I put a reverse eye spring in the front, moved the whole rear cross member/spring section 10" straight up into the trunk, and I think I've got the height and rake just right. It's low but not too low, and the reverse rake is definitely there, but subtle. I can make a set of these custom fender skirts for anybody who's interested.
I think the stance is exactly dead on. This is the old Motor city stance from the fifties, right down to the skirts. Make those skirts from old car tops to get the "bubble".
Hey, that's a great idea! It'll save me a ton of hammer/sandbag/planishing hammer time. Maybe a truck cab roof for a heavy arch.
The stance is right, I vote for 2" lower all the way around... (Drop axle/reversed eye main leaf in back)...
I agree about the front end. The reversed eye spring didn't seem to make a bit of difference. I think the original spring had relaxed so much it was at the same height as a reversed unit. I would really like the fenders to follow the top of the whitewalls. But, if I drop it down in the front, I lose my negative rake. Then I'll have to step the frame even further in the rear, and I'm getting dangerously close to having the rear tires rub on the fenders when the suspension is compressed. What I'm trying to go for is retaining as much of the stock suspension travel as possible. I could've just thrown in a flat crossmember, taken 2/3 of the springs out of the rear, and slammed the rear end into the frame everytime I go near a bump. I'm in northern New England (read potholes), and this is my only ride aside from my shop truck.
The Jalopy Journal
