FR500s are on - PICS. Guys with no isolators get in here!

fiveoho

15 Year Member
Apr 28, 2005
1,958
16
69
TN
18x9/18x10s with 265/35s and 295/35s (General exclaim uhp). Eibach sportlines w/energy suspension isolators.

the tires are VERY quiet and VERY smooth. overall im pleased but the front has too much gap for my taste. im wondering now if i should have went with a 255/40/18 (26") rather than the 265/35/18(25.3"). would that have filled up the fenderwell more or just made the car sit higher in the front?

heres my options, as i see it, to lower my front :

*delete 1 or both isolators
*steeda x2 balljoints with spacer delete
*order 255/40/18s
*cut a hair off the springs


i'll gladly listen to other suggestions.

i want to try removing the front isolators to begin with but im worried about vibration, rough ride and noise. who has no front isolators and how bad is it? would it drop the car 1/4"-1/2"?

thanks guys


P1110205.jpg


P1110202.jpg


P1110201.jpg


P1110200.jpg


P1110199.jpg


P1110204.jpg


P1110203.jpg
 
  • Sponsors (?)


I've been driving mine for 3 years without the front isolators. No noises or vibrations. 1/4" is about how much lower removing them will make it.

i thought maybe taping the pigtails if i remove the iso's.

hit a few other forums and some guys report a 1/2" drop by deleting the front uppers and lowers.

any drop at all would help some...
 
Man she looks awesome!!:nice:
Are the springs brand new?Give it time to settle if they are.
I have the Eibach Sportlines with FR500's 18X9 up front with 265 35 18's aswell,and i can barely fit one finger between the fender,and my tires up front,and just fit two fingers out back.

i can easily fit three fingers up front :( . springs have been on about a month. surely they have settled by now :shrug:


thanks for the compliments guys
 
i can easily fit three fingers up front :( . springs have been on about a month. surely they have settled by now :shrug:


thanks for the compliments guys

This is exactly what I hate about sportlines. They NEVER sit the same from car to car. My buddy had them on his 03 GT, & they sat exactly like yours up front & actually the rear looked like it sat lower than the front. Then, on other cars, they look absolutely dumped. IMO, it just seems like Eibach doesnt put much thought or precise engineering into the sportlines...

The funny thing is, I have them on my 91, & with the lower isos removed front & rear, they sit pretty nice. I can fit about 1 finger in between the tire & fender up front, & 2 fingers out back...

IMO, H&R supersports are the best lowering springs for stangs because they have a nice low stance, & the drop is precise every time.



BTW, the wheels & tires look great IMO.
 
This is exactly what I hate about sportlines. They NEVER sit the same from car to car. My buddy had them on his 03 GT, & they sat exactly like yours up front & actually the rear looked like it sat lower than the front. Then, on other cars, they look absolutely dumped. IMO, it just seems like Eibach doesnt put much thought or precise engineering into the sportlines...

The funny thing is, I have them on my 91, & with the lower isos removed front & rear, they sit pretty nice. I can fit about 1 finger in between the tire & fender up front, & 2 fingers out back...

IMO, H&R supersports are the best lowering springs for stangs because they have a nice low stance, & the drop is precise every time.



BTW, the wheels & tires look great IMO.


eibach sportlines claims 2.0 front / 1.8 rear . h & r ss claims 1.75 front / 1.6 rear

just from looking at the h & r gallery on american muscle, these -appear- to sit lower than the sportlines (
AmericanMuscle.com - Customer Images - View)

i knew the sportlines might sit funny, they did on my 95. bought them anyway bc i wanted to lowest drop. maybe i should have went h&r :shrug: . would just be disappointed if i spent the time and money to swap springs and still wasnt satisfied

any thoughts on the iso delete idea?

thanks epik
 
eibach sportlines claims 2.0 front / 1.8 rear . h & r ss claims 1.75 front / 1.6 rear

just from looking at the h & r gallery on american muscle, these -appear- to sit lower than the sportlines (
AmericanMuscle.com - Customer Images - View)

i knew the sportlines might sit funny, they did on my 95. bought them anyway bc i wanted to lowest drop. maybe i should have went h&r :shrug: . would just be disappointed if i spent the time and money to swap springs and still wasnt satisfied

any thoughts on the iso delete idea?

thanks epik

I know that Eibach advertises 2.0/1.8 rear, but as we know, its never the same from car to car. there is no way yours dropped that much judging by the pics & IMO, H&R SS's look like they would sit a tad lower than your current stance... Anyhow, I wouldnt sweat it, I would just start off by removing both front iso's, & the lower iso only in the rear. That way it will give it a slight rake & even out the stance IMO... I think it will drop the front almost a 1/2", & the rear about a 1/4".
 
I know that Eibach advertises 2.0/1.8 rear, but as we know, its never the same from car to car. there is no way yours dropped that much judging by the pics & IMO, H&R SS's look like they would sit a tad lower than your current stance... Anyhow, I wouldnt sweat it, I would just start off by removing both front iso's, & the lower iso only in the rear. That way it will give it a slight rake & even out the stance IMO... I think it will drop the front almost a 1/2", & the rear about a 1/4".

think that 1/2" in the front would be noticeable? hope so.
 
NITERY & ELITE -

judging from my pics, do you guys think a .5" drop would help? would it be pretty noticeable? some guys just report a 1/4" drop while several others say .5" . i know every car is different. would hope mine would yield the .5

nitery, i know you said no vibs or noise. how about you elite?

either of you tape the pigtails of the springs, bicycle inner tube them or anything like that?

you both took out top and bottom iso's, right?