Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I currently am running the 6 cylinder mustang springs on the front of my car. I want it to be lower in the front. I have read that it is questionable to do the shelby drop for a drag car. Is it OK to drop the car another 1" by cutting the spring w/o relocating the upper control arm?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,983 Posts
I currently am running the 6 cylinder mustang springs on the front of my car. I want it to be lower in the front. I have read that it is questionable to do the shelby drop for a drag car. Is it OK to drop the car another 1" by cutting the spring w/o relocating the upper control arm?

I had done it with great success on my 65 (without the Shelby drop.) Just be sure to also be using an adjustable (or 90/10) front shock to help transfer weight. I also tried it using the 1" drop but the suspension would change toe-in drastically more than what occurred when using the stock location as the front end rised.

Now if its a 67 or newer I would recommend doing the Shelby drop and using cut down Moroso Trick springs. Although similar in appearance to the 65/66 suspensions, the later models track better through the rise of the front end WITH the Shelby drop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Doing the "Shelby drop" as you guys call it is useless on a drag car. The modification is for cornering improvements only. Yes it will lower the front end a bit by doing it. My '66 Shelby was built shortly after the A arm mods were stopped. The front springs are original and I use 90-10 shock like Dennis mentioned. My car is higher in the rear due to special leaf springs and 29x10 Goodyear slicks. How low do you want the front end? The six cylinder springs ( used) should drop the front end an inch or two with an all iron 289-302, more with a 351W.
Mine is about a second slower than Dennis's car because of a lot less cubic inches and the C4 original to my car. Full article ( if you are interested) in Feb 2011 Modified Mustangs and Fast Fords Cover and article "It Hertz".
Randy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I had done it with great success on my 65 (without the Shelby drop.) Just be sure to also be using an adjustable (or 90/10) front shock to help transfer weight. I also tried it using the 1" drop but the suspension would change toe-in drastically more than what occurred when using the stock location as the front end rised.

Now if its a 67 or newer I would recommend doing the Shelby drop and using cut down Moroso Trick springs. Although similar in appearance to the 65/66 suspensions, the later models track better through the rise of the front end WITH the Shelby drop.
This is what I was looking for. I do have calvert 90/10's but they will be replaced later this year with viking double adjustables. There is a bit too much gap in the front and I have the calvert drop mono leafs under the car and it is just a tad too high in the front.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,983 Posts
Doing the "Shelby drop" as you guys call it is useless on a drag car. The modification is for cornering improvements only.

Randy, my reason for doing the Arning drop has partially to do with the toe-in and camber changes that occur when the front end rises during launch (which is very apparent when the wheels are off the ground.) This results in tire scruffing which will slow the car down and can even lead to a darting issue should the wheels not come down evenly.

I self align my old Mustangs and have taken measurements of the change of toe in for every 1" of rise. The 65/66's are all over the place from the factory and it took some serious modding to settle it down, such as relocating the tie rod spindle arm.

As you know, in 67 the suspension was revised for the wider bodied car. Relocating the LCA pivot inward, longer length paired tie rods, and the raised tie rod spindle arms greatly improved the toe in issue. From 1" rise to nearly 4" of lift toe in remains the same (with a max of 4.75" of travel.) During that last 3/4" the wheels start to toe-in but its limited to about 1/8" total by the time the wheels are off the ground. After a season of running the car I later found that doing the arning drop lessened changes in camber (which also affects tire contact.)

Off topic. The cool thing is that I've compared both the 65/66 front suspension and the 67-70 suspension system using the same 65 Mustang! 67/68 shock towers, strut rod brackets, and the complete 67-70 front suspension were initially installed to increase working clearances around the big motor. Ease of alignments plus the new found stability were unexpected but welcome side benefits (which also carries over to street use.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,983 Posts
This is what I was looking for. I do have calvert 90/10's but they will be replaced later this year with viking double adjustables. There is a bit too much gap in the front and I have the calvert drop mono leafs under the car and it is just a tad too high in the front.
I suggest going easy on the cuts (try 1/2 coil first then do 1/4 coil cuts) and don't cut more than 1 full coil out or else the upper ball joints will hit the bump stops on the outer shock tower cover on a bumpy return road. You will need to do an alignment afterwards.

I'm using viking crusader double adjustables on the front of my car and I really like them. They offer much more control over the front end and are a welcome improvement over the Calvert 90/10's I had before. Highly recommended. The Crusaders are factory rebuildable and I think have a lifetime warranty-at least they did when I got mine a few years ago.

I also bought Viking crusader DA's for the rear BUT had suspension control issues with my stick car that led to uncontrollable wheel hop that broke through the upper body shock mount 3 times. I then reinstalled the old Calvert 9 way SA's and the car has run new bests with them (and no broken parts.) I contacted Viking about the situation but they were no help on stock suspension stick cars. I am not the only one who has had this issue on a Mustang as a friend with a 69 stick car had the same problem with Afco DA shocks. His fix then was also to install the Calverts. He is currently experimenting with the Sandruff modified data acquisition stuff but hasn't found a sweet spot yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
Dennis ,
I simply went with a heim jointed strut rod as I saw most of my issues were there. I still have the original "handling package/GT ) springs and my "antique" Cure Ride ('65) 90-10s. I spent some time with mine on the alignment rack and ended up with little camber change and minor toe change. I did do the alignment based on "down track " photos of the ride height. Sometimes I wish it was a clone so I could modify it to be better , but there is also a personal reward for going fast "as produced". I just need a horsepower transfusion!
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top