This defies common sense but here goes. I ordered a set of four 1" lowering springs from Summit Racing (house brand) and 4 KYB GR2 shocks/struts. Took the car to a local frame shop and had them installed and aligned last week. To my surprise the car now sets 1 1/4" higher front and 1 1/2" higher rear than the stock 26" (measured at the center of the wheel opening). They said they will settle a little in about a month. To get the desired result they will need to settle 2", which I don't think is going to happen. I thought the car would ride a lot rougher than stock, but surpisingly it is just a little stiffer than stock, but not much. I called Summit and they said I had 45 days to return them, but they made a note of my complaint on my customer history. So, has anyone else had a similar experience or do I have some weird springs?

 

stock heght is not 26"..... it's like 27"+ your old springs had sagged an inch or so, over time, you will notice another 1/2" drop or so, but it sounds like you ,wanted stiffer spring anyways, so you can return them infavor,of a stiffer lower set or trim the springs you, hav on there , it will make them stiffer and lower, since summit will except the return, i would do that. then research and find a set of spring that wil suit you better

 

, 3rd gens have been around a while, the stock springs sag, so its quite common for lowering springs to have no effect on ride height, or even raise the car.

If you measured from the ground, to the top of the wheel well opening and came up with 26", your stock springs were sagging really bad.

 

Sounds like I put out a lot of effort and money for nothing here. I have seen photos of other cars posted here with lowering springs and you can really see the difference over stock. I am puzzled.

 

do you have any pics of your car, before and after?

and out of curiosity, what engine did your car have stock?

 

Yes I do have a pic and will attempt to attach to this reply, this is a few years old but the car hasn't been driven much and currently looks almost identical as far as ride height is concerned. That was the disappointment. Unknown to me was the fact that the stock springs had settled and 26" would have been a 1" drop over stock. I guess if that is the case I will leave it alone.
The new engine only has 2k on it, but has been in the car 8-9 years. The car itself has 20k. I mothballed the original 305 on a stand in my garage
It originally had a 305 TBI, 5- speed and a single track dif.
It now has a slightly warmed up old school 355, auburn 3:73 posi and the stock
5-speed with a CenterForce clutch. Other than the hood, suspension and wheels/tires, I haven't any changes to the car other than the Hurst shifter.

 

Wow, yeah it's sitting up pretty high. Mine was 27 1/2" stock, now 26" with some trimmed Moogs in front Intrax in back, I still got to do a little more trimming. They'll settle some but it wont take a month, hopefully they indexed them correct cause that could also make a difference. Unfortunately you paid for the install cause it'll cost you again to take them out if you're returning or even if you're going to trim them plus another alignment. Later.

 

Yes it is 27"+ all the way around, and pretty much identical to the pic. I did question Summit about my replacement costs and he kinda indicated they might work with me
on that. I wouldn't count on it though. I have spent many thousands of $$$ (5k just on the motor) over the last several years there, don't know if that will matter or not.
I may just let the springs settle in and leave them alone and spend a few bucks on upgraded sway bars, bushings, track bar etc. Maybe someday a 1LE or GTA steering box.
I basicly want a wolf in sheeps clothing. I ran it at the strip a few years ago with about 1200 miles on the motor and it ran 12.80's. Not a funny car, but nothing to be ashamed of.
Maybe would have done a little better, but I had to launch it at 2 grand to keep from burning the tires. I didn't build it to be a race car, just wanted the performance level of the old muscle cars. I think I got there plus some as a bonus.

 

wow, it sits a bit higher than i envisioned. I dont know where you are getting the 26" measurement?

I dont remember if it was stated or asked, but were the springs indexed properly, front and back?

How much have you driven the car since the change? I would just wait for a little while, a month or so, see what happens. If they dont settle, you can trim them. Or if you dont want to wait, send them back, but you will be loosing money on the deal, so not sure if its a logical choice.

 

No index on the rears. My Moog fronts have never settled a fraction after a year or so. The rear only settled after I'd trimmed about 2/3 of a coil.

JamesC

 

The springs were supposed to be indexed right by the installer. I did make sure he was aware they needed to be installed a certian way and he assured me they were. I will double check them when I have some time.
The height measurements were taken from the bottom of the fender lip to the ground (on a concrete garage floor) and measured at the centerline of the wheels. We will give it a month or so and see what happens. My guess is maybe 1/4"-1/2" drop.

 

Hey, nice to see I am not the only old fart in the group, I will be 59 next month.
Prior to buying the Summit lowering springs, I installed a set of Moog's on the rear. Yes there is a index on these. Moog only makes one spring for all 3rd gen rears, a varible rate spring. The instructions state that the straight part of the lower spring pigtail is to be aligned lengthwise with the axle. The upper end just has to be seated into the molded taper
in the rubber anti rattle pad. I bought this car new 20 years ago, but never messed with the suspension up until now. It still ony has 20k on it, but father time has taken a toll on the springs and struts/shocks which was the reason for the change at this time.

 

Aside from the isolator/spring interface, there should be no indexing--at least my GM shop manual makes no mention of it nor did my Moog replacements. I've swapped my Moogs in and out multiple times. I just throw them in any old way, and the ride height remains the same regardless. BTW, there are two rear Moog IROC replacement springs: 5665 (107.0) and CC635 (104.0) The latter are cargo coils with variable rate. Some members don't view those as performance springs.

JamesC

 

The rears I have are Moog 5662. Guess the guy from Moog Tech support lied to me. He said the 5662 was the only rear spring they had for my car. They are variable rate cargo springs.
These were removed when the Summit springs were installed. Sounds like a lot of black art in the spring business.
The installer at the frame shop said the IROC's were 1" lower from the factory. True or False? Maybe the 1LE cars?

 

The 5662 are IROC replacement front coils. Sounds like something fishy went on somewhere. I've never seen any evidence that that IROC/1LE cars were lower. The White Book mentions that the IROC featured lower trim height and center of gravity.... That said, my IROC originally measured 27 1/2.

JamesC

 

You were correct, the rears I bought were CC635, I had the 5662 number tucked away in my brain for some reason. These are now collecting dust in my garage and the Summit springs are installed. As mentioned the car has been in mothballs for several years, mainly due to my work schedule in the past (60 hrs a week minimum). I am now layed off, so I took some time to pick up where I left off and found the car had developed a wheel hop issue. This was the beginning of my pursuit of the spring/shock combination. I will just have to wait and see how these look in a month or so.

 

You simply can't trust that 59-year-old brain anymore .

JamesC