First post. I am the proud new owner of an '03 Red coupe (bone stock). I am 57 years old and am in love again. The first thing I wanted to do to my new love was to lower it. I started in the rear. Both bolts were protruding the same amount. I lowered both to within 2 threads of the clip. No problem. Then set the rear of the car back down. It was about 1" lower. It really looked good. Moved to the front.On initial inspection I discovered that the bolts were not set at the same height on both sides. The right side had about 5/32" more bolt protruding. Let the car back down on tires and measured the height of the wheel wells. Sure enough the right side is 1/4" lower. Any body have any idea why this is like this? Is this correct? I think not. I have a strong background in stock car racing. These bolts, front and rear, appear to be weight jacker bolts. I have a set of electronic wheel scales. Would it behoove me to put the car on scales? Does someone know what the wheel weights should be on a stock c5?
Also, the bolts in the front seem to be stuck. I have relieved spring pressure and have still broken two 10 mm sockets. I will change to an impact socket and a torque wrench for the next try. I wonder how much torque the bolt will take before it breaks? Hate to break it.
Anybody have any suggestions?
I am dying to get my new love lowered. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

The front bolts should turn easily once they have the weight taken off of them...why you are breaking things is beyond me.....sounds to me like someone tried to lower the car before and changed their mind and just had it re-aligned without getting everything back where it should be.

My advice to you would be.....crank the bolts all the way back like you are returning the car to stock height but go all the way. Then loosen them the same number of turns until you get the car lowered teh way you like it. I would think / hope that the car would then sit level with the same number of turns..howvere if like I said someone just half assed it and had the car aligned then the settings would be off giving you what you have now....but I am no expert I am just guessing

 

It definitely is not normal to have one side higher than the other in the front. In fact, before lowering my Z on the stock bolts I measured all four corners and both front wheels were at the same ride height. It is possible however, that the bolts were incorrectly installed from the factory.

Regarding the frozen bolts. I had the same problem with my front bolts. It was almost impossible to torque the bolts with a socket. I tried banging on the end of the ratchet with a hammer to lossen the forzen bolt, but that did not work either. My final attempt was using a long hollow tube over the handle of the ratchet to extend the handle out about another foot to provide more torque at the bolt. This was the only way I was able to lossen the bolt enough to start lowering the Z.

Im sure an impact wrench would work but you are right, you definitely do run the risk of breaking the bolt. I think the key to this issue is leverage and increased torque. Try applying steady force with the handle extension tube. This should work.

Good Luck!

 

Thanks guys. I am goung to try one more time with impact socket and long handled breaker bar. I guess if I break the bolt, it will be a good excuse to start the suspension upgrades!!!!
Jim

 

I also did the same and I too found that the drivers side was a scooth higher, Someone told me it is due to driver weight? I'm not sure if it true but when the driver gets in the car the front drops a smidge? I don't know, It's all hear say but glad you're still into cars and modding them at such a wise age

 

Regarding the front bolts, soak them in WD 40 or PB blaster stuff for 24 hours or longer and retry turning them. Some folks here on the forum even had to remove the spring first to get the bolts to turn. Mine turned real easy but then again my car has never seen rain, not to mention the salt and sand that some folks have up north.

I've read a lot of threads regarding the cars not sitting level when all four bolts are adjusted evenly. That's just the way some C5's are. Mine was included in that group. Mine, stock (with the stock springs) sat 3/8th's higher in the RF and 1/2" higher in the LR.

I adjusted the bolts to compensate for the uneven four corners. The car sat perfect but it handled funky afterwards. Not the way to go.

When I swapped my front and rear springs to new ZO6 units the car still sat uneven. So it wasn't the springs. Also swapped out the shocks, still the same heights.

I've come to the conclusion that some C5 frames are just bent (tweeked) a bit.

To remedy the problem I installed shims between the frame and the crossmember (or carrier) (two bolt locations per side). About max. combined shim thickness is 1/4" or so that can be fit in there and still leave a few threads showing on the carrier mounting bolts and keeping the guide pins in their holes. A 1/4''+ shim will translate to a 1/2'' gain in height at the top of the fender well.

I did this a couple of years ago and no issues. The car sits perfect and handles great.

Hope this helps some of you. Bob

 

It's possible that the car was corner balanced, adjusting for the weight of the driver. It's more likely that the front bolts were not set equally from the factory.

 

You've got the scales, you luck sob, use them. Corner weighting will make it handle predictably and be more fun to drive. If the ride heights are not exactly even, take the performance improvement and don't sweat the small difference. BTW, there isn't much practical handling gain to lowering on the bolts. Get used to avoiding too steep approach angles and curbs first. I just got my first 'Vette 3 weeks ago; it sure is a blast, isn't it?

 

,zenohsixxx: Could be driver weight, however if that was the case you would think that all bolts would be different, as the driver's weight would not all land on just the right front. My "wise" age of 57 includes 39+ years of racing late models and sprints on dirt and pavement, so modding cars has been my whole life, and will remain so until the last breath!!!!!!!!!!!!!
nvrtoolate: Yes, the car is a blast. It really is great just the way it is, but I have never left anything "stock" in my life. I think you may be right about not sweating the small difference in wheel well heights.
bcseitz: Looked at your car on profile. Beautiful! I have given your fix a lot of thought. Probably right on the WD-40. You said that the rf is 3/8" higher and your lr is 1/2" higher. All my experience w/ oval track race cars on set up pad with scales shows that jacked weight always transfers diagonally. I can't understand how you were able to get the car (at the wheel wells) to sit level left to right on the front and rear both, with the condition you started with. I would assume that the wheel wells are not the most accurate place to measure for ride height. This is always done at the bottom rail of a race car chassis. Don't know for sure, but I assume that the chassis is assembled with closer tolerances than the body is assembled with. Your numbers represent a warped plane, but was this a result of an out of alignment chassis assembly, an out of alignment body mounting, or a combination of the two. My car displays the same symptoms. The rear is level (measured at the wheel well), and the right front is 1/4" low. Again a warped plane. Just not quite as severe as yours.
Don't know for sure what is going on. I don't really want to shim the front cross member to correct for a 1/4" difference in wheel well height unless I discover that the ride height as measured at the bottom of the frame rails is a warped plane.
I am going to get the car on our race car set up pad and play with some weight numbers and ride height numbers. All my experience is with oval track cars. No car I ever built for going in circles ever had any two wheel weights the same. I assume that for a road race car, the ideal would be a 50-50 left to right weight distribution with driver. Don't know if this is achievable. Don't know what the ideal front to rear would be. If I could achieve these ideal numbers I would not care about small differences in wheel well heights.
If you guys are interested, I will let you know what I come up with.
Sorry this is so long, but having been a racer for so long, I am a little **** about set up on a car.


















d

 

Setup on a road car is different, to cornerweight properly balast the front seat for your weight, half a tank of gas, then adjust cross weights to be equal (rf & lr) same as (lf & rr).
My Zo6 is
LF 903 rf850

lr795 rr739

total 3287

 

 

ErnieN85: Thanks. That is exactly what I was looking for. I should have realized that to turn both ways equally that the cross or wedge as we call it should be the same both ways. DUH!

 

It was easy to level the car that way. Thought I'd try that first. It was easy and effective.

A 1/4" isn't hardly visible when leveling a car for cosmetic reasons. I wouldn't bother messing with it. My remedy in this post was intended for cosmetic reasons and to point out that leveling a C5 with the bolts will affect the handling.
One can measure from any point on the car they want to, checking for level. The primary purpose is to visibly correct for the height in all four corners.
Measuring from the frame is pointless because the "Visiable Equation" is the objective. The frame height to the floor can be fine but if the car still sits lopsided thats not Ok. Measuring at the fenderwells, rocker panels, air dam, or rollpan is fine. Whatever works. Just make the car sit visably level. The only thing that can be done is shim the body off the frame (way to difficult) or shim between the crossmembers and the frame which I tried and was easy to do and worked great.

Most important, leveling the car with the bolts works BUT really affects handling. Just kills what the Corvette C5 is all about, handling!
Bob

 

I read on another thread that the bolts in the front are reverse threaded. If I can find the thread I will post it here. I found the post and here is the link.


https://www.corvetteforum.com/techti...D=27&TopicID=1

 

They aren't reverse threaded but just screwed into the spring from the bottom. You're turning them from the bottom (so to speak) so you just have to think about what you are doing when making the adjustments.
Bob

 

Hey Bob,If you read the link for the front it states that it is reverse threaded. These are not my words but it was taken from the link. Please read first then criticize. Thanks

 

Just had my car on scales. This car is so stock that I can not believe that the bolts have been moved. I assume they are at the stock heights. The tank was a little less than 3/4 full. I weigh 170 and was sitting in the seat.
LF 892 RF 853
LR 865 RR 820
Total 3430

LR/RF Cross 50.1%
RR/LF Cross 49.9%

That is plenty close enough to make the car handle pretty well right from the factory. I think that if I can now get the front bolts loose, I will lower it the same number of turns both sides in front, then when I lower the rear I will lower both sides the same amount,but then jack a few pounds af weight into the RR to even out the cross perfectly. Then re-check on scales. This should raise the RR and lower the LF. I think that this will make my wheel well ride heights within 1/8" left to right
and get my wheel weight where they ought to be. Close enough for the girls I go with.

 

I'm not criticizing, just being factual.
Here are a couple of pictures of some brand new GM bolts I had laying around. As you can see, they are not reverse threaded. They screw into the spring in a clockwise rotation and they unscrew in a counter-clockwise rotation.

 

I've also read in some discussions that the front bolts were "reverse threaded". That usually infers a left hand threaded fastener.
It's only "reverse threaded" if you don't correctly analyze the way the bolt threads when working from above or below the control arm (but you'll end up with a raised suspension).

 

Yeah, this bolt thing isn't rocket science, it's pretty simple. It's not like rebuilding a transmission or setting up rear end.