First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List
.........................................................................
What a lot of people don't realize, and you won't get CI or any other vender
to admit it, but Firebirds sat one inch lower than their Camaro counterpart
when they came out in 1967. Remember the "Wide Tracking" ad campaign? The
springs that you are buying from CI or any other source are actually made
for the Camaro. Look up a spring for a Camaro in today's catalogs, same
part number as Firebird. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone actually sells
the correct springs. Perhaps a set of used Camaro springs would make it sit
correct?
Stu
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clell Rogers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 1:47 PM
Subject: [FGF] 69 FB Conv - new springs - sits too high
First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List
.........................................................................
Does anyone have any words of wisdom? There is a 4" gap between the top of
the tire (F70) and the fender. I am doing an "off the frame" restoration of
the bird and ordered new springs from Classic. (CS656 by Elgin) and tossed
the old springs - dumb #1. Before tossing the original springs, though, I
did compared the height, diameter of the coil and also the diameter of the
spring material and they were identical. I am sure that the springs are
aligned correctly in their seats top and bottom. I have rolled the car back
and forth to help it settle (it's not drivable yet) and also have had two
guys (330 lbs.) sit on the fenders and it only goes down ½ to 1 inch. The
engine, trans and front bumper etc. are all installed. Items not installed
are the shakers, fluids, seats, and a few other small items. Just sitting
there the upper control arms are contacting the upper rubber bumpers no
less.
I contacted Classic who suggested to weigh the front of the car. Not being
drivable yet, it would cost me $100 to rent scales, so hoping that maybe the
PN was wrong I ordered another set of springs - dumb #2. I installed one of
the new springs and it did not correct the problem. I talked with Mike (?)
at Eaton Springs and he said that the free height should be 17" which it is,
and the loaded height should be 11". The loaded height appears to be more
like 13".
I am a bit gun shy to order another set of springs from somewhere, because
maybe I'm missing something really obvious? I realize I could cut of a coil
of the spring, but I think it would still be very stiff and is not really
correcting the problem. I might end up doing that, but want to pursue other
aspects first.
Perhaps this is a common problem with aftermarket springs?
Is there anyone able to bail me out?
Many thanks,
Clell in Colorado Springs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submissions to Firebird-L: <[email protected]>
Unsubscribe from Firebird-L: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Help: <http://FirstGenFirebird.org/firebird/Firebird-L.html>
Classifieds: <http://FirstGenFirebird.org/ubb/>
Owner Pictures: <http://FirstGenFirebird.org/show/>
Donations: <http://FirstGenFirebird.org/store/cart.mv?999999>
FGF Merchandise: <http://FirstGenFirebird.org/store>
