Chevy Impala SS Forum banner
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The time has come to do some suspension work on the 1996 RMW.

A search of the archives turned up a great deal of subjective information such as 1" lower, 1/2" higher but not knowing what the start point was makes it difficult to compare the effects of various springs.

The early 2005 threads at http://impalassforum.com/noncgi/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=002457 and http://impalassforum.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=002406 provided the following data:

+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| ____ | 13407 | #5919 | #6673 | #6673 | #8914 |
+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
Wheelwell (inches)
| Frnt | 28.50 | 27.25 | 29.00 | 28.00 | 25.50 |
| Rear | 22.50 | 21.50 | 20.50 | 20.50 | 18.00 |
| Rake | 6.00 | 5.75 | 8.50 | 7.50 | 7.50 |
Frame (inches)
| FrFr | 8.15 | _____ | _____ | 6.00 | _____ |*2
| FrRr | 8.75 | _____ | _____ | 7.50 | _____ |*2
Springs
| Frnt | Stock | Stock | _9C1_ | _9C1_ | _____ |
| Cuts | _____ | _Half | _____ | _One_ | _____ |
| Rear | Stock | CC505 | _____ | _____ | _ *1_ |
*1 Tires a factor
*2 Too much variance, must be different measuring points

Members:
13407 JaiPea
#5919 Wagon Collector
#6673 rweatherford
#8914 fchava

This is no performance vehicle, it is a hauler that does to/from Home Depot duty even more than carrying people so aftermarket springs from Hotchkis and other that run $200/pair are way overkill.

On the rear I have seen the 9C1 w/airbags, CC507 and CC623 mentioned as well as CC501 w/airbags.

There are many mentions of cut 9C1 coils to lower the front, but I'd prefer to raise rather than lower.

CC623s were great on our 1988 and did not raise the back at all, but some threads mention raising the rear an inch, which would accentuate the rake.

If those of you who have various spring combinations could advise wheelwell height and maybe even frame height I'll publish a summary of all the combinations at the end of the thread.

Front Wheelwell:
____Front Frame:
__Front Springs:

_Rear Wheelwell:
_____Rear Frame:
___Rear Springs:


Thanks,

JP
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Here is another link with comparison photos between the Moog CC505 and CC507 springs:

http://impalassforum.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=003035

If you are hauling stuff, the CC507 springs are a bit soft. Strangely, though, handling seems fine with these. For my daily driver, I ended up with the CC505 springs in the rear. I get these for $65 per pair at the local Federated Auto Parts. I will re-check the ride height on the CC505 car this evening, but it is just a touch under stock ride height.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Our B-boxy wagon stands level and has higher ground clearance than round bodies.

jaipea: 8.15 inches front and 8.75 inches rear

My boxy with 235-75-15s is 9 1/4 inches up front and 9 inches at the rear on 20-year old factory springs.

Moog recommends the same spring for 1986 and 1996.

1986 5404
1986 HD 586

1996 5404

> There are many mentions of cut 9C1 coils to lower the
> front, but I'd prefer to raise rather than lower.

The front frame stands more than an inch higher on 1986 wagons with the same spring, so if you want to raise the front there must be more involved than changing springs. Maybe the 9C1 specs are like 1986 HD fronts.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top