69 a-body rear springs

are these the correct rear leaf springs for my 69 cuda ? chrysler part number P4510268 and P4510269.

Those are Mopar Performance springs.

http://www.jegs.com/i/Mopar-Performance/312/P4510269/10002/-1

i put those on my car 2 years ago. it sits up so high i cannot get my rear shocks on it. the car looks like it's stuck in the 70's. i thought it might settle after sitting but it has been sitting for 2 years now. i'm thinking they sold me the wrong ones.

"sitting" you dont mean sitting as in not being driven do you? I would think they would need to occillatations/flexing produced from being driven to make em settle as opposed to just having weight on them. What about some lowering blocks? My 65 dart roller came with 003/003 SS springs & I needed shock extensions but the height was perfect & it rode very very nice. OP the P prefix denotes a MP performance part which would not be an OE spring if I am reading your question correctly

yes i know they are mopar performance items. i am still assembling the car so i have not driven it. it sits up so high that i cannot install the rear shocks. i even tried jacking the rear shackles back with a porta power. the car looks like it has air shocks on that are pumped up all the way.

that is surprising that they are that high but maybe mine were used/had settled (I bought it as a roller) and I ain't sure which of the 002/003's is the higher but mine had (2) 003's for a level ride but I did need a pair of those garden variety shock mt extensions that I happened to have laying around. Would some lowering blocks take care of you? I would want the rear shackles at a reasonably correct angle (lower end down & to the rear ~45 deg. EDIT 14's in top pic/15's below

You might have to get the springs reset if you want it to sit lower..

my shackels are pointed straight down. i tried forcing them back with a porta power but they will not stay. even with them being forced back to a 45 degree angle the rear of the car is still way too high. i can post a picture tonight.

Actually with more thought I think you are fine on the shackle angle but you will need to alter something (else) to get the car lowered. I'm still thinking lowering blocks

I have a 69 Dart. I bought my springs from Mancini. Many here on Moparts said the SS springs sat high, and they suggested using the heavy duty springs instead. That is what I used and I think my car sits perfect. I would post a pic but I have not figured out how to do that yet.

Hey pic worked!

what is your shackle length? if its too long it could force the car up. old 70's trick

I used B Body Dodge front spring hangers flipped upside down on Dad's 69 Dart. Moved the rear both back and up at the same time.
On my 70 Satellite I used the Mancini B body hangers in the top hole and still had to add 1 1/2" lowering blocks to get it to sit right. The more tire your trying to use the worse it is...

Love that Dart

I know that s couple friends who used those springs and put a couple hundred pounds in the trunk while the car was sitting before it was drivable.

Not the best picture, but you get the idea. shackels are stock length.

sorry, have no idea how to post a picture anymore

it worked. rear shackel

WOW that is high.

(1) put some 20's on there! (2) dearch the main leaf(s) (3) lowering blocks

I've seen a few that set up high...but that's way too much to correct with spring hangers and lowering blocks. It may be cheaper to check into the HD springs...

wow that's high! the shackle is pointing in the wrong direction. should go like this \ relative to the rear

The 002 and 003 SS spring would be correct for nostalga type drag racing. They are designed to transfer the weight on launch onto the rear - especially right rear. On launch, the rear body will rise a little and the front a little more. They will need to be used something like 9" slicks and put the snubber up against the floor. /6 t-bars, 90/10 front shocks will also help and all period correct.

For stock replacement, the factory parts and shop books listed different springs for different combos. Something like this:
1969 A-body leaf springs
6 170 3004 580
6 225 3004 581
6 225 B-HT 3004 582
6 225 B-FB,C 3004 585
8 273 Val, Da 3004 583
8 318/340 V,L 3004 584 new
8 318/340 B 3004 588 new
8 383 B,L 2808 677
HD ex. 383 2808 532
HD 383 2808 678

Leaf packs varied from as few as 4 leaves to as many as 6 on both sides.
Stengel Bros carries a good selection (made by Stanley in the US) and you can drill down to see the specs of the ones they repop. However, if you're buying them and expect them to be visually correct, find out if the interleaves and clamps are different style than original. So for most correct looking, the clamps might have to be changed out.
http://www.stengelbros.net/Plymouth-Leaf-Springs_c_226.html
http://www.stengelbros.net/Dodge-Passenger-Car-Leaf-Springs_c_194.html

Initially that was one of the reasons I went to the longer B Body hangers since they were headed in the wrong direction. Later replaced the shackles to sliders.

it almost looks like you have truck springs on there! maybe that's what 'heavy-duty' relates to? is it possible to remove a leaf?

hi,is this cuda finished? bumpers, full interior,full fuel tank, sparetire, jack, all window glass? both front spring hanger bolts NOT tightened until car on ground and loaded? try another pic with a 225lbs buddy sitting in trunk with loose front spring bolts and lets see how it sits. ron

back glass is not in the car. rear bumper doesn't weigh much. 240 pounds hanging on the rear of the car makes very little difference.

The interior, gas tank spare and jack,and all the glass is in. Still sets way too high. I'm going to remove the mopar performance springs and put my stock original springs back under it.

Keep removing leafs until it sits right, over time if it sags add back.