Mark,
Yea, I noticed the difference (12" vs 10-1/2") too but I think the stiffer
springs make up for most of the free length size. The weird thing is that I
put both springs in the same location (seperately of course) and found nearly
a 1/2" difference when I lifted the car to the same height. I checked the
depth of the spring tower and the height of the bump stop location on the
crossmember and they are all the same. Granted that I cut my springs, but they
are/were the same height (10-1/8" and 10-1/2" resprectively at the same time)
and the same problem in bump stop gap exists. I did set the weight of my car
for with the spare, battery, and consideration of a FULL tank of gas. So it
might take less front spring height to get it level to slightly forward
inclined.
I can say this the, spring height and suspension mounting locations can
make a BIG difference. If there is an unseen 1/16" in the donut, the spring,
the spring tower and the A -Arm, then that cumulative 1/4" makes for about
1/2" in ride height.
At this point I think the CAT springs are the culprit. They have enough
compressed height difference to cause the problems. I also think that there
could be minor differences in my front end that when the wrong springs get in
the wrong location things only compound.
For whatever reason the driver's side is inclined to sit higher regardless of
the spring used. What I'm going to do is use the spring that has less
compressed height on the driver's side and the spring that is compressed
taller on the for whatever reason lower sitting passenger side. That combined
with my weight as driver should put things right where they should be.
I wonder how many people have a side to side difference (like Steve Sage
found) and just are not aware of it. But because I am basically putting it all
together from scratch I check everything and in doing so open a can of worms
that others just never see. Ignorance is bliss! And I mean that in a good way.
Because I know I agonize to make it right and in the end it might not matter
much anyway.
Thanks for your input. Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: CoolVT@aol.com
To: wittsend@jps.net ; tigers@autox.team.net
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: More confounding ride height nonsense!!!
Tom,
You mention the 10 1/2" springs. My originals were 12" and the
replacements from CAT were 10 1/2" . With the shorter springs, the car
definitely has a "down hill" look. I can't figure out what is going on with
yours unless the rear springs are arched differently.
Mark L.
|