What springs do I have?

1950StangJump$

forum member
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Posts
966
Reaction score
108
Might not be obvious from the picture, but the front of my 2008 GT is considerably lower than the back.

I do have a KB blower, but I can't imagine the weight of that would affect it too much. The 20" rims/tire diameter in the front is equivalent to the stock 18" rims/tires. The car has 22k miles, so I can't imagine wear and tear might be responsible for the front being lower. No (other) suspension mods, and the struts/shocks appear OEM.

I *think* the previous owner might have put different front springs on. In the picture, the blue tag is from the rear, the yellow from the front. A search of the tag numbers was inconclusive, but leads me to think stock GT rear and Bullitt front? Is the Bullitt suspension that much lower?

file1-56.jpeg

file-87.jpeg
 

Macman45

Resident Geriatric
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Posts
1,446
Reaction score
174
Location
Atlanta / Bay Area
Bullitt suspension is slightly lower and stiffer than a GT, coupled with the weight of the blower, and the fact the stock GT's have a super high ass for the "raked" look, that explains what you've got going. Honestly I hate the rake and lowered my rear 2.4" and front 1.8" with Eibachs.
I like the tuck of the front you've got, maybe grab some FRPP-P rears to fix the rake. I think the blower setup is 100lbs or so, coupled with stiffer B springs in the front only (weird) that explains your low front
 

1950StangJump$

forum member
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Posts
966
Reaction score
108
Believe it or not, I kind of like the stance. But, it's time in the build to start thinking about handling improvements, so that starts with figuring out what I've got.

Top of the front tire to fender is now only 1.25". I see so many springs advertising huge drops in the front, but I obviously don't have the room to drop much more, even if I wanted. If we assume they are Bullitt springs, it does seem hard to believe that it would be that low (minus the extra 100 lbs for the blower).

On the back, it's about 2.5" from top of tire to fender.
 

Macman45

Resident Geriatric
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Posts
1,446
Reaction score
174
Location
Atlanta / Bay Area
Believe it or not, I kind of like the stance. But, it's time in the build to start thinking about handling improvements, so that starts with figuring out what I've got.

Top of the front tire to fender is now only 1.25". I see so many springs advertising huge drops in the front, but I obviously don't have the room to drop much more, even if I wanted.

On the back, it's about 2.5" from top of tire to fender.

I've lowered my car 3 times and now it's .75" in the front, and about 0.9" in the rear, I call it about even. Handles better than a stock 13/14 coyote.
 

1950StangJump$

forum member
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Posts
966
Reaction score
108
That might be too low for my tastes.

So, here's why I think this is important . . . I need to be sure the current stance, particularly the low front end, is directly attributable to the springs and not something else in the suspension. That way, if I buy different springs, I know what I'm going to have when installed.

If I there is only 1.25" from tire to fender now, and that is because of something other than the particular spring, I obviously can't install springs that will lower it another 1.5".

But, if the current springs are .75" lower than the stock GT springs, then I know a BMR spring, which advertises a 1.5" drop, will only be another .75" from what I have now.

Hope that makes sense.
 

Macman45

Resident Geriatric
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Posts
1,446
Reaction score
174
Location
Atlanta / Bay Area
Oh I don’t blame ya. I drive mine 500 miles a year these day and it’s a shitshow over curbs and speedbumps.

Well you gotta factor in your blower. All those numbers are off a stock GT. Also remember these are progressive K-constant spring rates, the first .75” is not linear in force to the second 0.75”. If you want a bit more accuracy look at GT500’s, which are heavier in the front.
 

1950StangJump$

forum member
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Posts
966
Reaction score
108
Oh I don’t blame ya. I drive mine 500 miles a year these day and it’s a shitshow over curbs and speedbumps.

Well you gotta factor in your blower. All those numbers are off a stock GT. Also remember these are progressive K-constant spring rates, the first .75” is not linear in force to the second 0.75”. If you want a bit more accuracy look at GT500’s, which are heavier in the front.

Crap. I hate you might be right. I have a feeling this is going to be a "buy and install the springs you think will work, and hope for the best" type of game.
 

Macman45

Resident Geriatric
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Posts
1,446
Reaction score
174
Location
Atlanta / Bay Area
Back will be accurate, since you're stock back there. BMR sells front and rear separately. I'd scoop some GT lowering springs for the rear and some GT500s for the front from BMR. That'd be the most accurate
 

Support us!

Support Us - Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Sponsor Links

Banner image
Back
Top