Back too high...

[Don C]

That is correct.

 

[Stanglover]

Back in 73 that car would have been sitting just perfect jacked up like that where I grew up.........

You got that right, same here.  lol  It would have had aluminum slots and N50's on the back though.  In the before picture we see the Mustang script on the front fender, and it is of course personal preference to run with the Mach 1 decal in the recent pic.  I do believe though that the Mach 1 with the base 302 would not have had the competition suspension with the staggered shocks.  I'm at the point where I don't get overly critical with the choices on certain cars, because in many cases people bought them that way and perhaps haven't had time or money to remove non-stock features.  Or they like them that way, it's all good as long as someone isn't trying to pass off a tribute type of car for big bucks.  It's more important now to just keep these cars on the road rather than rusting in a junkyard. ::thumb::

 I totally agree with your comments and not my intention to be too critical. My car is far from the way it came out of Ford, but it is presented as perhaps what Mach 1's SHOULD have been from the factory. Besides most of the upgrades I did are for handling and safety, the rest is just "dress-up". As for base Mach's with the 302, I can't comment on that other than I thought  all Mach 1's had comp suspension, but would be interesting to know. I merely mentioned what I noticed in our friends pic to ask the question "did he know it was not likely a Mach 1 as represented"? "What's the VIN??"

Here is a pic of my 72. When I got it in 1980, it was jacked up to the hilt (until I lowered it) on the shackles and it does have aluminum slot wheels.

 

[Jean-Pierre]

YYYEEESSSSS!

:thankyouyellow:

It took me time to understand but between all of you, I got there.

I manage to get by in in fluent english but my problem is the mechanical terms that I know very badly and google translations are very bad.  :shootself:

Next time, I'll ask you pictures, it'll be easy in may opinion...

 

[NOT A T5]

Jean Pierre, OUI OUI !

 

[Jean-Pierre]

Hy guys,

No problemo !  ::thumb::

I buy this car in may 18 at at a little garage in Minnesota and I'm perfectly know that is a sportroof and NOT a Mach 1...  

It has not been restored. Only the painting is new..

 

[Jean-Pierre]

Not restored but... :whistling:

 

[donkost]

Back in 73 that car would have been sitting just perfect jacked up like that where I grew up.........

You got that right, same here.  lol  It would have had aluminum slots and N50's on the back though.  In the before picture we see the Mustang script on the front fender, and it is of course personal preference to run with the Mach 1 decal in the recent pic.  I do believe though that the Mach 1 with the base 302 would not have had the competition suspension with the staggered shocks.  I'm at the point where I don't get overly critical with the choices on certain cars, because in many cases people bought them that way and perhaps haven't had time or money to remove non-stock features.  Or they like them that way, it's all good as long as someone isn't trying to pass off a tribute type of car for big bucks.  It's more important now to just keep these cars on the road rather than rusting in a junkyard. ::thumb::

 I totally agree with your comments and not my intention to be too critical. My car is far from the way it came out of Ford, but it is presented as perhaps what Mach 1's SHOULD have been from the factory. Besides most of the upgrades I did are for handling and safety, the rest is just "dress-up". As for base Mach's with the 302, I can't comment on that other than I thought  all Mach 1's had comp suspension, but would be interesting to know. I merely mentioned what I noticed in our friends pic to ask the question "did he know it was not likely a Mach 1 as represented"? "What's the VIN??"

Here is a pic of my 72. When I got it in 1980, it was jacked up to the hilt (until I lowered it) on the shackles and it does have aluminum slot wheels.

That pic is awesome- I love seeing these types of cars with the "day 2" mods that we all had back in the day.  In addition to slotted mags with wide tires in the rear and air shocks as well, my GTO back then even had the famous dual side exhaust pipes with Thrush mufflers when I bought it!  I guess that pic was taken in Ontario, and it looks just like the row of homes built around 1960 where my parents still live to this day in Pennsylvania.  Yes I believe someone else posted that the F (302-2V) and H (351-2V) code engine cars did not have the competition suspension, makes sense.  You know it still makes me cringe just a little when I see Mach 1 decals on a convertible, but I'm getting over it.  lol  Again, people might have bought the car that way, there could be clear coat over the decals, or they just didn't get around to sorting those things out yet.  Back in that era (late 70's/early 80's) I certainly would not have known there were no Mach 1 convertibles.  All of my friends also suffered from a general lack of car knowledge, but it made for interesting bench racing discussions.  All we had to go on back then were the car mags of the day, car repair manuals, and word of mouth.

 

[donkost]

Jean-Pierre that car looks to be in really nice clean shape. You must really get noticed over there, because there can't be too many '71 to '73 Mustangs stalking the streets of France. I am always amazed that there is such an interest in Europe and elsewhere for these old US musclecars. I even saw a '71 Mach 1 one time on a tv show which was filmed in Tehran, Iran! It was Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown Iran which was shown on the CNN network here in the states.

 

[Jean-Pierre]

That's right. The majority of French people know the classical Mustang 64-70 but when I go out mine, many of them are very admiring. And not to mention those never seen a 73 of their life... :jawdrop:

 

[Carolina_Mountain_Mustangs]

I tried to reply three time but blocked every time.

 

[Jean-Pierre]

I tried to reply three time but blocked every time.

Sorry, I don't know why  :huh:

 

[secluff]

Geoff, the competition suspension was standard on all Mach 1's regardless of engine size. It was an available option on all other Mustangs except the 250 6cyl and was a mandatory option on the 71-72 F60x15" equipped cars (F60 tires also not available on the 250)

There has always been some confusion on both the suspension and the shocks.  The staggered shocks were specified by the engineers to be only on the 4bl equipped 351 and 429 powered Mustangs.

 

[Don C]

Why all of the conjecture? What is the first five of the VIN?

 

[Jean-Pierre]

Hi Guys, I'm back  

So, I changed my shock absorbers by KYB. The news ones were 3cm shorter so I was happy thinking that the back of the car was going to go down but not realy... 

However, I had a hard time depositing the old ones. I also had to dismount the fixing of the springs to take them out.

I see the shackle too but that's the stock dimension (90mm spacing)

So, there I don't know what to do anymore...

Change the shackles by shorter ones or put a rear end lowering kit...

 

[Hemikiller]

The rear shackles look stock, so that's not really an option.

Lowering blocks are a possibility and will solve your problem, but not really the best method. Changing the springs to a stock ride height spring is the proper way to resolve the issue.

 

[Stanglover]

Geoff, the competition suspension was standard on all Mach 1's regardless of engine size. It was an available option on all other Mustangs except the 250 6cyl and was a mandatory option on the 71-72 F60x15" equipped cars (F60 tires also not available on the 250)

There has always been some confusion on both the suspension and the shocks.  The staggered shocks were specified by the engineers to be only on the 4bl equipped 351 and 429 powered Mustangs.

 Thanks Steve, Honestly I can't remember what my H code had, but I'm glad of your continuing expert information. I think most, me included, think that Competition Suspension INCLUDES staggered shocks, but I guess not Eh!

Geoff.

 

[Stanglover]

The rear shackles look stock, so that's not really an option.

Lowering blocks are a possibility and will solve your problem, but not really the best method. Changing the springs to a stock ride height spring is the proper way to resolve the issue.

 Lowering Blocks; as I have commented on before and in the current post on Wheel Hop, they were only intended as a temporary solution while the new spring settle in. They are not the best method for sure. I just spent money on those Gtab-A-Trak springs, but now wish I'd just bought new Eaton's and be done with it. However, I don't think Eaton have the extra 1/2 leaf to help stop the hop.

Geoff.

 

[secluff]

Geoff,

The staggered shocks actually first appeared on the 68 1/2 428 4sp Mustangs. That configuration continued on through 1970 on the 4sp equipped cars. A change on the Competition Suspension for the 71-73's included staggered shocks on the 3514bl and 429 CJ regardless of transmission. I knew the M/T  cars had some terrible wheel hop. I had a 67 Mustang 289 4bl with a 4sp that had wheel hop so bad, I actually started breaking rear suspension pieces and drive line parts. A 9" differential swap and some Ansen Ground Grabber traction bars fixed that. I became aware of wheel hop with an automatic equipped car when a friend that owned a GTO wheel hopped so badly it twisted the axle tubes and broke the  welds loose from the center housing. We found the 9" for my 67 while going to pick up a replacement differential for his GTO which had gone past the point of being repaired any further.

 

[clevelandcoupe]

Hi Guys, I'm back  

So, I changed my shock absorbers by KYB. The news ones were 3cm shorter so I was happy thinking that the back of the car was going to go down but not realy... 

However, I had a hard time depositing the old ones. I also had to dismount the fixing of the springs to take them out.

I see the shackle too but that's the stock dimension (90mm spacing)

So, there I don't know what to do anymore...

Change the shackles by shorter ones or put a rear end lowering kit...

I would check the measurements on the shackles. I know they make extended ones. Your shackles look to to be only lightly rusted.

Just a thought......

 

[Stanglover]

Geoff,

The staggered shocks actually first appeared on the 68 1/2 428 4sp Mustangs. That configuration continued on through 1970 on the 4sp equipped cars. A change on the Competition Suspension for the 71-73's included staggered shocks on the 3514bl and 429 CJ regardless of transmission. I knew the M/T  cars had some terrible wheel hop. I had a 67 Mustang 289 4bl with a 4sp that had wheel hop so bad, I actually started breaking rear suspension pieces and drive line parts. A 9" differential swap and some Ansen Ground Grabber traction bars fixed that. I became aware of wheel hop with an automatic equipped car when a friend that owned a GTO wheel hopped so badly it twisted the axle tubes and broke the  welds loose from the center housing. We found the 9" for my 67 while going to pick up a replacement differential for his GTO which had gone past the point of being repaired any further.

 Very interesting info Steve. Thanks for sharing your knowledge on all things Mustang.

Again I learned something new today!

Geoff.