[stonebreaker]

Might want to think about investing in a couple of suspension setup books. Once you understand the theory behind how cars handle, it will make it a lot easier to figure out what you need for your setup.

For example:

 

[Caddylack]

Might want to think about investing in a couple of suspension setup books. Once you understand the theory behind how cars handle, it will make it a lot easier to figure out what you need for your setup.

For example:

Great advice, and can be applied to all sorts of things.

I tell people all the time, instead of asking tons of questions as they pop into your head, just start from scratch and learn about how "the thing" works. Once you understand how something works, most of these questions dissolve pretty quickly.

(I'm no exception, I still have to police myself)

 

[toonwarrior]

Thank you!

Totally forgot books exist with the youtube nowadays

 

[Caddylack]

Thank you!

Totally forgot books exist with the youtube nowadays

Our academic system is headed the same way.

 

[toonwarrior]

My moog 89008s just came in, 748# spring rate. Costs about 90 usd for the pair so definitely not a big hit if I do feel like they aren't up to the task.

I know the uncompressed heights don't mean anything but it does give a clear indication based on the spring rates as to which one of these springs would sit higher/lower versus each other

Moog 89008 - 14 inches in height - Linear rate #748 spring
Canuck spring - 13/13.5 inches - Linear rate #485 (referenced off google )
Hotchkis - 15 inches - Progressive rate 500-629 Lbs Per Inch Front

So right off the bat, my old canuck springs needed to be replaced, wayy too low and not enough spring rate for the height. Hence the reason why I was banging on the bumpstop so much in my bilstein / koni thread.

The hotchkis paired with the 1104 bilsteins is pretty solid but it felt too soft for autocross and it wasn't that amazing on the street, if I was keeping the car purely for street I most likely would have looked for a moog spring to match the stock spring rates for that cloud-like feel. It's possible that switching the BMR bars to the hotchkis bars would have been more ideal with the hotchkis springs for daily and auto X use but the bars aren't cheap and based on watching videos and what not still have a ton of roll.

So because this car is pretty much just used for car-shows and now autocross I can live with the extra stiffness so comes in the #748 spring.
Hopefully the higher spring rate up front kills some body roll and reduces some oversteer.

I also will pair the 80089s with the AK1503 bilsteins, some threads show that the 1104s do not have enough damping for springs over #700.

 

[91ss]

Probably mean AK1053s? Good choice. It's a linear shock so won't handle the bumps as well. But if you have good roads or during during autocrossing, should be good. The digressive AK1195 is what I run with 80090, the 710lbs springs. Very comfortable. Maybe not be best for autocross. You also must mean 80098s Numerically, they should raise the car almost 3.5" over the canuck springs if your numbers are right.

 

[toonwarrior]

I guess the only caveat is with the canuck springs they were used already so I'm not sure if it was fatigued a bit and is shorter than it would be completely brand new. The hotchkis and moog springs are completely fresh.

And why was I saying 89008 .

So I've read a few threads saying that the 80098/7268s are 1/2-3/4 shorter than stock impala height, what is stock impala height?

Ideally if the springs get me to 27" from fender to ground that'd be perfect, any higher than we run into issues with the rear since it's at a 27" from top of the wheel well to ground to which I'd have 3 routes of addressing it,

• finding a taller spring for the rear to match the new front height,
• pop in a spacer in the rear to match the new front height,
• or trim the front spring to match the rear (not a fan of trimming)

I'm running stock 255/50/17s. The main difference between a stock car is my wheels are centered with extended control arms moving it back 3/8s, and I had the spring perch moved up by the same amount so the spring wasn't at a gnarly angle which shifted the height of the perch causing the rear to sit higher, if I didn't do that my ride height at this point in time would have been even back and front.

The story behind moving the perch forward was cause of how the spring sat after I centered the axle, no way I was running at this angle, and that was with a spacer. But yea eventually switched over to the hotchkis which I guess is tall enough where it's not as screwed up.

My previous front heights with the canucks were 26 inches and the hotchkis was around 26.5. The canuck spring was pretty much on the bump stop so that may not even be the actual height the spring was providing.

So my car has the butt up face down effect. Which looks great but when your hard braking and turning the car is dive bombing hard especially with the softer spring up front.

So if the 80089s get me to 27" up front, we'll be good 😪.

Hopefully have them in by tomorrow.

 

[toonwarrior]

One spring put in on the passenger side without the shocks/sway bar put on. Measures about 28" and a bit from bottom of the wheel to TDC of the wheel well. So once everything is installed and settled I'd expect it to drop like half an inch hopefully putting it in the 27" range which should be ideal

 

[91ss]

Yep, my 80090 were at 28 after first install and ride. Once the wheels roll, it'll drop down a little, then a little more as they settle in. Make sure to loosen and retighten the lower control arm so they aren't preloaded, after some driving and settling.

 

[toonwarrior]

Edited:

So @91ss you were bang on about the 3 inch gain Currently with both springs installed no shock/swaybar it's at 29 inches.

Always thought the SS had a lower stance from factory but just looking at the older magazine photos they are quite the monster truck

Only problem now is since my rear is a hotchkis spring I got the carolina squat. The rear is around 27ish inches, but you'd have to subtract like half an inch from the relocated spring perch. I

So to match it the 5417 would be my choice however it's not in stock, the only one that is the 5245, number one it's rated at #133 lower than what stock is originally, and number 2 I don't know the ride height it's going add. If it's similar to the height I have up front I'll pull the trigger on it, if it's even higher than I might wait it out cause it's going to look like a tonka truck at that point, so at that stage I will either throw a spacer in the rear or trim a coil up front.

5245 …… 5.57 … 0.593 … 133 … 1060 … 9.000 … 17.00 … PT,PT … 91-96 B&D-car
5417 …… 5.56 … 0.610 … 157 … 1200 … 8.500 … 16.13 … PT,PT … 91-96 B&D-car
5419 …… 5.56 … 0.625 … 173 … 1211 … 9.000 … 16.00 … PT,PT … 91-96 B&D-car


Height for the hotchkis was around 14 inches, might be a bit taller but couldn't measure it completely straight and take a photo 😀 Rear 180-224 Lbs Per Inch Rear
Height for the canuck spring 13 inches, rated at 285#, damn those boys were stiff

 

[95wagon]

"Same harnesses from years ago"

They don't tech harnesses in your type of competitions ?

We have to throw them out every two years .
That along with fire bottle recertification it even costs a fortune just to sit parked.

 

[toonwarrior]

So the fronts settled to 28".

First drive:
More comfortable than the hotchkis/1104 combo I had up front? I was gobbling up potholes like nothing even at high speeds it felt controlled.

Don't want to comment just yet on the turning until I autocross it next week but so far it feels better primarily due to not as much dive but we'll see once it's on the course.

Right now the issue is the backs are at 27" so it's like a maybach right now, I'll buy a spacer for the rears so I can get it even, later on I may take the spacer out and trim the coil but I do not want to touch coil springs for sometime again.

In terms of the ride I was expecting it to be jarring, not even close. And based on some readings specifically a user named "scot" who kept mentioning see-saw effect for mismatched springs I genuinely could not feel it.

 

[91ss]

When I get on my other laptop, I'll pull up some springs and how high they'll sit. Biggest issue is availability these days.

 

[Z09B4U]

I went with 7268 and 5419 and the car is level. 91ss has the spread sheet with the numbers. Your front springs are very close to mine so consider the 5419. Other people and myself rightly or wrongly believe there is a front to back spring ratio and that is why I went with 173 lbs. I do not find my springs give me a hard ride but you hear more than feel the bumps if the tires and shocks match the springs.

If you want 5419 springs I have a NOS pair that never came out of the box.

 

[toonwarrior]

@Z09B4U you got a pic of your cars stance, and also let me know much I'd be interested, hopefully shipping isn't dumb expensive.

One thing with my setup is with any spring I would need to add half an inch because of the moved spring perch on the rear

My car how it sits now, literally just needs a tad half inch in the rear to even it out. But if I do end up replacing it with the moog spring I can just re-sell the hotchkis as a kit.

I will say though the car looks 500 times better lowered 😂. It is what it is.

 

[Z09B4U]

As you can see the two fronts are very close but my rear hub is closer to the body line.
The 5419 is the highest of your choices.

Both front and back are on spring isolators.

hopefully shipping isn't dumb expensive.

25 lbs

 

[Z09B4U]

Doing a quick search through my Moog spreadsheet.
These are Moog springs that get you close to an SS spring but only going by calculations. No actual experience.
The stock SS spring in my 91, with airbags fitted measures at about 10.5 inches. Might be around 10 with out bags. That's why the 5395 (HD for box style) has been at times referred to here as a close replacement.

SS is 10.5 inch installed(for me with bags) with a 154 lbs/in rate

First column is PN. Last 4th from the end column is calculated installed height into an SS based on it's weight and 3rd from the end is the spring rate. A box caprice is lighter in the back so actual would be higher.


5387 5.57 0.609 8.5 1089 9.5 157 15.42 Pigtail Ends
5395 5.54 0.609 10 901 9.9 167 15.52 Pigtail Ends
5415 5.57 0.61 9 950 9.1 170 14.6 Pigtail Ends
5417 5.562 0.61 8.5 1200 10.2 157 16.13 Pigtail Ends
8307 5.66 0.609 9.75 907 9.6 158 15.49 Pigtail Ends

Highlighted the 3rd and 4th columns as it wasn't previewing nicely

5419 10.6 173

 

[JJ96SS]

Idk anything about auto cross but couldn’t you use coil overs ?

 

[toonwarrior]

Idk anything about auto cross but couldn’t you use coil overs ?

It's quite expensive, like 4 grand for the level 2 kit with the coilovers, you can't really just buy coilovers for these cars without the rest of the stuff if you want to dial it in, and that's in USD. Then when you add in the time to get it dialed in with the alignments and what not it's even higher.


From what I've read so far and talked to a few people the moog setup is quite basic and cheap, the front and rear springs under 300 bucks total, then shocks add like 300-400, everything outside of that is just stock replacement stuff. And since it's close to stock ride height the suspension geometry I would assume is decent unless someone on here says otherwise.

That being said I guess I'll find out once I go through this process . I will say though the car does not look as pretty with that much wheel well gap.

@Z09B4U

So I'd be aiming for a 10 inch installed height I guess since mines is already half an inch higher with the relocated spring perch. I'm thinking the 10.6 might cause it to be a bit too high, we'll see I'm going to wait a bit before I do anything.

 

[1slow96]

Idk anything about auto cross but couldn’t you use coil overs ?

Of course ,but suspect driver skill/expertice is a bigger factor.
How often do you expect to auto-x to justfy spending thousands of dollars for a
theoretical advantage over a properly sorted out tradional springs ,shocks ,swaybar set-ups?
Tires make a huge difference. Dedicated DOT/track rubber is better bang for the buck IMO.