• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

Automatic/Manual, with or w/o AC

  • Thread starter Thread starter WhiteFizzo
  • Start date Start date Sep 13, 2006

WhiteFizzo

Founding Member
May 17, 2000
85
0
0
Virginia Beach Va
Sep 13, 2006
#1
  • Sep 13, 2006
  • #1
I installed the FMS B springs about a year ago. The front sits WAY too low for my tastes. I have decided to put some stock ride height replacement coil springs in the front and keep the B springs in the rear. My question is that when I look on the websites (autozone, advance...) the springs are different for the transmission and for the AC. I am guessing that this has to do with the weight of the front end of the car. My car being an automatic (with dreams of converting to a 5 speed someday ) with factory air conditioning, if I put in the springs for a manual w/o ac would this drop the ride height from when it was stock? Or is there just not that much difference in the springs and I wouldn't be able to tell?
 

JChalfan

Member
Nov 27, 2002
551
0
16
Bellevue, WA
Sep 13, 2006
#2
  • Sep 13, 2006
  • #2
Do they actually list a different part number for auto/manual AC/non-AC? Parts stores (and their websites) always ask you those questions, no matter what part you're buying. Maybe it's asking the question and giving the same part #?

If there is a difference in the springs they sell, I would suspect the difference is so small you wouldn't be able to tell.

I never even considered the idea that Ford put different springs in auto/manual 5.0's. Anyone know?

I just put FMS B springs in my car, and they did lower the front end quite a bit more than I would like. Even with the polyurethane insulators. Of course my old Paxton isn't light, and I'm sure it pulls the nose down a bit also.

Good luck.

Jeff
 

srothfuss

Last night I stabbed the same guy 7 times in a row
Oct 17, 2004
1,796
3
0
Woodward Ave.
Sep 13, 2006
#3
  • Sep 13, 2006
  • #3
There shouldn't be any difference between V8 springs except for:

There were 4 specific spring rates:

1 for I4 cars
1 for V8 cars
1 for I4 convertible cars
1 for V8 convertible cars

The transmission and A/C don't contribute too much to the overall weight of a vehicle and shouldn't play any role with spring rates.
 

WhiteFizzo

Founding Member
May 17, 2000
85
0
0
Virginia Beach Va
Sep 13, 2006
#4
  • Sep 13, 2006
  • #4
I didn't think that there would be much of a difference, if any. That being said, there are different part numbers for the different transmission, ac, and bodystyle (coupe, hatch, convertable) combinations.
 

JChalfan

Member
Nov 27, 2002
551
0
16
Bellevue, WA
Sep 13, 2006
#5
  • Sep 13, 2006
  • #5
WhiteFizzo said:
I didn't think that there would be much of a difference, if any. That being said, there are different part numbers for the different transmission, ac, and bodystyle (coupe, hatch, convertable) combinations.
Click to expand...

Just call the knowledgable counter guy and ask him what the difference is!


Sorry about that, I have bad luck with parts people.

Seriously though, I'm not really sure what to suggest. It's possible they are all the same spring, just labeled for different "applications"?

You could always just buy the ones they say are for your car and call it good. A 5-speed swap down the line won't change how the car sits.

If you are concerned about the front end sitting too high with the B springs in back, you could always cut the new springs (carefully, 1/4 coil at a time?) until it sits how you wanted it to.

Jeff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Engine Suggestions on an engine rebuild. Stock cam/GT40Ps or aftermarket on both for a fun weekend driver?
  • MadSquirrelTech
  • Apr 28, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
693
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 7, 2026
MadSquirrelTech
T
What's it Worth? 2002 GT conv/auto
  • tonydetesta
  • Jan 7, 2026
  • What is it Worth?!?!?
Replies
3
Views
618
What is it Worth?!?!? Jan 21, 2026
Mustang5L5
T
Resolved 1990 GT Convertible - Very clunky ride!
  • Tom77
  • Feb 24, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2 3
Replies
50
Views
2K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Aug 21, 2025
Tom77
T
S
Engine 2003 Mach 1 Automatic Upgrades assistance
  • SJK1417M1AT
  • Sep 25, 2025
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
Replies
3
Views
281
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Dec 21, 2025
01SVTvertt
0
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
768
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
gray owl
G
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang 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?