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

question on stance

  • Thread starter Thread starter dansdad
  • Start date Start date Sep 22, 2008

dansdad

New Member
Feb 20, 2008
19
0
0
Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Sep 22, 2008
#1
  • Sep 22, 2008
  • #1
Ok folks,

You all have helped us out much already on my sons 66 coupe but to re-cap before I ask today's question.

We are restomoding (slightly) a 66 coupe with a 6 cyl and automatic for him to drive in 2 years when he turns 16. We have taken care of the floor pans, lowered the seat pans and done much of the mechanical upgrades. What is left on that front are the disk brakes on the front and replacing the rear end so it has 5 lug to match the planned front.

So this weekend we were running around on errands, it was a wonderful day and all kinds of classics were out on the road. He found a 66 on the highway that he really liked the stance of. It was not lowered, in fact if anything i would call it raised in the rear like we used to do in the 70's and 80's. Back then, we would just use longer shackles and air shocks, but I suspect there is a better way now. What would you all recommend. I wish I was able to pick the drivers brain on the car we found, but he was on the highway and moving somewhat faster than my little 6 cyl ranger could catch...

It had larger tires on the rear, and narrow tires on the front, almost stock appearing on the front.


I know, if it were to be my car, I would lower it so it would corner better, but it is his car and his dough paying for everything.
 
B

Blu-Steel

Member
Dec 29, 2006
92
0
7
Waynesville, MO
Sep 22, 2008
#2
  • Sep 22, 2008
  • #2
Over time those rear springs sag a lot. Mine did and really became noticable when I replaced my front springs with 620 lb Grab a Track stock height springs. I replaced the rear springs with Grab A Track 5 leaf 195 lb stock height springs and they really raised the rear. Each leaf is thicker than stock leafs so they should not suffer as much sag over time as the stock ones did.
I'd suggest trying those springs on the rear and if they raise them too much you can always put lowering blocks in.
 

izzy jr

New Member
Jul 18, 2005
76
1
0
Abilene,TX
Sep 22, 2008
#3
  • Sep 22, 2008
  • #3
even just new stock gt leafs with 235 60 14's on the rear and 205 70 14's front create that appearance and both tires are almost the same outer diameter with the 235's obviously being wider and it still handles decently
 

dansdad

New Member
Feb 20, 2008
19
0
0
Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Sep 22, 2008
#4
  • Sep 22, 2008
  • #4
He is looking for a larger tire diameter in the rear than front.

Think back to the 70's and 80's when you would put on air shocks and the largest tire that would fit.

His car, with the 6 cyl and all will probably not turn them, but his goal is to "make it look so fast, nobody will even try"

To that I wish him good luck.

I think the new stock GT springs sound like a good idea, and we will be replacing the front as well. I will try to talk him into a Shelby drop so that it will look like he pushed the rear up even more.

Up next... split header(s) and dual exhaust...

wonder what his good grades will buy him next.... I am thinking
 

izzy jr

New Member
Jul 18, 2005
76
1
0
Abilene,TX
Sep 22, 2008
#5
  • Sep 22, 2008
  • #5
dansdad said:
He is looking for a larger tire diameter in the rear than front.

Up next... split header(s) and dual exhaust...

wonder what his good grades will buy him next.... I am thinking
Click to expand...


how about a t5 manual conversion and 3.55-3.73 ls rear gear to turn the bigger wheels easier, or the rear valance for the gt with dual exhaust exiting through it,shelby front valance with or without bumper looks good either way
 

dansdad

New Member
Feb 20, 2008
19
0
0
Highlands Ranch, Colorado
Sep 23, 2008
#6
  • Sep 23, 2008
  • #6
We have already purchased the GT rear and are planning the Shelby front. Body parts we still need are the passenger front fender and front valance. We are also looking for a shelby type scoop to install. We will not be changing the trans unless the auto craps out, then it will be another, albeit more modern, auto.

Thanks for the advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Buying with a bad motor?
  • djj62478
  • Mar 8, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
8
Views
233
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Mar 11, 2026
TTSaleen
O
Good all around perfornace-ish tires?
  • optionizerSS
  • Jan 25, 2026
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
6
Views
261
2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk- Monday at 9:00 AM
optionizerSS
O
Progress Thread The Mach Returns - Update/build thread
  • squeak93
  • Feb 20, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
5
Views
252
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Jun 1, 2026
squeak93
L
SN95 Interior / Exterior Color Combinations - were some not possible?
  • lparsons42
  • Aug 29, 2025
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
4
Views
431
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Sep 2, 2025
Mustang5L5
New Member with a 1992
  • Clutchfork
  • Oct 18, 2025
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
5
Views
258
The Welcome Wagon Oct 19, 2025
Clutchfork
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?