When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
New rear spring? My rear leaf is dead and need of replacement. The space between the tires is the same front and rear. From what I understand, the rear is supposed to have more space...
I have not noticed so many sitting "very high in the rear."
Not since 1977, anyway.
It sounds like you need to do some research and learn about these cars. The forum has some great tools to do this. You also may find a forum member that can go with you to look at a car and help you make a decision. Remember: it is a machine until it is yours; do not fall in love with it before you buy it!
I purchased a 1969 corvette brand new and still own it. Over the years it was hard to notice that the front end was slowly sagging but my mechanic placed rubber wedges between the coils to compensate the springs compressing. Over time springs will compress whether they be coil springs or leaf springs. Believe Vettes of that vintage sat lower in the front than the rear or had that look from the tire clearence compared front to rear.
About 8 years ago, I purchased a set of front coil springs which were stiffer and had a few coils less than the originals. After installation, the car still sat low in the front and the ride was very harsh. Sent those back and located an other set of springs that had the same number of the coils as the original. Maybe a little higher in the front than the original look but I like them and the tire clearance is about the same from front and back.
So, springs do sag over the years. I kept the original springs.
Correct. The original tires were 70 series and I tried 60 series. Not made for the 69. The car handled poorly. The tires would hit the wheel wells under the right conditions. Stick with the 70 Series. The 69 Vette was designed for that size tire.
I am looking to buy a !968-73 Vette and have started looking on eBay.
Why is it that so many of them seem to sit very high in the rear?? Is this a problem??
Thanks
I may be selling my '69...what exactly are you looking for? My car is a 427/435 convertible...all numbers matching, 52K miles, on a scale of 1-10, it's at least a 9.5 inside and out...over thirty trophies and other awards in the seven years I've owned it, has documentation all the way back to the sales invoice and original window sticker, plus copies of all previous titles. I plan on having it professionally appraised this week.
The car is clean and right. I have made few changes and those I have I kept the original parts. I still haven't wrapped my brain around actually letting it go, but with what the economy's done to my finances and my wife's business, it may be what I have to do.
I hope to have a better idea of what I'll do hopefully by the end of this week.
68-72s came with F70x15s, which were relatively short and in my opinion, never filled the wheel openning very well. The current replacement size for the F70 is 215R70x15. Either of these tire sizes leave a fair size gap between the top of the tire and the wheel openning lip, which does cause the illusion of the rear sitting higher.
In 73, GM switched to GR70x15s, which were taller and filled the wheel openning much better.