Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: mopar68]
#2155355
09/15/16 10:31 PM
09/15/16 10:31 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 36,041 Lincoln Nebraska
RapidRobert
Circle Track
|
Circle Track
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 36,041
Lincoln Nebraska
|
I had a 65 dart with 003/003 (came that way as a roller). when done it was level & the springs rode high and tight. I loved em
live every 24 hour block of time like it's your last day on earth
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: mopar68]
#2155364
09/15/16 10:47 PM
09/15/16 10:47 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,791 Hamilton, Ontario Canada
Magnum
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,791
Hamilton, Ontario Canada
|
I don't know why the SS spring package needs to sit higher on the passenger side. Yes the spring is stronger but stronger does not need to have more arch. In coil spring terms you can have a stronger but shorter spring.
With that in mind I am going to dearch the passenger side spring so my car sits level. Not much else has changed, it will still have the stronger spring on the passenger side to combat axle lift.
69 Super Bee, 93 Mustang LX, 04 Allure Super
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: Magnum]
#2155426
09/15/16 11:49 PM
09/15/16 11:49 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 18,157 Mass
DAYCLONA
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 18,157
Mass
|
I don't know why the SS spring package needs to sit higher on the passenger side. Yes the spring is stronger but stronger does not need to have more arch. In coil spring terms you can have a stronger but shorter spring. Initially the springs were designed around having a 100 lb battery (ballast) located in the passenger side trunk area, and the fact that the car torques over to the right and squats on the passenger side rear wheel in a full throttle leave on the light, once designed with these over compensating perimeters in place, they haven't changed in decades, plus the fact they were intended for drag use only
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: DAYCLONA]
#2155435
09/16/16 12:05 AM
09/16/16 12:05 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,498 Omaha Ne
TJP
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,498
Omaha Ne
|
I don't know why the SS spring package needs to sit higher on the passenger side. Yes the spring is stronger but stronger does not need to have more arch. In coil spring terms you can have a stronger but shorter spring. Initially the springs were designed around having a 100 lb battery (ballast) located in the passenger side trunk area, and the fact that the car torques over to the right and squats on the passenger side rear wheel in a full throttle leave on the light, once designed with these over compensating perimeters in place, they haven't changed in decades, plus the fact they were intended for drag use only The car on launch torques to the RR, Uhh WHY???, OK now why would they make that spring a bit stiffer? to control the chassis, Plant the tires equally, and send the car STRAIGHT forward. In doing so, yes the RR will sit a bit higher. But if all else is RIGHT, front and rear suspension wise, The car will PLANT the tires equally and go STRAIGHT FORWARD. Trying to level the car for aesthetic reasons defeats the purpose of the design,
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: mopar68]
#2155439
09/16/16 12:13 AM
09/16/16 12:13 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,531 Jacksonville, FL
Chris2581
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,531
Jacksonville, FL
|
My Demon has the 3400# S/S springs and it sits level.
Nautilus Racing- We use Superformance gaskets and Turbo Action converters/products.
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: TJP]
#2155450
09/16/16 12:32 AM
09/16/16 12:32 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
I don't know why the SS spring package needs to sit higher on the passenger side. Yes the spring is stronger but stronger does not need to have more arch. In coil spring terms you can have a stronger but shorter spring. Initially the springs were designed around having a 100 lb battery (ballast) located in the passenger side trunk area, and the fact that the car torques over to the right and squats on the passenger side rear wheel in a full throttle leave on the light, once designed with these over compensating perimeters in place, they haven't changed in decades, plus the fact they were intended for drag use only The car on launch torques to the RR, Uhh WHY???, OK now why would they make that spring a bit stiffer? to control the chassis, Plant the tires equally, and send the car STRAIGHT forward. In doing so, yes the RR will sit a bit higher. But if all else is RIGHT, front and rear suspension wise, The car will PLANT the tires equally and go STRAIGHT FORWARD. Trying to level the car for aesthetic reasons defeats the purpose of the design, The extra height on the pass side was NOT to compensate for body torque. It was to compensate for the weight of the battery that was supposed to be in the trunk on the pass side. So, if you used the SS springs as engineered there would be no height issues. But if you don't know what you are doing you will have issues and then blame others for them.
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: Supercuda]
#2155471
09/16/16 12:57 AM
09/16/16 12:57 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,498 Omaha Ne
TJP
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,498
Omaha Ne
|
I don't know why the SS spring package needs to sit higher on the passenger side. Yes the spring is stronger but stronger does not need to have more arch. In coil spring terms you can have a stronger but shorter spring. Initially the springs were designed around having a 100 lb battery (ballast) located in the passenger side trunk area, and the fact that the car torques over to the right and squats on the passenger side rear wheel in a full throttle leave on the light, once designed with these over compensating perimeters in place, they haven't changed in decades, plus the fact they were intended for drag use only The car on launch torques to the RR, Uhh WHY???, OK now why would they make that spring a bit stiffer? to control the chassis, Plant the tires equally, and send the car STRAIGHT forward. In doing so, yes the RR will sit a bit higher. But if all else is RIGHT, front and rear suspension wise, The car will PLANT the tires equally and go STRAIGHT FORWARD. Trying to level the car for aesthetic reasons defeats the purpose of the design, The extra height on the pass side was NOT to compensate for body torque. It was to compensate for the weight of the battery that was supposed to be in the trunk on the pass side. So, if you used the SS springs as engineered there would be no height issues. But if you don't know what you are doing you will have issues and then blame others for them. OK, Sure, OK,
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: rarefish]
#2155591
09/16/16 11:04 AM
09/16/16 11:04 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,421 Balt. Md
383man
Too Many Posts
|
Too Many Posts
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 27,421
Balt. Md
|
I use a matching pair but as said you can use them any way you like. They are supposed to be made to work best as the pair you buy but many dont like how the car sits with the pair on them as they usually sit uneven. But whenever I put a set on I just adjust the torsion bars to get the car sitting even. This is how my cars sits with a 3400 lb pair of SS springs on it. And yes I had to adjust the torsion bars to get it to sit level. Ron When you adjusted the torsion bars to level the car with the SS springs, did you have to crank up a little more on the driver's side bar? I having a hard time figuring out how the torsion bar adjustment would be able to level the car side to side in the rear or are you talking about front to back leveling? I believe the R/R was high so yes I cranked up on the drivers side and down on the pass side torsion bars. How much depends on how high one side is over the other side and yes I could get the car level doing it that way as I have done it many times. And I am talking side to side not front to rear as you have to change both bars the same when changing front to rear. Since mine is a street car I wanted it close to level. And my battery in my trunk is actually on my drivers side because I was running out of cash when I got to the battery in my trunk and my buddy gave me the extra cable he had. But it just would not reach to the pass side so I put my battery on the drivers side and its worked fine for me. Ron
Last edited by 383man; 09/16/16 11:06 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: 383man]
#2155633
09/16/16 11:45 AM
09/16/16 11:45 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,700 Wichita
GY3
master
|
master
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,700
Wichita
|
I use 456 and 457 SS springs. It sits noticibly higher on the right rear despite the front end measurements being dead level. I never really realized how lopsided it was until recently when the Dana went in. It hooks really well on 275's, goes straight as an arrow and pulls the left front a little off the ground. My best 60 ft. is 1.59. I do still have the battery up front for convenience.
'63 Dodge 330 11.19 @ 121 mph Pump gas, n/a, through the mufflers on street tires with 3.54's. 3,600 lbs. 10.01 @ 133mph with a 250 shot of nitrous an a splash of race gas. 1.36 60 ft. 3,700 lbs.
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: mopar68]
#2155714
09/16/16 01:52 PM
09/16/16 01:52 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,093 Michigan
A727Tflite
master
|
master
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,093
Michigan
|
The right rear spring was not designed to compensate for the weight of the battery - was designed with a stronger rate and more leaves in the front segment for "bias" - to reduce the amount that the right side of the axle wants to "lift" off the ground. The early Maxwedge cars had no battery in the trunk and they had this bias control already built in.
Torque reaction from the engine contributes to pulling the driver side front off the ground. The more you load the right rear the less driver side front lift you get. There are other forces in the rear that "pulls" the right rear axle "up". That is what the bias is trying to prevent. With ladders and four links and such - I believe you use the coil over to compensate for this - and/or by preloading the passenger side ladder and locating points - but I have no experience with those. Take a car that is level without the SS springs then add the SS springs - you are supposed to load the driver side torsion bar to level the car out - this "preloads" the right rear tire.
Last edited by Transman; 09/16/16 01:56 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Mopar perf. super stock spring
[Re: mopar68]
#2155760
09/16/16 02:51 PM
09/16/16 02:51 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,287 West Coast, USA
jbc426
master
|
master
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,287
West Coast, USA
|
I run two passenger side 2800lbs springs on my 3700 lbs cars. The ride is firm, but very compliant on the open road. The best ride and overall performance on the rear suspension of any Mopar I've owned in the last 35 years. I do have 1" lowering blocks on the car to adjust the ride height to my liking.
In the past, I had used Caltracs & the stiffer 3400lbs SS springs and the car rode like a pick-up with both, and only hooked hard on very smooth surfaces.
Dr Diff suggested running the lighter SS springs, and the results are nothing short of amazing. I do run a set of properly adjusted slapper bars on the car. I know many folks regurgitate the story that they don't work on Mopars, but I know otherwise, as do all the local hotrodders & tuner folks and especially the guy in the Hellcat I beat in a drag race at Willow Springs last spring.
1970 Plymouth 'Cuda #'s 440-6(block in storage)currently 493" 6 pack, Shaker, 5 speed Passon, 4.10's 1968 Plymouth Barracuda Convertible 408 Magnum EFI with 4 speed automatic overdrive, 3800 stall lock-up converter and 4.30's (closest thing to an automatic 5 speed going)
|
|
|
|
|