Suspension and Chassis Questions about your suspension? Need chassis advice?

trans am with performance suspension

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 8, 2005 | 09:06 PM
  #1  
83Firebird420's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, B.C.
Car: 87 GTA 120,000k, 90 CRX Si
Engine: 5.7 TPI, 1.6L 16 valve SOHC
Transmission: 700r4, 5spd std
Axle/Gears: 3.73
trans am with performance suspension

last year i bought new rear menroe sensitrack shocks and new rear springs for my 83 firebird. i havent used them and since then bought an 87 trans am with performance suspension...so my question is, should i replace the suspension with the new parts i bought or are they not as good as what is in the trans am?

and also what makes it better than reagular suspension...the vin# doesnt say anything about the suspension.
Reply
Old Feb 9, 2005 | 08:48 AM
  #2  
RB83L69's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 16
From: Loveland, OH, US
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
"Performance Suspension" is a sticker that goes on the dash, not a parts specification. I can't recall ever seeing a Trans Am of that age that didn't have that sticker.

A car that's 18 years old needs new springs and shocks. You can believe that, no matter what. So yes, new parts are better than 18-year-old ones, no matter what stickers the car has.
Reply
Old Feb 9, 2005 | 02:06 PM
  #3  
83Firebird420's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, B.C.
Car: 87 GTA 120,000k, 90 CRX Si
Engine: 5.7 TPI, 1.6L 16 valve SOHC
Transmission: 700r4, 5spd std
Axle/Gears: 3.73
ok thats waht i was thinkin...cuz yah they are 18 years old.... thanks
Reply
Old Feb 9, 2005 | 09:45 PM
  #4  
fst2qtrmile's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
From: Cape Cod, MA
Car: 1998 eclipse GSX
Engine: 4G63 2.0
Transmission: 5 speed
hahahah yeah i thought performance suspension ment something too - but noticed over bumps that age wore them out. new, old, regardless - replace with driving needs
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2005 | 02:06 PM
  #5  
83Firebird420's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, B.C.
Car: 87 GTA 120,000k, 90 CRX Si
Engine: 5.7 TPI, 1.6L 16 valve SOHC
Transmission: 700r4, 5spd std
Axle/Gears: 3.73
the only thing i noticed when i changed the shocks yesterday, was that the new springs were like 2 inches shorter than the neww ones. so i left them in.
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2005 | 04:27 PM
  #6  
RB83L69's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 16
From: Loveland, OH, US
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
THat's because they're stiffer to begin with. It takes more force to squish them the same amount (that being the definition of "stiffer", of course) so they have to start out life shorter before they're loaded.

Go back and change them, you'll like the improvement.
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2005 | 04:47 PM
  #7  
83Firebird420's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, B.C.
Car: 87 GTA 120,000k, 90 CRX Si
Engine: 5.7 TPI, 1.6L 16 valve SOHC
Transmission: 700r4, 5spd std
Axle/Gears: 3.73
but then will the ride hieght be a bit taller than it is now? cuz i want to keep it low like it is now...or after a couple months will teh new springs compress to the hieght it is now?
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2005 | 06:41 PM
  #8  
RB83L69's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 16
From: Loveland, OH, US
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
No.

That's why the new springs are shorter.

They're stiffer. So they compress less under the same weight. Duh.... that being the definition of "stiffer". So they have to start out shorter in order to end up the same height with a car sitting on them.
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2005 | 07:44 PM
  #9  
83Firebird420's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, B.C.
Car: 87 GTA 120,000k, 90 CRX Si
Engine: 5.7 TPI, 1.6L 16 valve SOHC
Transmission: 700r4, 5spd std
Axle/Gears: 3.73
ah crap...sorry in my earlier post what i ment to say was the old springs were 2 inches shorter...and i left those ones in cuz i want to keep the same ride height...so should i put in the new springs that are taller, or just leave the old ones in....sorry about all te confusion, but i thot i had said the old ones were 2 inches shorter not the new ones.
Reply
Old Feb 10, 2005 | 11:27 PM
  #10  
RB83L69's Avatar
Supreme Member
 
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 18,457
Likes: 16
From: Loveland, OH, US
Car: 4
Engine: 6
Transmission: 5
Try it and see.

You've already spent more time typing questions, than it would take to put the springs in and find out.

Let us know what happens.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Vintageracer
Camaros for Sale
12
Jan 10, 2020 05:33 PM
Exxon Limited
Camaros Wanted
22
Dec 21, 2015 10:36 PM
Reddeath210
Firebirds for Sale
14
Oct 6, 2015 08:20 AM
Randomtask2
Body
7
Aug 13, 2015 01:57 AM
Exxon Limited
Camaros for Sale
2
Aug 9, 2015 08:13 PM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:56 PM.