustang)....
(http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc205/Vinnietbird/1476092_10203087322370382_522808182_n.jpg) (http://s216.photobucket.com/user/Vinnietbird/media/1476092_10203087322370382_522808182_n.jpg.html)
Vinnie, you have the CHE lca adjustables right? It looks like the rear sits higher than the front, which is the opposite of what I've got.
No, I have the basic CHE tubular control arms.
I'm leaning towards this height.
:iagree:
Vinnie, Did you retain the isolators on the Sport when you switched to Sn95 springs?
I actually bought new ones, and used them. so yes, I did retain isolators.
For me the stance Vinnie's car has is on the money. I like just a tad of rake from front to rear.
Just to add to this discussion in a technical way the spring rates on the SN95 do vary. Here are some of the possible rates by year and car model where the first rate is the front (lb/in) and the second rate is the rear (lb/in):
'94-95 Mustang Cobra - Front 400 / Rear 160
'95 SVT Cobra R - Front 700 to 850 / Rear 200 to 260
'96-98 Mustang Cobra - Front 400 to 505 / Rear 165 to 265
'99-04 Mustang V6 - Front 400 / Rear 190
'99-04 Mustang GT - Front 450 / Rear 210
2000 SVT Cobra R (Eibach) - Front 800 / Rear 750 [COLOR="#FF0000"](IRS)[/COLOR]
2001 SVT Cobra - Front 500 / Rear 470 [COLOR="#FF0000"](IRS)[/COLOR]
2001 Bullitt - Front 600 / Rear 250
2003 Mach 1 - Front 600 / Rear 250
2003 SVT Cobra (Conv.) - Front 500 / Rear 470 [COLOR="#FF0000"](IRS)[/COLOR]
2003 SVT Cobra Coupe - Front 600 / Rear 600 [COLOR="#FF0000"](IRS)[/COLOR]
So with that if Vinnie knows which model of '99 car his came off that would give you a good idea as to what springs you need to run with an aluminum headed 302 car with an AOD.
Darren
I bought front and rear springs from a 94-95 Mustang gt and I'd like to get your height Vinnie. It's not crazy low, and its not 4x4. I'm installing them this Saturday and I'll try to get pictures up.
My uncle swears up and down that I need a camber kit if I put 94-95 Mustang GT stock springs on my Bird, or else my tires will wear out much faster. Thoughts?
I don't really know a whole lot about it and I'd like to hear from you guys.
CC Plates are a must either way!!! Only way to get the alignment correct and or if you want better numbers!!
You can take a chance and put the springs in and see if an alignment shop can bring it within spec. If not then typically you are out the alignment charge and get to tear back into it to install CC plates. The one thing for sure is you will never get the caster setting out of the stock setup that you can get with the MM CC plates. IMO the CC plates are worth every penny.
Darren
I have heard guys use SN95 springs w/o CC plates and had good results, While others have used the CC plates....I have to agree with Aerocoupe. Its a trial and error thing I guess..Keep us posted.
I had good results with the SN-95 springs and stock strut mounts. Now, if I had a set of the adjustable mounts, they would go on. But I didn't have them, and I'm still happy.
Why in the world would someone take the time to change out a set of springs and leave in a set of upper plates that are worn out and 25 years old. Those upper plates get worn out and will not hold an alignment. Makes absolutely no sense to me. The other issue is caster angles. Without increasing it why bother lowering the car and trying to get it in spec with a worn out set of upper mountings. Even if the plates are good they still flex in turns as they are rubber mounted!!!!! Those upper mounts rot out fairly nicely and in my view should be at the least replaced with new ones or better yet CC Plates so a complete spectrim of alignment numbers can be achieved. Just Me
My strut mounts are NOS pieces I installed at the same time.
I have machs on the front with bullits on the rear, I also added 2" riser on the rear with the che ajustable arms, just to get some adjustment, without them I would be maxed out. I did try 95 springs ,but they bottomed and didn't handle worth a shiznit. so I went back to the bullits. I do use mm plates on the front.
When did this happen? http://www.maximummotorsports.com/1983-88-Thunderbird-C429.aspx
I'd love to have those adjustable control arms, but I can't swing that kind of cash for them. I'll be keeping the non adjustable CHE's.
Vinnie,
Did you use standard sn95 springs, or cobra ones to get the lowered effect? We're you able to get by with the chi fixed control arms or did you have to go to adjustables?
Thanks-Geoff
Maximum has had them for a while now but the CHE's are less cash so that is what typically gets discussed.
In Post #28 you will see what Vinnie is running as far as LCA's and Post #23 reveals what springs he is running. You may also want to read Kitz's comments in Post #26.
Darren
I have standard SN-95 springs and non adjustable control arms on my Sport.The Sport is happy, I'm happy. The ride is like factory for the most part. if I had stock wheels and tires, the ride would be softer, but with the low profile tires, it has a little more "feel" in the ride, but nothing uncomfortable. The car doesn't "bounce" and ride harsh at all which is why i wanted factory springs.....not specifically for the Sport, but they work, and the ride is close to factory.