When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Ok Ok, so I don't think this combo is the ideal, or most cost effective way to go but hear me out. ....I was getting the 88 ready for an LS swap. Full build. Suspension and steering has been completed. All UMI roto joint parts, SFCs etc. etc., as well as ground control weight jacks and Koni Yellows. Along the way I've decided that I want something different from the car, and I'm going to be doing a 95% restoration, with just some tweaks here and there. One major area is suspension. The car handles wonderfully when pushed, but is just too firm to be an enjoyable cruiser. I want to ride softer, and frankly, so does my wife, lol! I'd like to change as little as possible to get it there, although reselling parts could certainly make changes more viable.
Here's the question. Given the goal of a stock like ride, or possibly just a little more firm, what will a soft lowering spring like UMI's 600lb. kit, or stock MOOG springs behave like with Koni Yellows? Will the Koni's still be too firm? Is there a benefit to LEAVING them on the car?? or.....Secondary question: Should I just pull the Koni's too, and sell them? Doubt they have 1500 miles.
Following the advice found in some other threads based on setting them up, they're full soft up front, which is easy to verify, and i believe middle of the road out back. If I'm not mistaken, the rears are hard to adjust on car so I haven't actually checked recently. Front I know are full soft. Regardless, they may soften up a little, but performance isn't the goal here. I was hoping to gain that ride quality with softer springs. Only reason Koni's are on the table is because I already own 'em and they're on the car! No way do I NEED them for my goals.
I agree with the above , you should be fine staying with the Koni's and the softest setting. Koni's in the rear also? I think even soft lowering springs will make the ride too harsh for a cruiser.
I have the KYB AGX adjustable struts. The rest is stock stuff outside urethane bushings on the sway bar. It rides really nice, my wife has no problem. In fact she has commented on this fact before.
If you haven't' already add a STB and "wonder bar" as this will tighten up the handling without sacrificing the ride quality.
I would try the new springs with the Koni shocks. Then go from there.
My gut feel is the Koni are still the best choice (for the wallet of us mere mortals).
Yep, I agree with QwkTrip. Within the last 2 months, I added inner and outer subframe connectors, springs front/rear, all steering components/bushings and Konis front/rear. It’s as good a as a 35+ old car can be. I also set the shocks on “full soft” for now.
Yep, I agree with QwkTrip. Within the last 2 months, I added inner and outer subframe connectors, springs front/rear, all steering components/bushings and Konis front/rear. It’s as good a as a 35+ old car can be. I also set the shocks on “full soft” for now.
So there's a backstory. lol It looks "stockish". I think my rear springs were bad so I went into the replacement with the thought that I wanted the rear up 1/2" and the front down 1/2". After much reading on this forum, I thought the Moog 5660s would give me a slight drop with a softer ride. I then thought, let's see where the front sits and if I need to I will cut some of the rear to get it where I want it. The reality is the front is up about a 1/2" from where it was and the back is up 3/4" or so. Now it may settle a bit as I only have about 20 miles on it but I doubt it at this point.
I have seen a number of 27.75" to the peak of the wheel well for a stock car. Now I am not sure if this is a Camaro IROC-Z or Trans Am GTA or does it matter? Mine sits higher than that. As I am at work, tonight I will get some pictures. At this point i am not sure I will do anything but may change my mind
FWIW, I went with the Vogtland lowering springs. They feel a bit softer than stock WS6 to my butt. I have the KYB adjustable struts/shocks; it helps to be able to tune a bit with the dampers. Photo shows before and after; lowered my car about 1.25 inches.
How come Firebirds always sat higher than Camaros from the factory? The look after lowering looks like a stock Camaro, just a little lower in the rear.
I think you need to see some pics of a Camaro to get the proper look of how the springs will look on your car. As you know the size of the tire/wheel combo will effect how it looks also.
@vinny R Now that is an interesting take. I think the 27.75" from ground to fender peak was on a Camaro but I cannot recall. Perhaps I will try to find who on here had that detail. It might have been @QwkTrip . I will measure mine and post picks but from memory I thought it was ~28.25' to 28.5" unless its settled. Anyway, real numbers and pics later.
@rt66er Do you by chance know the measurement on your ground to highest point on wheel well?
Full disclosure: the rear springs were too low (lower than front when installed). I purchased a set of 4th gen rear spring isolators to raise the rear a bit.
Stock: LF: 27.625 RF: 27.875 LR: 27.8125 RR: 28.125
Vogtland: LF: 26.4375 RF: 26.75 LR: 26.625 RR: 27.00
Wow that was quick but good to have some actual numbers. Curious that your car is higher on the right ~1/4" than the left. Mine is the same way. Things like this bug me but not to the point that I am going to fester over it.
Full disclosure: the rear springs were too low (lower than front when installed). I purchased a set of 4th gen rear spring isolators to raise the rear a bit.
Stock: LF: 27.625 RF: 27.875 LR: 27.8125 RR: 28.125
Vogtland: LF: 26.4375 RF: 26.75 LR: 26.625 RR: 27.00
I also felt the rears were lower. I cut some 1/2 id rubber hose and made spacers for the "dead springs" to raise the rear.
1st pick is the car on stock 30 yr old springs. 18" wheels with a 40 tire in front and 19" wheels rear with a 35 tire.
this pick I think is the fully lower Vogtland springs. The whole car sat too low for my liking and the loss of front suspension travel made the ride to firm. My tire also rubbed when I hit a hard bump and had the wheel turned.
This is where I settled. Front original springs(probably had some sag from the years). Rear Votgtland lower springs with a 1/2" rubber spacer installed, got me about a 1/4 more in the rear
One other caviot to consider, the last pick is after my new front end alignment. My camber was factory at 0 or even slightly on the + side. I had the car aligned to -1 as my tires where wearing out the outside edge. After I pick the car up it looked a little lower in the front as the top of the tire is kicked in. There are just alot of variable on these cars when it comes to the lower look.
I appreciate all the feedback on this topic. ...I think from a technical standpoint, as Qwik mentioned, Koni's are the best, AND I already have 'em, so I'm gonna give it a go. Need to decide on stock springs, or maybe one of the softer "lowering" springs. I think the Vogtland as mentioned here, as well as UMI and Hotckis offer sub 700# front springs, and that's kinda what I'm after.
As for appearance, I'm currently sitting at 25.5" up front, and I think about 26.5" or 27" would be an acceptable compromise for my needs. I feel like stock springs are gonna ride the way I want, but are going to sit too high. I know I know, gotta pay to play. I've been through this before, and have run several different set ups on multiple cars, but THIS time around, I'm putting a little more focus on the ride quality, so honestly I'm just not sure what I'll end up with. Vinny, those Vogtland front springs on your car look REALLY low. Looks good, but I'm shocked at how it sits. ...and even with your STOCK springs, your car sits lower than most lowering springs. Regardless....it looks good.
Ok so we have some storms coming through so I will apologize for the side picture but it’s inside under a lift. The front measures 28” and the back is 29”. I may still cut the back springs to lower it an inch. Fuel tank is empty as it’s going to get changed so I may wait to see what it looks like with gas in it but probably still needs work.
Not sure how they feel but with this combination, that is what it is. Now they haven’t been on long and the only other thing I could check is the control arm bolts in the front to see if there is binding but they are torqued to spec.
The front is exactly where it was before the new spring and the rear is up 5/8” from where it was and I would bet they were the stock springs.
And how old are your stock springs? I have checked with 2 other guys with GTAs. They have similar springs and they are at 28" all around, 28.5" all around so yes my rear are .5" higher than theirs. I think folks forget what stock height was on these cars. It doesn't mean you may like it or not. As stated, my front sits right where it was on stock springs and the rear is 5/8" higher than stock. I plan to fix the rear with either a different spring isolator, hose on spring or cutting the coil. These springs have been on the car for 20 miles.
My point in engaging in this thread is if you want stock height for a GTA, it is around 28" ground to fender. If you don't like the look of that and want it lower, then don't get Moog 5660 front and AcDelco 45H3025s or be prepared to cut them down to get the height you want. I also saw a thread saying the Koni shocks will cause the rear to be up .5". I am a little a lot skeptical of how a shock would cause a car to sit higher.
Ahh the whole story, lol (cut off coils). I agree I would like to lower this thing a little but I do not want to sacrifice the ride so I think I will leave the front as is and work the back to get it down an inch. Like I said I am debating a change in spring isolator vs coil cutting but may need former to get the inch out. What is weird is the other two guys are lower than me? I got underneath the car and springs are seated on axle and spring isolators in place both sides. Since I am dropping the fuel tank this weekend, I will play with the setup to get the inch out.
Fenders are just eye candy hanging on the car and have nothing to do with suspension geometry. True ride height is the compressed height of the spring in the spring pocket. And the load on the spring is the sprung weight of the car, not the scale weight rolling on tires.
I have been seeing a need to make a good tech thread how to choose a Moog spring to get the outcome you want. I will work on this but might take a month or so.
I was looking at rt66er height before/after and wondering, does my stock height sit that high?? Well turns out from the photo I have, can't really tell !!
Oh and yes, yellow koni's, everything else factory. Koni's set to softest mode, seems closes to factory shocks from what I can recall back in the day.
Last edited by LiquidBlue; 03-07-2024 at 07:11 AM.
I wonder if WS6 package had an effect on ride height? WS6 came standard on Formula and was optional on TA...
There are a lot of different factory part number for springs. No idea what they all mean, but that could have something to do with it. As far as I know, WS6 was sway bars and springs, and maybe shocks, forget on that one.
03-04-2024, 12:27 PM
