Front and Rear Height

[cv_72mustang]

Looking to replace my rear springs on my H code Vert using EATON Detroit springs (non performance)  and they have an option for additional 1" inch. I measured my car and the back is ~5/8" higher than the front.  Is this about the correct stock height difference you might expect ?  The car currently has  complete  new front end and new shocks on rear, but the original springs. I'm trying to decide if the 1" is a better choice since it 'feels' to me it rides too low (if I remember it was designed this way).   I just don't have  a reference point .  Any comment?  Also guys at EATON spring were very helpful.  

 

[c9zx]

I have owned 5 71-72 Mustangs as far back as 1976. They all sat about .75 inch higher in the front than the back. The 1969 Mach1 and 1970 Boss 302 I had were the same way. It must have been a "Ford" thing.I like the car to sit level. Chuck

 

[cv_72mustang]

Thank-you C9zx

I also just  realized that if I had taken more time with search feature and key words the site some diagrams posted and procedure to measure ride height.   Dumb dumb  I am! 

 

[Don C]

Nothing dumb about it, that's how we learn, if we're not dumb, that is 

 

[Carolina_Mountain_Mustangs]

If you can get your hands on a copy of the Ford assembly line manuals it gives the Ford spec on the ride height and where to measure it. You can order a copy from most mustang suppliers reprinted by Osborne in Georgia. Only complaint is the copies are very light. I thing the measurements are in the Chassis copy of the manuals. I have put mine somewhere and cannot find, lol.

 

[Don C]

Here are the stock dimensions

https://7173mustangs.com/forums/topic/28786-underbody-dimensions/?tab=comments#comment-295892

 

[Spike Morelli]

I just replaced my rear leaf springs today. What I bought, are the Eaton springs NPD sells for a Mach 1 with competition suspension, and 138 pound spring rate. Of course, I replaced the front bolts which anchor the front spring bushing to the chassis, the U-bolts that hold the axle to the springs, and the rear shackles with bushings. The NPD catalog says that the competition suspension leaf springs are a tad lower than, I guess, the lesser spring rate springs. Not wanting to lower the rear of my car at all, I opted for the 1" longer shackle kit from NPD, to offset any lowering. Bought it all with a leap of faith that the finished ride height would be acceptable.

Well, all right! The car looks like it has a great stance now. It sits just a wee bit higher in the rear than the front, but not with a "jacked-up" look. I never want to see the car "tail-drag", going for at least, a level car, but hoping for a hint of rake, just a touch of aggression. I measured the hitch height, and the rear is 1" higher than when I drove her in to the shop this morning. It may settle with time, but if it didn't, that would be OK with me. Who knows, perhaps my front coils are showing their age by dropping the nose a tad, but whatever.........I am happy with the ride and how it sits. Assuming my front end is at standard height, for those who desire an entirely level sit, the standard shackle may be for you .

 

[Stanglover]

I'll not copy the entire post, but if you reference " An interesting and informative Video from Eaton Springs" posted on Aug 19th, Then go to a post on October 12, I posted the result on my car after installing Eaton Boss 351 rear leaf springs. I wanted the heavier duty on the Mach 1. The result was the back end was about 7/8" higher than the front with standard (original) shackles. My front springs are also the original and when restored, the free height measured exactly what they should be, no sag nor distortion.  Mine measurers 25 3/8" front and 26 1/4" rear on BFG 235x60 R14  and 245x60 R14 respectively center of wheel arch.

In that post, there are a few videos from Eaton that I suggest anybody installing new rear springs, watch.