• Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech

Are coilover conversions rough riding?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 67Thunder
  • Start date Start date Nov 11, 2005

67Thunder

New Member
Jun 19, 2005
101
0
0
Vancouver, Canada
Nov 11, 2005
#1
  • Nov 11, 2005
  • #1
I have ordered all the parts for my rear suspension, modified the wheelhouses for wide tires, and cut out the old leafs.

Because I have such a wide tire, I considered using the global west del-a-lum bushing/shackle to make sure I don't get too much side to side movement from the rear suspension . (I am lowering 2 -2 1/2 ")

When I talked to the salesman, he said the only del-a-lum they sold was returned, because it was too rough riding. It was more for track or road race applications.

I wondered if the FRONT coilover set ups like TCP etc have a similar problem. I am looking for a street performance suspension with a negative wedge setup so I can lower the car etc.

So if any of you have the TCP coil overs, can you give me some feed back on how your car rides. Is it bone jarring?
 

Marshall

Founding Member
Nov 22, 2000
225
2
19
Qld Australia
Nov 11, 2005
#2
  • Nov 11, 2005
  • #2
I can recommend the RRS coilover struts from experience, ride and handling is excellent. they also offer optional shocks and disc brake sizes.
 

Route666

Active Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,652
6
39
Brisbane, Australia
Nov 11, 2005
#3
  • Nov 11, 2005
  • #3
The theory on coilovers, especially on older cars, is that the coilover can make better use of available leverage through it's longer length and re-designed attachment points, thus a coilover that will react better in performance terms will not necessarily be more rough riding and could in fact be better riding.
 

rbohm

Founding Member
Apr 12, 2002
6,698
550
204
tucson,az
Nov 11, 2005
#4
  • Nov 11, 2005
  • #4
ride quality depends on how stiff the springs are, how stiff the shocks are, how stiff the chassis is, and how stiff the bushings are. a stiff chassis allows the use of softer springs and shock rates to allow for better ride without compromising handling. bushing that are too stiff, like solid aluminum or steel, transmit vibration and road noise, as well as every bump in the road, and that translates into a harsher feeling ride. however bushings that are too soft allow the suspension to move in unpredictable ways, thus giving you a squirrly feeling when you are driving agressively. coilover suspensions are not really more efficient than other suspension systems, but they are lighter and reduce unsprung weight, sometimes rather considerably, and they are adjustable, more so than other suspension designs, and thus they are generally more tunable.
 

70vert

New Member
Dec 31, 2004
722
0
0
Bay Area, CA
Nov 11, 2005
#5
  • Nov 11, 2005
  • #5
I've got some experience here.

I can tell you that after upgrading from ancient springs and newer gas shocks that the ride is a little harsher, but of course much less vague. I have the Unique Performace (TCP copy) so the experience should be just the same. I forget what weight the springs are, (small block spec) but it's a different geometry so it won't compare 1 to 1 to your older springs.

The biggest thing that made my ride harsher was going to 17x8 wheels with 245/55/17 tires rear and 275/45/17 in the rear. I'm hoping that composite leaf springs help that out later on.


67Thunder said:
I have ordered all the parts for my rear suspension, modified the wheelhouses for wide tires, and cut out the old leafs.

Because I have such a wide tire, I considered using the global west del-a-lum bushing/shackle to make sure I don't get too much side to side movement from the rear suspension . (I am lowering 2 -2 1/2 ")

When I talked to the salesman, he said the only del-a-lum they sold was returned, because it was too rough riding. It was more for track or road race applications.

I wondered if the FRONT coilover set ups like TCP etc have a similar problem. I am looking for a street performance suspension with a negative wedge setup so I can lower the car etc.

So if any of you have the TCP coil overs, can you give me some feed back on how your car rides. Is it bone jarring?
Click to expand...
 

Route666

Active Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,652
6
39
Brisbane, Australia
Nov 11, 2005
#6
  • Nov 11, 2005
  • #6
TCP's catalogue suggest 400 - 450lb for a baseline weight for a Mustang driven on the street depending on desired ride quality. They say 50lb less for aluminium heads and 50lb more for a big block.

Is that less than typically is run? I hear about 620lb standard type springs, but they are very harsh. I'm just wondering what coil-over rate matches the 620 springs with regards to suspension performance, not ride quality.
 
C

C0V3R

Member
Feb 14, 2003
524
0
16
Australia
Nov 12, 2005
#7
  • Nov 12, 2005
  • #7
I can also personally recommend the RRS setups. The installation is a piece of cake and they perform very nicely.
 

Bullitt

Packin' Heat
Founding Member
Jan 13, 2000
2,743
0
47
Houston, TX
Nov 12, 2005
#8
  • Nov 12, 2005
  • #8
Route666 said:
TCP's catalogue suggest 400 - 450lb for a baseline weight for a Mustang driven on the street depending on desired ride quality. They say 50lb less for aluminium heads and 50lb more for a big block.

Is that less than typically is run? I hear about 620lb standard type springs, but they are very harsh. I'm just wondering what coil-over rate matches the 620 springs with regards to suspension performance, not ride quality.
Click to expand...

you typically can't compare a "coilover" rate to a "coil" rate unless the springs and all mount in EXACTLY the same spot. depending on where the coilover mounts to the control arm it will change the motion ratio. this basically means that it'll take more or less spring (usually less spring) to get the same wheel rate. most coilover spring rates i've seen are quite a bit less than what you'd run for standard coils on the same car. it's hard to say exactly what is "right" unless someone else has the exact same setup.
 

Route666

Active Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,652
6
39
Brisbane, Australia
Nov 12, 2005
#9
  • Nov 12, 2005
  • #9
Bullitt said:
you typically can't compare a "coilover" rate to a "coil" rate unless the springs and all mount in EXACTLY the same spot. depending on where the coilover mounts to the control arm it will change the motion ratio. this basically means that it'll take more or less spring (usually less spring) to get the same wheel rate. most coilover spring rates i've seen are quite a bit less than what you'd run for standard coils on the same car. it's hard to say exactly what is "right" unless someone else has the exact same setup.
Click to expand...

I understand that if you did have a coilover with everything in the same spot it theoretically would give the same performance as the stock setup, because it basically would be the stock setup.

I thought that coilovers take advantage of leverage better (mounting to the control arm closer to the wheel) but rbohm's post has thrown me off a little on this.
 

67Thunder

New Member
Jun 19, 2005
101
0
0
Vancouver, Canada
Nov 13, 2005
#10
  • Nov 13, 2005
  • #10
Thanks, good info.

One of the other tough parts, is once I decide what to go with, I have to decide spring rate.

I have a running 428, to drop in the 'stang, and we are putting the battery in the trunk.

Eventually I am going to remove the cast heads in favour of the edelbrock aluminum heads, aluminum water pump, and as many other weight saving tricks that I can think of for the front end.

If I did this at drop in time, I could figure close to small block weight. Since I am doing it over time, then I might have to use the Big block springs.
 

Route666

Active Member
Aug 16, 2003
1,652
6
39
Brisbane, Australia
Nov 15, 2005
#11
  • Nov 15, 2005
  • #11
Well I know that with TCP (I'm not affiliated, I just like the gear, so I drool over it lots) that you can now get a second set of springs at a different rate for an extra 75 bucks, so you could get a softer set for later mods for not much more than the initial cost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Drivetrain Rear end clunk
  • seanmahoney
  • Oct 13, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
385
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Oct 13, 2025
nickyb
Tightening upper control arm bushings at ride height dilemma… need some help
  • AnthonyA1234
  • Dec 27, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
51
Views
5K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Feb 27, 2025
General karthief
Suspension Rear driver side sits lower than rear passenger side...?
  • 91GTstroked
  • May 15, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
7
Views
3K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 18, 2024
91GTstroked
Suspension Foxbody ride height change after installing new control arms
  • Mhalc1
  • Jan 3, 2024
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
36
Views
9K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 10, 2024
Mhalc1
SN95 Sway Bar Endlink Issues!
  • Swizzy
  • May 10, 2024
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
878
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- May 13, 2024
Swizzy
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?