CC_HotRod

I need to replace my rear springs. Which should I go with the variable rate or factory? Please give my the pros and cons of each.
Thanks

RB83L69

Factory ones ARE variable rate.

Moog CC635, or equivalent

CC_HotRod

I was looking on the Advance web site and they give TRW CC635 as Rear; Heavy Duty/Cargo; Variable Rate; Hef-T-Coil; Set Of Two and TRW CS5665 as Rear; Regular; Set Of Two. I was wondering what exactly is the difference other than the price?

RyanEricW

This thread is 6 years old, but I'm looking to buy new springs, and I'm wondering the same thing. What is the difference besides price?

ADVANCED AUTO PARTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------
They have the same 90 day warantee from advancedautoparts.com.

MOOG Coil Springs - Rear
Variable Rate
Part No. CC635
$72.99
Spring size: Inside Diameter 4.3", Bar Diameter .5", Installed Height 10.25"
Load rating: 518 lbs.
One tangential and one pigtail end


TRW Coil Spring - Rear
Variable Rate
Part No. CC635
$47.99
Spring size: ?
Load rating: ?
One tangential and one pigtail end



PEPBOYS
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Pepboys/Prosteer Coil Springs - Rear
Variable Rate
Part No. RCS635V
$54.99
Spring size: Inside Diameter 4.3", Bar Diameter .504", Installed Height 10.25", Number of Coils 9.40, Rate Load Height 104, Approx Free Height 15.25
Load rating: 518 lbs.
One tangential and one pigtail end



AUTOZONE
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Duralast/Coil Spring Coil Springs - Rear
Variable Rate
Part Number: RCS635V (CC635)
$59.99
Spring size: Bar Diameter .504", Approx Free Height 15.25in
Load rating: ?
One tangential and one pigtail end


Guessing these are ALL the same specs.

1ADan

iTrader: (4)

the funny thing (having been an Advance employee on and off for about 7 years now): moog and trw often share parts. same parent company. I've seen some TRW parts come with moog stampings & tags. If you're nice to your local store (and the employees aren't jerks), they'll let you order up the parts without paying ahead of time. See if you can order up both versions and take a look. Both have lifetime warranties; if both are identical (and i think they will be), grab whichever is cheaper.

RyanEricW

Thanks for the info Dan! Just hope it doesn't end up raising my car dramatically lol.

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

Moog and TRW are both brand names of the Federal-Mogul Corp.

Therefore there is no difference between the same part # regardless of which name happens to be printed on the outside of the box for passing through different distribution networks.

The factory springs, as described above, are variable-rate.

The CC635 is variable rate.

The 5665 is constant-rate.

Neither is inherently "better"; although some people might prefer the one for a given application, some the other. IMO the CC635 is more appropriate for the street because its properties more closely match what the application demands. But that's just opinion, lots of people have used the other and liked it too.

ANY new springs are likely to raise your car, since your existing stock springs are probably sagging an inch or 2 like everybody else's. It's even possible that you could spend several times as much to get "lowering" springs, and they would raise the car. Words like "raise" and "lower" require 2 pieces of information to define: you need to know NOT ONLY the "after" state, BUT ALSO the "before". Without knowing how bad your stock ones are trashed, it's impossible to guess how they will compare to functional ones.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

After a year of 'settling', the Moog rears (5665) that I stuck in my car required cutting. I was also forced to trade the OE isolators for heater hose--this to lower the car to approx. OE ride height, which I believe is 27 1/2".

JamesC

88GTAChuck

iTrader: (1)

JamesC is right, I noticed the same thing when installing Moog 5665 in the rear last night on my 86 IROC. It raised the height of the rear some bit. I wish I did a measurement before swapping out the springs and shocks last night. It was one of those last minute decisions to just do it. Right now the cars sitting at 28 1/2" in the rear (almost a 4" gap between the top of the tire and the bottom lip of the fender) and that's with the stock isolators which I might swap for heater hose and see how that looks. I'm guessing stock height was 27" or so like JamesC said.

JamesC how much of the coil did you cut, to get her to come down to stock ride height? I hate to cut new springs... but I might toss the stock springs back in and check the height.

Thanks,
Chuck

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

Been awhile. I cut twice (as I wasn't satisfied the first time). IIRC, in the end, maybe a 1/2 coil. Since the rears are relatively easy, I'd cut a couple of times and see where I was at.

JamesC

the solitaire

Can verify that.
Same set of MOOG springs in the rear and the car sits @ 28 1/2"
Front 27"

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

With Moog 5665 and 5662 and 4th gen isolators, my car sits at:

driver front: 28.5
passenger front: 27.9"
driver rear: 29"
passenger rear: 28.25"

Some people's springs settle after installing, some people don't. For whatever reason, who knows. Mine did quite a bit since 2009, although mostly in the front.

Pretty soon I'll be cutting my rear springs in order to get them more level with the front, with a slight rake (MAX 0.5" higher in the rear)

RyanEricW

Well strange thing guys, I replaced my struts and springs in the rear with autozone oem parts, and I'm glad I did. However I want to make a note here.

I bought part cc635 from autozone, and the $25/each struts they offered along with the $59.99 spring set. Came out to like $110~ not bad at all.
Gabriel Ultra/Shock/Strut - Rear - Part Number: 69676

Weird thing is, I'm ASE certified in suspension and steering, so I know how to check for strut failure, yet.... I did not detect it at all on my car this past year. How do you guys usually go about checking that, just curious.

This is the first time ever I couldn't tell what the problem was, but it was definitely the struts. I unbolted them, and they were not pushing back out as they were supposed to on their own, but they were giving resistance when I tried to pull/push it in. Probably why I couldn't test for it.

The springs I bought too, supposidly oem, they raised the rear of my car by 0.75". I attribute it to being new, and having more coils.

Another word of note, I could only get ONE coil spring compressor in to remove and install the springs. The space allotted back there kept giving me issues with the compressors I was using, causing them to get stuck, not allow the spring out, and other weird stuff. I know better than that, but it was a necessary danger as it seems. On the passenger side, I needed to mount the compressor facing the front of the car, and on the driver side I had to mount it facing towards the passenger side due to the ... mind blank, that bar back there for side to side stability.

Pic attached
--------
Edit car was 26 3/4" in height on pass/driver side in the rear before, with a 2 7/8" gap between the tire and fender.

Now the car has a 3.5" gap between the tire and fender (darn it), so I'm guessing its at 27 3/8"~ height. Not a terrible look, but noticable difference. I'll be happy so long my pass tire doesn't catch my fender anymore. That poor tire.

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

Are you trying to say, you used a spring compressor on the rear? You're kidding, right? Right??? (I hope????) Please say you are.

The CORRECT way to change those out, is to put the "frame" on jack stands; put a floor jack under the pumpkin; unbolt the shocks; let the floor jack down carefully, so as not to stretch the brake line (or, unbolt it from the pumpkin to give a bit more clearance); throw the old springs, which will now be laying on the ground, in the trash; set the new springs in; raise the pumpkin; re-bolt the shocks; put the brake line back if you loosened it; take the car down off the stands.

Took longer to type that than it does to do the work, and takes longer to put the car up on stands than it does to swap the parts.

No spring compressor required. No safety issues, no fitment problems, no problems PERIOD. Gotta be one of the EEEEEEZIEST routine maintenance things you can do to one of these cars. Might even be eeeeeeeezier than changing the oil.

The correct way to test the shocks in one of these cars is to look at the receipt for the last time you bought them, and the odometer. If the receipt is more than about 4 years old, or if the odometer has more than about 25,000 more miles now than the receipt says, or if the receipt says "Gabriel" REGARDLESS of age or mileage, they're bad and need replacement. As cheeeep and eeeeeeezie to change out as they are, it's not worth bothering with outsmarting yourself by "testing" them.

BTW, these cars don't have "struts" in the rear; they have "shock absorbers".

RyanEricW

Yeah meant to say shock absorbers...not a big deal. It's a well known fact this car does not have MacPherson Struts in the rear... It's been a long week.
See now I did that on my 92, and the old spring would not come out. I put the frame on jackstands, let the rear down, and it still was not enough clearance even with a prybar to get them out. I found it strange since everyone always claims how easy it is to be on these cars. Perhaps you should try working on a 92 camaro, or maybe someone else can follow up. Maybe it is just my car, most likely not.

BTW, that's a bs way to test for shock damage. The parts on here were oem from the factory, and these "cheap" shocks were the only ones in stock at the time, otherwise I had to wait a week. They had the even cheaper version of these shocks at like 15-20 dollars, but... the cheapest parts are never the option. It is good to know people, as I know the manager at AutoZone, so even if they fail within a year or two ill get free replacements or will exchange for better ones. I'll let everyone know if I have any issues with them.

sofakingdom

iTrader: (1)

Then you probably didn't take the little brake distribution block off of the pumpkin, and therefore the WHOLE WEIGHT of the rear, PLUS however much you were reefing on it with a prybar, were trying to stretch the rubber brake hose. Not a great idea. If you take that loose, the springs will literally FALL OUT of the car. FALL. Gravity only, unassisted.

There's no difference in this regard between ANY third gen cars of ANY year, or for that matter, 4th gens up to 2002. All the same, 1982 - 2002. 92 is no different from any other in this regard.

Yeah I know how it is when you try to buy anything remotely resembling "quality" for these cars; unfortunately most (not all of course, but most it seems) of the people who own them nowadays are price-sensitive to the exclusion of all else. Too many are like, if "the cheeeeepest" was $49.95 but was total trash and "the best" was $49.99 but was superior in every way and would work twice as well and last twice as long, they would still go for "the cheeeeeepest" every time. So, typically all you ever find in stock, is the bottom-of-the-barrel stuff, like Gabriel. It's a real shame but I guess that's just the economic reality we all have to deal with.

Don't worry about telling us how the Gabriels do, we already know. They are basically the absolute cheeeeeepest dirtiest sleaziest lowest weeeniest thing you can possibly make, that you can legally print "shock absorber" on the box. You'll see. It's worth the wait of a day or 2 for Summit or Jeg's shipping, to get something else. But you now have the consolation of knowing how eeeeeeeeezie it is to swap em, so you might as well go ahead and order something better now, so you'll have em on hand and ready to go when those shock-absorber-shaped objects you have now, no longer even pretend to act like shocks.

And, I didn't say ANYTHING about shock "damage"; only, whether they were any good or not. Not sure where you got the "damage" idea from to put words into my mouth?

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

Guess what?

I just went outside and measured my car's ride height again. (It is important to note I have since removed the spare tire and jack, and relocated a lighter Optima Red Top battery in it's place over the rear passenger wheel compartment, and have installed Koni yellows struts/shocks all around replacing Tokico Blues with only 3000 miles on them. I also currently have just a bit under 3/4 of a full tank of gas.):

CURRENT:
front driver: 27.9"
front passenger: 27.5"
rear driver: 28.5"
rear passenger: 28.9"

BEFORE:
front driver: 28.5
front passenger: 27.9"
rear driver: 29"
rear passenger: 28.25"

I can't imagine that the springs settled even more.. They were installed in 2009, and settled some.. But now they just got lower again?! I am surprised because since then all I have done to the car is actually weight reduction so I am perplexed.

RyanEricW

Literally did not see it hanging on anything, which made me think I was crazy lol. Perhaps I made a big mistake, but my brakes still function, so I suppose all is good for now.
Anyhow, I feel safe knowing those gabriels have a lifetime warranty. If they were indeed junk I don't know how they would stay in business.

Well logic would dictate that if a mechanical item such as a strut in this case, is inoperable, it would then be damaged to cause such, a malfunction.



That's quite a bit of a drop...

RyanEricW

If you feel so strongly about Gabriels, you are welcome to donate to the RyanEricW Better Shock Suspension Fund. =) PayPal is at RyanEricW@GMail.com

hellz_wings

iTrader: (2)

I know, that's why I am surprised.. I can take pics of measuring tape if you want. This was measured on level ground just like last time. Can springs settle that much over time? I have driven it like 1500 miles since 2009 lol.

Speed Racer

iTrader: (1)

But which one between the 5665 and 635 is stiffer? My old stock springs tend to bottom out (even with zero weight in the car) way too easy, and I want to fix that. My 9" diff is hitting the bottom of my car and making a hole! But I'm not sure if they are worn or not given my seemingly normal ride heights:

FR: 28
FL: 27.85
RR: 27.5
RL: 28.25

Summit says the rates are:

5665: 107 lbs./in.
635: 104 lbs./in.

...but I don't think that's directly comparable since the 635s are VR.

Based on what I've heard, I'm leaning toward the 5665s, but let me know what you all think.

thanks.

ASE doc

I had to cut my Eibach Sportlines twice for a total of one coil. I think they are still a bit high but a little rake is okay. When I first installed them, the look gave me nightmare visions of 70s air shocks. A ******* co-worker said "that looks cool" and I had to cut them right away.

As far as shocks go, KYB says 50,000 miles is time to replace. Any type of gas charged shock is a dual chamber shock with a wimpy little piston and partially filled with gas that mixes with the hydraulic fluid under heavy damping stresses to "adjust" damping. Over time, the gas leaks out which is why the shock loses its tendency to rebound. The tiny pistons with their lightweight valving don't stand up well to hard use and fail fairly quickly.

Monotubes are a different story. Koni Reds or Yellows are heavy duty monotubes and have a large diameter shaft with a large single chamber and heavy duty valving that can take abuse and continue to provide consistent damping.

RyanEricW

I believe they are both variable, but trust me, I got hte cc635's, and they are amazing compared to stock 20yr old parts. Also replace your shock absorbers... while you are under there. They are probably the easiest thing to remove on these cars olol.
I must say though, the cc635's install height is 10.25" compared to the 5565 which is 10.00". The 5565's has a 580 load rating, which the cc635's have a 518. Not sure why you'd need the 5565's though..

ASE doc

Bottoming out is a common symptom of worn out shocks.

RyanEricW

Yeah I found that out find hand, but the springs were a bit old too. For $60....replace the springs.

Speed Racer

iTrader: (1)

I forgot to mention that I just replaced my adjustable Koni reds with Lakewood drag shocks. The Konis did have some preload and helped hold up the car, but the Lakewoods don't. But I always thought the springs were supposed to hold the car's weight and the shocks just dampen the movement.

RyanEricW

True. But when you hit a bump, your shocks should prevent your car from bottoming out due to the resistance in them. Springs are supposed to do most of the work from keeping the car from bottoming out, but old springs will put more of a load on the shocks, causing them to not suffice or wear quicker.

JamesC

iTrader: (5)

IIRC, the Moog CC635's are a variable-rate spring (cargo); the Moog 5665's are linear.

JamesC

Speed Racer

iTrader: (1)

I found some more specs on these if anyone is interested...

CC635:
Spring size: Inside Diameter 4.3", Bar Diameter .5", Installed Height 10.25"
Load rating: 518 lbs.

5665:
Spring size: Inside Diameter 4.3", Bar Diameter .485", Installed Height 10"
Load rating: 580 lbs.

I still think I'm gonna try the 5665s and see what happens.

Speed Racer

iTrader: (1)

FYI... I got these springs on Amazon.com for only $50 with free 2nd day shipping. That's half as much as Advance Auto Parts, and I don't have to go explain every option on my car to someone while they double check my part number.

plasmeh

iTrader: (10)

I'm buying some 5662's for the front from Advance Auto and using their 'dealio' coupon code to score a bunch of free stuff in the process. $40 off of $100 order and free shipping to home on orders over $75 = lots of free stuff. The coupons at Advance rule. Period.

1ADan

iTrader: (4)

I know what you mean. I work there part time and the coupons are better than the employee discount! I get funny looks from my coworkers when I come in for my shift and pick up my online order

plasmeh

iTrader: (10)

When I first started using them a few weeks ago I thought it had to be some kind of price markup crap, but really the prices are better than AZ most of the time, the prices online for things like brake cleaner are like 1.79 vs 3.99 in the store, then you can throw HUGE coupons on the order and just waltz right in and pick it up? Ridic. Never shopping anywhere else for the normal everyday car stuff anymore.

Guest

I'm getting the idea of trying the CC635s on my '86, and the 5665s on my '84. That'd be $105 for both pairs, delivered, so it'll be August before I might have funds.
But both of my Camaros definitely need rear springs, as both are definitely sagging too much for my liking.

Speed Racer

iTrader: (1)

Update: I went with the Moog 5665 on the rear. They are SO much better than what I had before. It's a little firmer, so I don't feel like I'm dragging butt down the road and driving up hill all the time. This was a very worthwhile effort. Combined with my new Moog 5602 fronts, and I'm very happy that the car's ride and stance is back like new again.