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

Setting Ride Height - need measurement

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scott W
  • Start date Start date Nov 7, 2009

Scott W

Founding Member
May 27, 2000
1,768
0
37
Toronto, Ontario
Nov 7, 2009
#1
  • Nov 7, 2009
  • #1
I need to know the measurement from ground to fender lip. I have quite a bit of stereo equip in the trunk, so as a result the back end sits a little bit lower than the front. I just picked up a front coilover kit and I want to know how low I can go in the front. My rear measurement is 25.5" and my front is almost 26". Anybody know the stock measurement? What's the lowest you can go without any problems.

P.S. I already had lowering springs on the car,
 

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,016
1,613
194
NJ
Nov 7, 2009
#2
  • Nov 7, 2009
  • #2
Not sure you are going to get an answer that you are looking for.
Almost nobody's car sits at the same height.

Do what's best for your car.
If your car is that loaded up with stereo equipment, you probably aren't all that worried about a road race suspension, so just lower the front of the car to the point where you think it looks best and the tires don't rub.
 

stang&2Birds

Founding Member
May 4, 2000
2,091
5
58
New England. :-) CT/MA
Nov 7, 2009
#3
  • Nov 7, 2009
  • #3
Scott,

Hi.
No, no. You have it all wrong. You put any spring in the car, or any tire on the car, and you are legally able to claim any amount of drop you want. Also, you can claim that a 9" drop makes your car handle like it's on rails.


Okay, on to the real tech.
First: My interests are in handling and real-life street suspensions. So, my advice is also mainly concerned with those areas. Others likely know more about suspension setups for the Quarter mile, or mainly for the lowered look.


The stock height for a fox is approx 27-1/4" +/- 1/4".
The amount you can drop the car "and not have problems" varies with the springs, the suspension setup, and the intended/desired use of the car.

In general, you can drop a Stang ~3/4"-1" as long as you go with springs that are ~20% stiffer (i.e 600 lbs/in), and you use a bumpsteer kit and CC plates. That's to keep the car "with the same street and handling characteristics" as the Stock GT. IMHO, most people are full of it when they claim that their car handles better than stock.

Please realize that the GT is already a lowered platform.
And that the ***s that call the GT a "4x4 stance" don't have the slightest clue about automotive suspensions.


The tires/rims that will fit on any Stang (lowered or stock) depend a lot on the year of the car, the specific car and how it's tolerances added up, and the specific rim and the exact tire chosen. In other words, just because "Mike" has the same year car and springs, that doesn't mean that you can run "Mike's" tire/rim setup on your car without any problems. Sorry, but that's the real truth. You can get an "idea" of what fit from other people. But, in reality, anything other than the stock tire and rims get into the build tolerances of the Stang!


As for your specific setup, I'd like to see the rear closer to the same height as the front (26"). Then, I'd suggest a good CC plate (MM), and bumpsteer kit (MM). Also, you should have a front spring rate of at least 600 (Mach1/Bullitt rates). Otherwise, on the street, you'll be very likely to bottom out the suspension/frame on a big pot hole. On the street, you need to keep the amount of force required to achieve full jounce similar to the stock setup.

The above is why the Ford Engineers lowered the Mach1 and Bullitt ~1/2 and 3/4" and went to 600 lbs rate springs. Note that the Mach1 and Bullitt already had the "3rd generation spindles" (96-04) for reduces bumpsteer and ackerman change. And, the sn95 platform could support proper alignment with CC plates.

Also, if you look at the ride height of the 95 Cobra R - a car sold only to race teams and made for circle track racing, you'll notice that Ford did not slam their race car. They also went to even stiffer springs. Although, it's debatable if the springs were still too soft for a dedicated race car. Race suspension setups are partly religious beliefs.


As I said, it depends on your intended/desired use of the car. Some people want the lowered look, and don't car about handling as much. Some people want a pure handling car, and don't mind driving around with harsh 900+ rate springs on the front. For me, I want a better handling car, that isn't "super harsh" when driving in the POS New England states. I often tell people that the New England roads are pot holes connected with small patches of asphalt.

And, yes, I do put my money where my mouth is:
Mustang 86 - Mach1 Springs

Good luck!
 

stang&2Birds

Founding Member
May 4, 2000
2,091
5
58
New England. :-) CT/MA
Nov 7, 2009
#4
  • Nov 7, 2009
  • #4
P.S. I have an '86. And, I wanted to keep the fenders stock (not rolling the lips, or pushing them out). I also wanted to keep/squeeze the 245/45/17's (RE730's on D178 rims) on the front. And, I wanted better handling. That's why I have the stiffer springs and close to stock height. As the car is now, the front tires are a very very very tight fit.

As I said, the year, rims, tires, and tolerances for each specific car can make a big difference.
 

Scott W

Founding Member
May 27, 2000
1,768
0
37
Toronto, Ontario
Nov 8, 2009
#5
  • Nov 8, 2009
  • #5
Thanks for the reply and info. I have an 89 LX. I have suspension technique lowering springs and i"m going to replace the front with the coilover kit. I want handling and looks. right now the car is leaning to the back, I want to lower the front at least as much as the rear, so that it rides level. I already have the cc plates (MM). I have the rear upper and lower control arms. the only way to raise the back would be to put stock springs back on, or use 'weight jacker' rear lower control arms. I'm going to install the coilover kit and drop the front to 25.5", the same as the rear. I'll check for clearance issues. I was hoping some of you had some info about tolerances - so I don't learn things the hard way.

I've got stock size 225/60/15's up front, and 275/50/15's in the back.
 

Attachments

  • DSC01247.webp
    94.8 KB · Views: 257
  • DSC01263.webp
    119.1 KB · Views: 206
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Suspension Lower control arms needed
  • racer_dave
  • Feb 9, 2026
  • 1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech
Replies
3
Views
224
1974 - 1978 Mustang II Talk & Tech Feb 20, 2026
Noobz347
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
A definitive answer to the question of how much height Energy Suspension isolators add
  • 2000xp8
  • May 20, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
266
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 20, 2025
2000xp8
2
Electrical mayhem
  • 2000ElectricGreen
  • Mar 13, 2026
  • 1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk-
Replies
2
Views
249
1996 - 2004 SN95 Mustang -General/Talk- Mar 24, 2026
2000ElectricGreen
2
R
1994 GT 5.0L crank no start
  • Red1994MustangGT
  • Apr 15, 2025
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
  • 2
Replies
23
Views
1K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Aug 19, 2025
Kurt_MO
K
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?