Sicarius428 said:My 70 with the shelby drop and eibach big block 1 inch springs lowered my car 3 inches... Granted its supporting a 428 but thats what mine ended up being.
Kevin
Dagz said:hey boys not here to steal the thread, but what are you running for ride height with that stang and the 20's MDJAY
Dagz
jmenke said:The drop was too much on my car with the Promotorsports drop and 1" Eibach progressive rate springs. Looked and handled good, but 17" 235 45s on a '66 rubbed and drug my headers.
Opentracker said:I agree that they start to look like wagon wheels after you get past the 16" wheels.
John
mdjay said:Come on now John! Let's not get into this debate~
This is a matter of preference!
I'm all for the 17" look
zookeeper said:Opentracker, nice pics. I see it really isn't too much trouble to clearance the A-arm. But most 16x8's built for older Mustangs use a 4 1/2 backspace, which is only 1/8" more than my 15x7 shelby wheels. That means that there will be 7/8" more wheel to the outside than mine and I don't have that much room, so how does everyone claim to run 8's on the front that don't rub with no modifications?
zookeeper said:Opentracker, nice pics. I see it really isn't too much trouble to clearance the A-arm. But most 16x8's built for older Mustangs use a 4 1/2 backspace, which is only 1/8" more than my 15x7 shelby wheels. That means that there will be 7/8" more wheel to the outside than mine and I don't have that much room, so how does everyone claim to run 8's on the front that don't rub with no modifications?
Opentracker said:That is a bad-ass looking car. I GIVE! - - Those wheels look killer!
Some of the SUV's with 24's do look a little funny to me. Just my opinion.
John
Sicarius428 said:Yeah that was with new springs. I After I change the heads to some Edelbrocks it should come up a bit more. I like the way it corners or looks but my headers drag on most speedbumps. I drove my friend's 70 with some 620s and it was a bit skittish on some of the bumps is why I went with the progressive springs. Not that I drive the car much but thus far I am really pleased.
Kevin
Ok, that's what I thought. Thanks for answering honestly, I really don't want the tires to rub at all, nor do I want to raise the car. I know some companies make 16x7's and I'll probably go with those when the time comes rather than hope rolling the lips is enough.Opentracker said:Our '65 coup runs the 16X8 wheels with 4.5 backspacing on the track with a 225/50/16 tire. It has glass fenders and there is no lip at all. They do rub a little but not much. The cars I have seen with the 8" wheels do have some mods or they sit way high with a small tire and stiff springs.
OH, you had to go and role out Big-Mac didn’t yah. That is the one and only classic mustang that I thought looked good with 18”. However, my personal limit is 17 and I really want to go 16 because I like to see some tire on the rims.mdjay said:IMO It's the bling factor that can kill the look on an early model.
Ex Big-Mac did a nice job with 18's
Looks better like this...mdjay said:zoo - they have 17" 5 and 10 spokes with the correct backspacing.
It's been my experience that just the 1" s drop can cause a bind as well. So be careful with the process.
Dodge's wheel chart shows someone ran a 17x9 with a 5.5 bs in the front on a 67-68. That put's the offset in the same spot on as a 17x8 with a 4.5. Personally I would think you might run into problems with the UCA and/or the outer tie rod.
http://www.dodgestang.com/Tire Fitment Guide 67-8.pdf
Just found out 20's work...
Sicarius428 said:Honestly the car doesn't roll or plow that I noticed. I've taken it on a few good turns but I also put the 1 1/8th front sway and 7/8ths sway bar in the rear. The front end is still by no means spongy. Shorty headers really aren't an option for the 428... I wouldn't want to sacrifice the power that the long tubes give me anyways. hehe... not that its hurting for any.
Kevin
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?