The Project

iTrader: (6)

I was wondering if there is any difference between IROC and WS6 springs in terms of spring rate, stiffness or height?

Thanks......

midnightfirews6

iTrader: (1)

I'm interested in the answer to that question as well and I have a couple related ones to add to it. I've seen the rates posted for the later (GTA years) 3rd gens with WS6 option springs floating around here but it didn't mention early third gens. Does anyone know if the early third gens with the WS6 package had the same rates? And were the rates constant for all years of the IROC as well?

Reid Fleming

iTrader: (2)

What rate numbers have you seen?

FueledSoul

iTrader: (18)

IROC and WS6 got the same type of springs, but that also depends on the "computer selected" deturemded by the options and weight of the vehicle .

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

Doesn't too much matter; they're both 20 years old or more, worn-out, sagging, useless garbage stock springs, at least 10 years overdue for the trash.

WS6 meant different things in different years. It's not like you can just say "that" and it automatically points at part #s or something. It always tickles me to see what a buzzword that RPO has been turned into since it got put on the side of those 4th gen cars. People throw it around like it's some kind of be-all end-all. While it was generally the "top of the line" suspension option on these cars, it was STANDARD on most of the upper performance models, both Camaro and Firebird; you may well find that RPO in an IROC's SPID sheet.

Not sure which one will bounce higher when you throw it in the dumpster. If I had them both, that's what I'd be trying to find out. That's actaully kind of fun, if you do it somewhere that a spring all sproinging vigorously around won't go through a window or hit somebody or something, it's amazing how much energy they can store up, and how high and far they'll fly in unpredictable directions if they hit the ground hard enough first.

midnightfirews6

iTrader: (1)

How much do mileage and driving habits play into spring fatigue? My car only has 80k on the clock and potholes and rough roads were generally dodged. I'd imagine the weight of the car would cause some fatigue, but the car still sits up like a monster truck- I got around 27-28" for my fender heights.

Seeing as you seem very opinionated and experienced on the subject and you're one of the more knowledgeable board members, do you have any personal recommendations for spring rates/ heights/ packages for the average stock v8 third gen for great handling while retaining streetability? I've read pretty much all the handling threads and everyone has a different opinion on this matter, just curious to hear yours. I know all cars are different and there is no one size fits all spring, but I was just wondering if you could throw out some ball park figures to think about.

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

My car came with the WS6 option for its year; which was about 275 lbs/in springs in the front, don't know what in the rear, and about 32/21 sway bars.

I put in Moog 5664 and CC635 springs which are about 700 something lbs/in front and 165 lbs/in rear at the nominal rear weight (they're variable rate so the more weight you put on them the higher their rate goes), and (I think... I might be failing the memory test) 34/24 bars. The car sits a little higher than it did with the wore-out stockers, but about 1" lower than when it was new (again, going by memory) so I guess it's OK. Rake angle is about right; maybe ½ - ¾" lower in front.

No doubt mileage has something to do with spring life. A spring is just a piece of metal, and every time it bends, it changes slightly. Very slightly maybe but it changes just the same. Over time it's cumulative. I'd suspect, but have no proof, that running a long time with bad shocks, which lets the wheels bounce up and down uncontrolled and therefore cycles the spring through MANY times more bending events than it would experience if the shocks were good, shortens their life. Seems like if you look around at cars going down the freeway, the ones with bad shocks do seem to sag more; but since the shocks don't hold the car up, there's gotta be something else going on. That's just my theory, YMMV.

You're right it tends to be a somewhat personal preference, there's not really one "right" setup and all others are "wrong" unless you want to talk about the quickest possible laps on a particular track or that sort of thing. But even that, has alot to do with driver technique.

In no case however, is the correct answer, a bunch of old stock springs, of whatever provenance, buzzword or no.

Might be instructive, FWIW, to hit the History forum, and cruise through the pics of the assembly plants where there's HUGE lots of these cars with like .1 miles on them, and see where they sat when they were new. Most people who own them now have no idea about that, not having been alive at the time, or at least, not mature enough to take note of such details. On the other hand, some of us test-drove them pretty regularly from the time they appeared in 82, speaking striclty for myself, I would make a point of trying one out every couple of years just for the halibut. But I don't think most people around here would like for their car to sit like it did when new.