CHEAP and Great Alternative Coil Springs '49 thru '59 Ford and Merc

gasser, now you have me curious. So you didnt opt for the dropped or granada spindles? I was planning to do the dropped spindles as well, but maybe I dont need to if this drops the front enough? Are you running front disc?

 

i just got my coils and i am waiting for my upright to get back from the machinist for king pin fittment, still need to buy shocks though

 

looks like a good set up!

 

I'd love to hear more about the fordbarn thread about rear shocks, anybody got a link? I bought the Monroe 5821's mentioned eareelier in the thread but haven't gotten time to install them

My understanding has been that 3" drop coils are fine and will not throw off your alignment. When I had cut springs, the front was way lower and the alignment/ride/bumpsteer were horrible.

I ahve 3" lowering springs and 3" blocks in the rear, the shocks look fairly horizontal now, but I'll fool with it when I put in the maverick rear.


EDIT: The above applies to a shoebox ford

 

there may be others, but here is the thread i started over there, basically just says what I posted above.

Do you think the aerostar coils and dropped spindles will be too much drop, or be ok?

 

Thanks ctfortner!

as far as the coils/spindles being OK, I think it depends on what your mean exactly...I don't have drop spindles, but when my front was lowered around 5+" it looked great but the ground clearance made driveways, bumpy roads, speed bumps, everything a real challenge I'd rather not repeat.

I'm going out on a limb wiht this answer but AFAIK your alignment will be adjustable to within spec. As far as bump steer I'll continue to inch my way out on that limb and say that lowering it that much isn't gonna help it any. My understanding is the front end on a shoebox was the first IFS ford made and they didn't get it right the first time out, so bumpsteer was characteristic from the factory.

I ended up buying a fatman trick tie rod end kit that relocates the tie rods and replaces the pitman , which is supposed to help with bump steer.

Have you gotten dropped tie rods as well? AFAIK you need them with the drop spindles, unless you wanna heat and bend the stockers , which adds to the bumpsteer issue.

I'm just kinda talking out my ass on the above , I'm sure someone with actual experience could tell you better, I'm just repeating what I recall reading.

EDIT: The above applies to a shoebox ford

 

I have Granada discs, but they didn't lower the car. They are a nice, cheap junkyard upgrade. Dropped spindle disc kits are great, but big bucks. Since my 57 needed new springs and shocks anyways, Fairlane Dave's trick was perfect for what I needed.

 

Do you have a picture? I have a 58 and would like to see how it could sit.
Thanks.

 

Johnny, that is exactly what I mean, not wanting it so low that bumpy roads, speed bumps, etc.. are a problem. Thats just to low for me for this car. Here is where mine sits right now, with original 50+ year old springs.









Like gasser said below, he added granada spindles but it didnt lower his any. I guess that depends on how much reaming you do. I have read that they "can" lower you up to 2" however. So that was my question, if I do both, that could end up a total of 5" lower than stock. But of course, where is stock? I doubt mine is anymore.. But looking at my front, I think it could go 4-5 inches from where it is now and still be ok, and I am sure its sagged some, so I am going to go for it I think. Grandas and aerostars here I come.

I have not gotten anything yet for the brakes. I have debated till blue whether to get a kit or do myself. I am down to doing myself at the moment, but guess what, granada spindles arent just readily available. So thats not making this an easy chore so far. So, I am curious about the tie rods, I dont recall the disc kits replacing those (could be wrong), and supposedly they supply "everything you need". Worth checking out for sure.

 

On the Granada Swap. you simply use the existing 1956 tie rod ends. The "fatman trick tie rod end kit" may supply different tie rod ends, I'm not sure. Another option is the FatMan 'rack & pinion kit'. I don't usually go this route, but after I installed the 302, the steering box is barely an eight of an inch from the exhaust, which is cooking the box. The box has also developed a "tight spot", or "skip", which may have been caused by excessive friction due to a drop in viscosity from the heat. The Rack will both replace the useless box with something new (instead of another worn out 56 box), solves the heat problem and now provides enough room for shorty headers. I believe it also addresses the bump steering issues as well.

It may be something you want to consider.

 

CTFORTNER: I'm an idiot, I didn't realize that you have a later model Ford, I have a '51 and ASSumed that you had a 49-51 as well. my bad! So my posts just apply to a shoebox, not your car. Sorry about that!

 

Ahhhh, ok, no problem. Thanks for clarifying.

 

Hey, can we go back to this subject for a quick second? Does the '49 through '59 window include thunderbirds? If so, I can't imagine that the '60 Thunderbird coils would be much different. Anybody know what the specs on the thunderchicken coils are?

 

very helpful thread, on my way out to pick up spring and shocks

 

Thanks for the info on this thread.

 

Good info to have as I am getting started on my '55 Ford this winter. My parents bought the car new. Last driven in the mid '80s, sitting in the barn at my mother's house. Planning some mild custom touches (shaved hood and deck lid, lowered a little) and upgrade to disc brakes with '80s Crown Vic/LTD spindles and front brakes. Keeping King Henry V8's 272 Y block and 3 on the tree. Though nothing sounds better than a flathead and good glass pacs, a good Y block running glass pacs sounds mighty sweet.

 

WOW!!!! I just finshed installing my new Moog springs on my 50 Ford. What a difference!!! I just didn't realize how worn out my old springs were. The drivers side had collapsed on one side. Not to mention the cool new 2" lower stance it has. VIVA EL HAMB!!!!!!

 

due to the car being lower do you have to make any further adjustments to the suspension, or you just put them on and go? Also with the Aerostar springs, can you still cut 1 coil out to get the car lower and if so then would you have to make further suspension adjustments?

 

And do they work in a 49-51 Merc???

 

Yes you can cut the coils, but as a warning when I lowered mine, with boogie blocks and shorter coils I had to make some major adjustments to the spring pocket to get the lower arm to clear. I also added new shorter bumpstops too.

Not sure on the merc, I think<<< (think, not sure) that they should work on a merc.

 

Nice to know somebody has read and used the knowledge in my numerous posts over the last few years about the MOOG spring catalogs.

 

I am putting a set in my merc tonight. From the looks of it the spring is floating around inside the spring pocket while the car is still on jack stands. I was able to put the spring in by hand without using a jack as well. I don't know if I am going to do the other side or not. I'm going to measure the spring in a little while and make sure they sent me the right ones. I sure would like to hear more opinions on these in a merc.

 

buckeye, the same thing happened to me, and I was a little worried. I put these in my 56 ford and the originals had to be lowered out with a jack, but I was able to put these aerostars in and raise the a arm and bolt on the ball joints with nothing but my hands. If you yank on it real hard after all is assembled (while on jack stands) it would move slightly. BUT when you set it on the ground, its a whole different story. I cant speak to the merc, but my ford was just like you mentioned.

 

These springs in my merc are completely different than your ford. They will load with a jack but anything before that makes them unusable. I don't really want to stick my hand in the spring pocket to align the spring everytime I jack the front end up. The idea is awesome but they simply don't work to well for the merc. They are about 4" shorter than the stock merc spring too. Oh well, it was worth a try. Off to the classifieds these springs go.

 

once you have the shocks in the springs cant unload,, remember if your running that much shorter spring you need a shorter shock, otherwise the shock will bottom out before the suspension hit the snubber!

 

I understand that, but I think they are wayyy to low to work properly on a Merc. It was worth a try for 60 bucks.

 

What shocks are the shoebox guys using with the Aerostar springs?

 

I would assume that the monte carlo shocks would work with those as well.

 

I decided to bite the bullet and order a set of springs from my local Checker O'reilly's. I saw they had a set of TRW listed on their website for $42.99. Part CC850. I printed the ad and took it with me into the store. The store manager agreed to match the price on some Moog CC850 since they were the same part #. This project had a good start. They came in the next day. I called my buddy and made plans to install them after work.

I took the following pictures for reference.








After taking the pictures and shaking my head in disgust, I pulled the 49 into the garage and started to pull things apart. As far as remember, I put new springs in around 1992 after cutting one two many coils out of the original ones. At the time I was running 215/65/15 radials so the it did not look very high. As soon as I put these 6.70-15, the front end was nose bleed high. Even with Fatman uprights on it, the vehicle looks almost stock. Surprisingly enough, swapping the springs took my buddy and I less than an hour for both. Here are the results:









Dropped it about 2 1/2 inches. Rides and handles so much better now as well. Alignment stayed in place. I have Monroe shocks on it now, but forgot to write down what number they were. No problems bottoming out at all. This is by far the best investment I have made in a while.

 

Thanks foe the awesome pics 49 flattie!

Great job! Talk about bang for your buck!