Chevy Tri Five Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Hi Gang, I rebuilt the front end on my 56 everything new. Now the car rides really hard and stiff . I used the HD springs 668 wire size thinking it's a wagon and I would need that. I am thinking of changing out to the smallest spring do you think it would soften the ride quite a bit? Thanks, Bravo:flag6:

oops..upside down..?
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I think it would be the best start.

How do you get the car to stick to the ceiling in your shop? :)
Ha ha, when your a whiz at computers like I am it's easy! Thanks Rick :flag6:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,231 Posts
.668" wire diameter? Yeah, that is stiff! Especially if it's 16"-16.5" free length with 10 coils.

Moog #638 springs make my 55 2dr sedan sit prox 3/4" higher than stock (measured as per the service manual). And that's after 2+ years of settling. For reference, my car has a small block with aluminum heads, intake manifold and radiator, and an aluminum manual trans.

I just bought a pair of Moog #6314 which should make the car sit prox 1" lower than stock.

Moog #6312 would be somewhere in the middle.

Here's a chart posted by Farm Boy awhile back. I built a spreadsheet to see how much various springs would compress under the same load, but my head nearly exploded before I finished. Key specs are free length and rate, which is fairly constant for these springs. Remember, these lengths are for spring travel not wheel travel. I think wheel travel is prox 1.7" for every 1.0" of spring travel.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
I take that back the springs were the 656 HD not 668.
Thanks MikeB for the good info. I would like mine to be a inch lower than stock too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,231 Posts
Bravo77 -- Probably won't have my 6314s installed until early October. Waiting on some new upper control arms. The 6308s are sold by some vendors as 1-inch drop springs, so I guess we'll see what I end up with.

From the chart, you can see that it takes a little less weight (37 pounds less on each spring) to compress the 6314 to 10.75". And after that, the 6314 will compress 1" for every 288 lbs applied to it, whereas the 6308 requires 379 lbs to compress it 1".

Hope I didn't end up with a too-soft spring! But hey, maybe I can live with soft springs if my sway bar and KYB shocks keep the movement in control.

Vietnam 68-69? I was in Vung Tau in 69 and again in 70 on the Navy repair ship that sat in the harbor. Piece of cake compared to what you guys did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
MikeB, I have a 327 and TH400 disc brakes. Other than that it is all stock including the rear end. Do you think the 6314's would work out in mine?

I went to Vung Tau for a three day in country R&R in 69, might have crossed paths then? Never know...
Thanks, Bravo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,695 Posts
Hi Gang, I rebuilt the front end on my 56 everything new. Now the car rides really hard and stiff . I used the HD springs 668 wire size thinking it's a wagon and I would need that. I am thinking of changing out to the smallest spring do you think it would soften the ride quite a bit? Thanks, Bravo:flag6:

oops..upside down..?

According to '55 Chevrolet Specs the official production front end curb weight of a production Nomad is about the same weight as that of a 2 door Belair sedan or coupe within 10-15 lbs. However, the rear weight of the Nomad is about 150-200 lbs heavier than the sedan or coupe. The above assuming comparible options and assumes the heavier 6 cylinder engine and powergluide transmission. Says to deduct 30 lbs for the V8. Heavier springs are needed in the rear, not the front. Funny thing is passengers back then were 150 lbs each!
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,231 Posts
Do you think the 6314's would work out in mine?
Can't say for sure until I get them installed. All I'm working with now is theory and a spreadsheet!
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top