It seems that many forum members have had issues with turning their car into a rake after installing a composite spring. Which brand does not seem to make a difference. What gives? Why don't the spring vendors make these things so you can actually lower the car without the bolts having to drag on the pavement. Is there some law of physic's I can't see here that is blocking a good solution?

Vendors? WTF? I'm getting grief form the old locals about going boutique and causing my own problems...

I inserted my full rant related to my recent fun in Grumpy 427's thread on the same subject. (if anyone is interested)

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c3-t...correctly.html

Thanks all!

 

TRW and Hypercoil (Hyperco) composite both are built the same way and will give you ride height issues, as recorded by past experiences with forum members.

VBP composite does not give you ride height issues.

Strange as this now sounds, I have a steel 9 leaf 2.5inch HD 80-82 spring from Mid America which also required me to have 9 inch bolts to get a proper ride height. It the way the aftermarket springs are built. The GM spring had a different custom arch built into it. I could see this from looking at the GM vs the aftermarket. Plain as day.

I don't think the aftermarket iron rear 7 leaf steel spring has this problem though.

So this problem is not limited to the composites now.

 

Haven't had the issue with the steel springs I've run over the years (most recent combo, F41 w/Guldstrand shortened main), but have seen enough complaints that I'll sign your petition...


TSW

 

 

We have run into ride height issues on specific vehicles, but with over 10,000 springs out there to date I think we've been pretty successful. Case in point: I have a 77 in the shop that has had one of our springs for probably 8 years and it sits perfectly level with the bolts that come in the install kit.
I know there have been ride height issues discussed on this forum in the past, they are out there and we do keep track of them. But I hear more rave reviews from my return customers than complaints (otherwise I wouldn't be in business) and have several customers with multiple cars with our spring under all of them.
If one of our customers does experience a ride height issue we stand behind the product and are concerned with our customer's satisfaction. I would rather take back the spring than have an in-correctable ride height issue and a dissatisfied customer. Let me know if you have any questions.

Andrew
800-442-0335

 

I just changed from the stock 9-leaf to VBP 330# monospring with little increase in ride height.

 

I used VBP's Sport/Slalom kit #42002 which comes with a 360# monospring, 550# coils, Bilstein Sports, and 8" bolts. This is the ride height I got pretty much "right out of the box".. Slight adjustment to the rear bolt on one side to correct for uneven ride height.

Approx 27 3/4" +/- all the way around, or about 2 fingers...







Maybe I just got lucky!

 

Nice set up Mako. I like that... loving that hood....
Yeah, your ride height is desirable. Many members lower the rear without doing the front. So if you go to low in the back, it makes the front stick out. I got 550lbs spring on the front also. I was worried it would be to low, but it looks good so far.

 

As I said, I actually DID NOT lower the rear, at least very little if I recall..just a little tweaking. Its my only experience with a composite spring, so I read guys complaints regarding excessive ride height, and consider myself lucky that mine came out about right...

 

Andrew, although I do have a TRW spring from you, and with Bilstine Sport shocks it works great... BUT yes, I to had to go to 10" bolts.


my feelings on this is that it has been reported so many times that people are burnt out on reporting.

Everyone here that I have read about says the same thing... the arc needs to be redone imho. yes, the 10" bolts fix it, or that is puts a "band aid over" the real issue.

now, i will say this, my vett set so high when stock my wife said it looked "horny" i lowered it about 3", to what i believe to be a more proper hight.... and this is where the 10" come in......


if a new spring was to be offered that would bring down the car 1-3" with out 10-12" bolts dragging the road, there would be a lot of interest i believe.... very much like VBP front coil springs that drop the front 1-2" without cutting the coil.... good business...



its simple, nether spring manufacture is really listing to us, but when one finely does, they will be getting all the business... i understand it cost money to redo it right... but the first one that does, can say goodbye to the one that does not....

i for one am waiting.....

 

Excellent Summary! ....and there are plenty of threads out there complaining about ride height issues with VBP springs as well....bottom line is we should be able to get a composite that gives factory height with 6 3/4" bolts...and then be able to lower it further if we want with longer bolts. The fact that all of them require 8" bolts to even get close to factory height is IMHO!

Waiting for other vendors to chime in here..

 

Interesting comment. Even with the cushion-and-cup kits a set of 8" bolts is included. I do not know the reason for this. Why is it so difficult to emulate the original 6" configuration?



I stayed with nine-leaf steel and 6" bolts.



The car looks a little high with the 235-60R/15 tires/wheels rather than 70s but I am content.

 

Good Points made. Pauldana, do you happen to have any pics of those 10 inch bolts on your car or did you trim them down due to being to close to the road after you got your ride height? I guess if you have the stock 15 inch wheels it could be an issue.

 

Hi,
I'll add that some ride height dimensions can be affected by the wheel/tire size. The dimension to the wheel arch being one of them.
The front control arm and rear strut rod dimensions are a bit more difficult to do but are probably more reliable to compare to stock dimensions.
Regards,
Alan

Hi MS72,
If that's 'Gig Harbour'.... NICE!

 

For the sake of this thread I'd like to believe that only people using stock diamater tires are responding. Or at least those smart enough to know what they have for tires and how it relates.

-W

 

Andrew I know you're awesome...because I've delt with you so I'll be as gentle as possible.

I too have some serious ride height concerns, but I won't know untill I get it down and put some miles on it. And for all I know all this might apply equally to the VBP springs as well. But you're here for the moment and everyone is quite sure the TRW spring (at least) is in the game here for being high.

That said.... the fact that the TRW (now Muskegon) spring needs to come with a bolt one inch longer than stock is prima facie that it's made "wrong" out of the mold. Fixing it with Bubba's bolt is just a band aid.

Using a bolt any longer than the "1 inch over bolt" to correct ride height issues puts that bolt way down below the rim and is very dangerous in the event of a tire blow-out. Have you made any customers "happy" by providing those even longer bolts? Do your longer bolts come with safety disclaimers? I know I would not want that kind of exposure in todays climate. There's a lot more on the line with these spring questions than just "customer satisfaction".

Those that say that it's not too much to expect a spring made here in 2010 to work correctly with stock bolt lengths are correct. The TRW design is (very) old and it might be time to revisit it a little, if for no other reason than to get it to work correctly with stock length bolts.

All these cars have the exact same geometry from 63-82 so any variance from "car to car" must be more of a QC thing with the springs.

-W

 

We really need a poll here.

There are so many reasons for a spring customer to complain or not complain that it's hard to get a read on reality.

The following possibilities result in a happy (or non-complaining) customer.

1. Car is at correct ride height - owner is happy.
2. Car is high - owner does not notice or care.
3. Car is high - owner likes that 70's "jacked up" look.
4. Car is high - owner corrected it with unsafe length bolts.
5. Car is high - owner lives with it and does not complain.

vs only one possibility for a complaint

Car is high - owner is unhappy and decides to complain.


Note that at no point in any of these converstaions (until now) has anyone even suggested the possibility of: "Car is low - owner is unhappy and decides to complain."

If all was truely "normal" the high and low complaints should be about equel. All I've ever seen here are "high" complaints.

-W

 

Just to kick 'er off...

I'll go with door #1!!!

 

You have to make the assumption that VBP, Muskegon, and the like are designing their products for 15" stock wheels based on original GM specs. Why do otherwise? The 18" rubber band crowd can find products elsewhere.

 

Well, we at least need to assume a stock 27" diamater wheel/tire combo.
How it gets there, is beyond the scope of the discuassion.
-W