Springs

MSM0075

MSM0075

Member
May 13, 2003
741
0
16
Central Jersey
#1
Well me and my bud just replaced shocks and struts on my '88 2.3 and its still dripped a little on the drivers side. So I guess its time for some springs...I would like to go Eibach. The car hopefully will be turbocharged in the next few months and I want it to handle like a beast. Can you reccomend better springs? Where should I order from? Summit wanted 270 bux...I thought that was kind of high??
 
#2
Is a stiff ride acceptable?
I used 99+ mustang springs, and trimmed them for the stockish ride height. The ride is definatly very firm, but not to obtrusive unless I hit a pot hole or railroad crossing.
You could also go with 87-93 5.0 springs. They will be slightly stiffer in the front, but will be a stock replacement for the most part.
 
#5
any one here uses eibach V8 spirings on there 2.3?? i was thing of doing it since . i want a realy stiff car. and the 2.3 springs are harder to find and i could get some nice v8 eibach ones off evilbay.
 
#6
MSM0075 said:
I would like to go eibach beacuse its most popular wich usually means reliability. Plus I want to lower the car a bit for handling...
Click to expand...
Just to warn you my dad gave me his springs because he said they sagged, I think he just didn't like the stance they gave his car. My car had a nearly inperceptible reverse California rake, which is supposed to better for the Ackerman steering motion of the rear axle :shrug: , with them on my car.
 
#7
Lx89Stang05 said:
any one here uses eibach V8 spirings on there 2.3?? i was thing of doing it since . i want a realy stiff car. and the 2.3 springs are harder to find and i could get some nice v8 eibach ones off evilbay.
Click to expand...
I work for Advance Auto and in looking in the catalog the 2.3 and 5.0 had the exact same p/n's. I was wondering this myself. My assumption is that they are significently stiffer and with the fact the lower that they should work fine.
 
#8
TheNoachSHO said:
I work for Advance Auto and in looking in the catalog the 2.3 and 5.0 had the exact same p/n's. I was wondering this myself. My assumption is that they are significently stiffer and with the fact the lower that they should work fine.
Click to expand...
i just dont want to frontend to be riding high. cause of the weight difference between the v8 and 4
 
#9
eibach pro kit... said 1.5" but prolly lowered 2"...

ka0tyk-sig.jpg
 
#12
Lx89Stang05 said:
i just dont want to frontend to be riding high. cause of the weight difference between the v8 and 4
Click to expand...
If you're wanting it to handle better, a little more heigth in the front is supposed to be good for Ackerman (the way the rear axle tweaks diagonaly making the wheels move fore and aft , giving a rear steering effect) But it'll look kinda silly. Gof I wanna get my stang running again.
 
#20
Cougar said:
17" Adobe Photoshops :D
Click to expand...

wrong. 18" saleen photochops... but I do have a set of these 16x9" sitting at home. I have 10 holes on the car right now, a set of 10 holes sitting outside, and a set of 14" steel rims at a friends house... you always have to have 4 sets of rims, you never know when you're gonna need em. =P

DSC01028.JPG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PonyGTrider
Suspension Harsh Ride
Replies
62
Views
2K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Noobz347
Noobz347
N
Fox Street Suspension Build Advice
Replies
3
Views
328
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Noobz347
Noobz347
91GTstroked
Progress Thread 91GTstroked 90 7 up convertible build
Replies
8
Views
334
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
91GTstroked
91GTstroked
B
Where to go from here on my build…
Replies
8
Views
211
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
AeroCoupe
AeroCoupe
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
Replies
4
Views
942
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
gray owl
G
Top Bottom
Back
Forums
Menu