I have some questions about lowering our cars

Why do you want to lower your car?

It depends WHY you want to lower your car.
o Handling? (read my posts!)
o For looks? (ignore my posts! )
o For Quarter Mile? (I sometimes mention some issues for that).
o Is ride comfort important at all in your setup?

ANYONE that tells you that you can do all any two of the above better than the stock GT setup is talking out of their *SS!!! Well, I'm assuming that you don't want to spend ~$15K in mods (maybe ~$7K if you do all of the work yourself).

For handling, call MM, and tell them your budget and desire. Or, call Sam Strano (search for him by that user name on the corral). Either will treat you right.

Or, put on B springs, cut them, use 96 spindles, put your hat on backwards, and go boasting how your car will out handle my car any day of the week! LMAO!

BTW: The YEAR matters a LOT in squeezing in tires and so on! A 92 & 93 Stang is different than a pre-92 Stang. And, tolerances make a difference in if a setup will work in one car and not another. And, tires VARY! And, people don't properly inflate their tires, and so on.

The bottom line? Be very careful if anyone says "it fits on my car, so it'll fit on your car".

And, yes, I put my money where my mouth is:
http://www.veryuseful.com/mustang/tech/misc/Mustang1986_with_Mach1_springs/

BTW: I've also had B springs on the car (rice, rice, baby!), sn95 FCAs, 400lbs/in springs, 4 cyl springs, etc. Yup. I read and got tons of pure BS and incorrect advice! I no longer have time to keep fighting that battle. I used to have a spring FAQ. Even though it had a tons of good info and put down a LOT of ricer BS, it ended up being out of date. For me, I didn't want to keep something that was ~85% correct. Yea, better than the ~20% correct BS that used to (and still does) float in the threads. But, if I know that something was fully accurate, *I* didn't want to be part promoting incorrect info.

If you read something I wrote in a thread, then that was the best to my knowledge at that time. Some info may be out of date!

Honestly, the stock GT setup is, by far, the best compromise for "everything".

In real life, there's a trade-off for any of the 4 "targets" I mentioned above. You have to have a firmer ride for handling. That hurts comfort and for qtr mile launches. The same is true for lowering. A lowered car (more than 1") is worse for qtr mile launches and hurts comfort. For the qtr mile, don't forget about the need for big tires in the rear and how the rear squats during launch.

Also, in terms of handling, bumpsteer, center of gravity, and geometry changes become important! So, without a lot of $$$ mods (and most likely a new k-frame and fender mods), lowering a Stang by more than ~1" screws up a lot of things!

You're in LA. So, you could likely lower the car more than 1" and not have problems with the potholes and snow that most of the country has. For any part of the country that gets snow, the big cities and the small local streets are often "potholes connected by small patches of asphalt". That's a great description of any New England big city.

Back to the lowering. Coil-overs may be what you want. They offer the ability to adjust the "spring rate" and height. However, *I* will say over and over and over, the Fox and sn95s strut towers were NOT designed for coil-overs, not by a long shot! It's one thing for a "weekend toy" qtr mile or circle track car to run coil-overs. Yea, it's not seeing real-life pot-holes, speed bumps, and so on. And, it's not taking the beating that a street car takes. Stangs have had their coil-overs go through the strut towers, had their coil-over crack, distort, ruin the strut towers and so on. But, after a few million cars and 20+ year, you've never heard of that from the coil spring system (not counting the POS strut towers rusting out).


Also, *I* am not a fan of coil-overs in a powerful qtr mile car that lifts it's front end off the track. Yea, put the FULL force of the engine and heavy-*ss front-end of the car on a "small bearing" that's on the CC plate (caster camber plate - required for coil-overs) which is bolted to the weak *ss strut towers. YIKES!!

Qtr mile cars have light front springs. So, they come close to, or hit, full jounce (front-end compression) when the front-end comes crashing down after a launch. With the stock setup, the springs fully compress and it's the FCA, compressed spring, and the top of the beefy k-frame.

With a coil-over setup, it's the FCA, rod in the strut fully compressed, bearing in the CC plate, and a lot of force that's now pulling the strut tower backwards and inwards from that single ~1.5" point.


Last: Yea, I've read a lot about people saying how coil-overs are "okay for a Fox/sn95". Hmm, I don't know one that's involved in "high-stress" high-reliability mechanical design. And, responsible for designs that would likely get them fired, and likely never work again as an engineer, if their stupid design failed because it was a stupid *ss design (like the flaming river steering shaft). Yea, GMS and C&L can design and sell pure cr*p, and "get away with it". It's different when it's an engineer designing for a high visibility and reliability market (like for OEM automotive, Defense, aerospace, etc).

As for the ABS, you need sn95 front and rear axles. Sn95 rear axles limits how wide a tire you can put in the back since it pushes the axle out by 0.75". However, the benefits of ABS is awesome!

To put in ABS, the "hard part" is getting the harness and connectors. A local junkyard may be able to get them for you, or allow you to get them. You need the connectors that plus into the ABS sensors (4) and the 2 connectors that plus into the ABS controller. Then, it's a lot new brake lines! Plus, you need to decide where to put the controller. Most put it in the stock location (on the frame rail, on the driver's side, next to the bottom of the radiator). Or, if they have the battery in the trunk, they put the ABS controller where the batter used to be. For me, I put it in a unique place, next to the battery. I have to move the coil to the passenger-side, move the starter really down, and push the battery forward a little. Plus, make custom brackets and figure out how to make the brake lines so that I could mount the ABS controller with some brake lines already connected.

Also, here's the (well written) tech article that most people go by:
http://www.corral.net/tech/handling/abs.html

Why would anyone want ABS? Ugh!

i guess i am from the old school where I leanred how to modulate brakes. I guess I just figure that ABS makes the drive have even less control of the car.

93 LX said:

i guess i am from the old school where I leanred how to modulate brakes. I guess I just figure that ABS makes the drive have even less control of the car.

Click to expand...

ABS is activated only when the wheel is about to lock up or has already locked up. So, if the ABS activates, it's SAVING YOUR *SS by allowing yo to keep control of the vehicle (steering) and in 99.99% of the cases, GREATLY reducing the braking distance. The ABS can control EACH wheel from 10-60 times a second. And, it does that by knowing the rate of deceleration of the wheel and the vehicles speed. When activated, ABS tries to keep the wheel slip, for the slipping wheel, at ~the optimal ~7% wheel slip.

Also, have you ever driven on icy roads, or leave covered roads? In those conditions, often 1 or more wheels will loose grip because of the leave ice. With ABS, no big deal! Keep your foot on the brake, and the ABS keeps the other wheels from locking up, allowing you to slow down. Otherwise, it's skidding and having the car turn because of traction differences.

I find that people that don't like ABS, have never really tried it out on an EMPTY icy parking lot, or an EMPTY parking lot with leaves.

ABS is the type of stuff that I do - electrical and mechanical control of "stuff".

I'd say that a drop of ~1" is best. You don't want to go to low. More than a 1" drop is mainly for looks. Also, with any drop, you'll likely need CC plates. That puts a lot of stress on the strut towers. So, I strongly recommend a STB.

People don't argue that the POS strut towers move (even in the 100% stock setup). What they debate is if it's "really better" to have the moving strut tower "possible effect" the steady strut tower while in a turn. Again, these people are not worried about daily stress on the strut tower, or the massive forces on the strut towers when a pot hole is hit.

It's important to realize what application people are talking about, and why they defend and promote that type of setup.


And nope, I've never had the pleasure to visit the New Orleans or LA area. I love the mountains and the trees. So, I like to spend my vacations in Vermont, Maine, and the White Mountains in NH. The only 2 places that I haven't visited, that I'd like to see, are Nevada and the Grand Canyon region, and the LA/TX gulf area. Maybe in a few years. I'm (very thankfully) swamped now juggling two consulting gigs. Either could go away with little notice. So, that's why I keep the both jobs.