Discussion Forum - Northstar Chevelle Club

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Looking to raise the rear a little on the 66


2K+ Club

Status: Offline
Posts: 2734
Date:
Looking to raise the rear a little on the 66
Permalink  
 


IMG_1943.JPGI I I    Iwould like to explore exposing a little more on my rear tire.  So I was thinking of using some kind of spacer as a trial to see how it would look.  It looks like there are two types of spacer, and adjustable type and a type that you just set between a couple of coils.  Is one preferred over the other?

After I settle on the height (thinking 3/4-1" increase),  I would go with something more permanent, like the spacer that mounts between the bottom of the spring and the rear axle spring pad.

A special thanks to Keith for mounting the tires for me.



-- Edited by jim larson on Saturday 4th of April 2015 02:22:41 PM



-- Edited by jim larson on Saturday 4th of April 2015 02:24:17 PM



-- Edited by jim larson on Saturday 4th of April 2015 02:25:09 PM



-- Edited by jim larson on Saturday 4th of April 2015 02:29:47 PM

Attachments
__________________

Jim L

Lake City



3K+ Club

Status: Offline
Posts: 4731
Date:
Permalink  
 

Jim, I'm not a fan of the spacers that go between the coils of the spring, as I think they change the spring rates, and can make the car ride rougher too.  I've used these in the past that go between the top of the spring and the coil pocket, and have the 1.5" ones in the rear of the Malibu to raise it up a little.

Summit Racing Link

SPC Performance 1628 - SPC Performance Coil Spring Spacers



__________________

Stan S.-Twin Cities 'South Metro'

1972 Malibu Convertible 2nd time around 

2001 Mustang GT Convertible 

Forum influenced terms: 'Link Paste', 'Stanitized', & 'Revolving garage door...' 

 



2K+ Club

Status: Offline
Posts: 2734
Date:
Permalink  
 

I was going to use the spacers for a test.  And then go to what you are showing.  Trying to determine if I should go 3/4, 1, or 1 1/2.



__________________

Jim L

Lake City



President

Status: Offline
Posts: 391
Date:
Permalink  
 

Many, many years ago, I used a rubber twisting spring spacer.  the spacer went between the coils in the spring.

 

I liked that over the metal adjustable ones because the rubber ones did not make noise, were easier to install and had some flex to the.

 

I did a quick search on the web.  This is what they looked like.   

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Perfect-Parts-2-1-2-Solid-Rubber-Coil-Spring-Stabilizers-Restores-Height-/141622912874

 

Hope this helps



__________________

Hankster

Columbus, MN

'71 Chevelle SS frame-off, restro-mod, 402/375hp, Tremec TKO 600 5-speed, 3:90 12-bolt posi

'60 VW Beetle currently in the CAC



President

Status: Offline
Posts: 7323
Date:
Permalink  
 

SShink wrote:

Jim, I'm not a fan of the spacers that go between the coils of the spring, as I think they change the spring rates, and can make the car ride rougher too.  I've used these in the past that go between the top of the spring and the coil pocket, and have the 1.5" ones in the rear of the Malibu to raise it up a little.

Summit Racing Link

SPC Performance 1628 - SPC Performance Coil Spring Spacers


 Those won't fit an early '66 frame. I believe Jim has the open top spring...headscratch Those are designed for the small top '67-and up.

Jim, if you just want to see it raised and not drive it, I would use a 4X4 under the rear crossmember and a floor jack to pick the body up to where you want it. Measure the wheel well height before you raise it and where you like it. It isn't going to take much to raise the body as the springs have sagged over time and they will still help lift it.



-- Edited by Lost in the 60s on Sunday 5th of April 2015 04:34:43 PM

__________________

Mitch D.   River Falls, WI

Lifetime member of the "Cars apart Club"

1966 Chevelle SS 396 M20

1970 Chevelle SS 396 M20

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350 M20



Active Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 306
Date:
Permalink  
 

How about Poly coil spring isolators?  They're open in the middle. Not sure how thick they are, but maybe you could put one on the top and one on the bottom to get some extra height?



__________________

1964 Malibu Convert
"Nitrous is for guys who can't build motors"

www.worldracingleague.org 

www.facebook.com/wellsmafiaracing

 



2K+ Club

Status: Offline
Posts: 2444
Date:
Permalink  
 

Jim, the red lines and rims look outstanding. I think your correct, it would be nice to see a little more rear tire after all you paid a lot for them and need to show them off.

I wish there was a better way to archive a desired ride height other than trial and error. I've had three different sets of front springs in the Elky and I'm still not happy with the front ride height.

I know you want to keep it original but have you considered air bags, coil overs or air shocks? With them you could adjust the ride height and at least air shocks where available in 66.
I think every means of raising the ride height other than changing the rear coil springs has some form of negative impact.

Here's some light reading. www.airliftcompany.com/workshop/category/air-suspension-basics/

Derek needs to check in here, he's the suspension guy




__________________

Kevin

Northwestern Ohio



2K+ Club

Status: Offline
Posts: 2734
Date:
Permalink  
 

I have been reading a few articles on TC and they seem to suggest not to mess with the suspension, main issues being wheel hop and pinion angle.  I plan to check  the ride height and see where I am with that.  Then I will know how much the springs have sagged if any.  I have the 66 and earlier style spring perches, that need a spacer that has the hole in the middle used to attach the spring to the search with a clip and bolt.  Also the top does not have the pig tail on the spring like the 67 and later springs.  

In fact I have 1" spacers in there now. Maybe time for new springs and a rear  sway bar with boxed lower arms. 

I have looked at various book from the mid sixties, and it seem they had a different spring for just about any chevelle model and then more,  depending upon engine and options like AC.  It looks like the SS had both a first and second design with different loads.  For example the 1st design for the 66 SS Sport Couple had a load of 1281 lb.,  where the 2nd design had a 1111 lb load.  I did the 2x4 thing; but thought I should live with a different height for a few weeks before I did something.



__________________

Jim L

Lake City



Founding Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 2787
Date:
Permalink  
 

The flat spring perches on 64-66 would probably be easiest to test ride height by stacking up 3" fender washers under the spring and running a longer bolt through the retainer... maybe not a good long-term option, but you could figure out where you want it to be, and if it will cause wheelhop there with factory spring rates not in coil-bind.

The higher you go, the more likely to hop it will be.





__________________

Derek Kiefer - Mantorville, MN

69 Malibu Pro-Touring stroker LS1-383/T56 - 69 SS396-325/3spd project



President

Status: Offline
Posts: 7323
Date:
Permalink  
 

jim larson wrote:

I have been reading a few articles on TC and they seem to suggest not to mess with the suspension, main issues being wheel hop and pinion angle.  I plan to check  the ride height and see where I am with that.  Then I will know how much the springs have sagged if any.  I have the 66 and earlier style spring perches, that need a spacer that has the hole in the middle used to attach the spring to the search with a clip and bolt.  Also the top does not have the pig tail on the spring like the 67 and later springs.  

In fact I have 1" spacers in there now. Maybe time for new springs and a rear  sway bar with boxed lower arms. 

I have looked at various book from the mid sixties, and it seem they had a different spring for just about any chevelle model and then more,  depending upon engine and options like AC.  It looks like the SS had both a first and second design with different loads.  For example the 1st design for the 66 SS Sport Couple had a load of 1281 lb.,  where the 2nd design had a 1111 lb load.  I did the 2x4 thing; but thought I should live with a different height for a few weeks before I did something.


 When you raised the body with a jack, did you determine how much higher you wanted it ?

Using Derek's method, or any spacer method, would let you see the height but not the ride from new springs, which I am certain you need. It is a very common problem with these cars that the rear sags over time until it sits lower than the front, as yours does. Installing new springs and bringing the ride height back to factory will serve to correct a potentially improper pinion angle that may exist now because of the sagging springs.

A sway bar will improve cornering but will do nothing for ride height or rate.

I had to chuckle when I read about wheel hop issues. I just don't see you hammering on that car hard enough to ever know if it wheel hops....laughing

My SS has 3" riser cups between the axle and spring. They were there when I got it and the stance is slightly higher in the rear. I like the stance and was worried about wheel hop too, but even with either the 275/60 street tires or wrinkle walls on the strip, I am amazed that it's never hopped.

 



__________________

Mitch D.   River Falls, WI

Lifetime member of the "Cars apart Club"

1966 Chevelle SS 396 M20

1970 Chevelle SS 396 M20

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350 M20



2K+ Club

Status: Offline
Posts: 2444
Date:
Permalink  
 

Mitch makes a good point, you're only going to bring it back to where it was; about the correction for two adults in the back seat. You would really like the handling improvement a sway bar would bring.
What gears do you have and is it a posi unit? I don't think you will get enough traction with those tires to get wheel hop, if it's posi I think you would just go sideways.
When I had air shocks and worn bushings in the Elky the wheel hop was so violent the sun visor would swing back and hit me in the forehead the ash tray and glove box would pop open and empty their contents on the seat.




__________________

Kevin

Northwestern Ohio



2K+ Club

Status: Offline
Posts: 2734
Date:
Permalink  
 

Sounds as if I should go with new springs first.  I checked the pinion angle as it sits now.  Can't remember what it was or what it is suppose to be at.  I am thinking 1/2 a degree at both trans and pinion flange.  I believe that is what I got; but will have to check again along with checking the 2 different measurements for rear ride height.

I think the 66's set king of low from the factory,  I will have to try and find my photos from 67 and see how the rear sat.

I checked with George Lever today and I can get a used set of boxed gm lower arms powder coated with new moog bushings to my house for just under $200.  Then I would need a sway bar.



__________________

Jim L

Lake City



President

Status: Offline
Posts: 7323
Date:
Permalink  
 

Can you get them with urethane bushings ? The urethane will yield a better ride and sway control as you aren't twisting the rubber on compression and it isn't squishing sideways on corners. The center sleeve in a urethane turns freely for a smoother ride. I use Prothane as they have small grooves in the urethane to retain the grease for self lubricating.

__________________

Mitch D.   River Falls, WI

Lifetime member of the "Cars apart Club"

1966 Chevelle SS 396 M20

1970 Chevelle SS 396 M20

1967 Camaro SS/RS 350 M20

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Chatbox
Please log in to join the chat!