Transverse leaf spring question

[secondchance]

Originally Posted by Scrrem

If you looking to sell that spring, I'd be in the market
Rich

Which one? Early or later one.

[secondchance]

Originally Posted by WVZR-1

Like I added to my other post. I believe the spring rate could be a +!

I hear you David. If I go with early front (stiffer) the shouldn't I replace rear w/ early also (stiffer). Otherwise, I could be introducing oversteer (or did I get it backwards)?
Also, do you think Chevy engineers respecified shocks in compression/rebound when they went to softer springs? I wonder if they stiffened up the shocks to counter softer spring somewhat...

[Scrrem]

Originally Posted by secondchance

Which one? Early or later one.

The early one.
Rich

[secondchance]

Originally Posted by Scrrem

The early one.
Rich

Well, let's see how it goes.
I need to find out shock difference. Having stiffer springs front and back (and I know where to find a matching rear) may reduce scraping my front airdams. On the other hand, if the early cars had stiffer shocks then I would have to revalve my shocks to work with stiffer springs. Need to think this thru... If I stay with later springs, you have the first dib on 91 front.

[Scrrem]

Originally Posted by secondchance

Well, let's see how it goes.
I need to find out shock difference. Having stiffer springs front and back (and I know where to find a matching rear) may reduce scraping my front airdams. On the other hand, if the early cars had stiffer shocks then I would have to revalve my shocks to work with stiffer springs. Need to think this thru... If I stay with later springs, you have the first dib on 91 front.

Cool. Yeah, I did research on this subject a few years ago and got really confused when you start combining the different options, FX3, Z51, ZR-1 and all seem to have different spring rates and the rate changes from year to year. This in my mind, must change the shock dampening value. Way too complex for me to try to de-cypher.
Rich

[secondchance]

In summary, 90-91 had stiffer springs but softer shocks. 92-95s had softer springs with stiffer/faster shocks.

For those who are interested, article w/ link below is very interesting read:
http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/...fx3/index.html

Site Administrator - If I am breaking the forum rule by the above link, please edit.

[WVZR-1]

Originally Posted by secondchance

In summary, 90-91 had stiffer springs but softer shocks. 92-95s had softer springs with stiffer/faster shocks.

For those who are interested, article w/ link below is very interesting read:
http://www.corvetteactioncenter.com/...fx3/index.html

Site Administrator - If I am breaking the forum rule by the above link, please edit.

It's an interesting read but then you need to consider the source. Halverson - oh well! He publishes what he's paid to publish.

It still doesn't negate the possible + to the increased spring rate. Halverson's #'s for his suspension parts are numbers he was supplied with from production specifications, you don't think there were manufacturing tolerances? A '91 spring is 23 or 24 years old and your ''94 spring is just a couple years younger maybe. If you want to know what the '91 spring actually is "NOW" get it checked! Answers maybe all of your questions.

I believe it's being way "over thought" - had the later spring not had the pedestal type cushion at the control arms you would have had the job "done" and been telling us about the things you really enjoyed about the change.

[batchman]

My two cents - if you lower you want more spring rate to minimize running out of travel.

I *think* any factory-spec shock should work with any factory spring rate, while it won't be optimum it should work for street driving. The more aggressive the driving the further from optimum it will become. Worst that should happen is back shocks may not fully control rear spring rate and you get an "echo" or hobby-horse effect.

FWIW I went from stock 91 to 750/375 (front/rear) and it ain't enough for autocross on slicks - next stop coming soon (I hope) is 1k/500 with Penske double adjustables.

Cheers,
- Jeff

[mike100]

when you cut the bushings and/or remove the shims, you effectively lower the spring rate so you might be better off with the early spring. Another way to put it is you reduce the spring preload so the car sits lower. you probably don't approach the stock tension until you are near the bumpstops. Doing the lowering wedges makes the car softer imo.

You might consider taking out one or both bushing shims as that will get you some drop without having to remove the spring 100% (it is easier and about 2/3rds the work). The ZR-1 (early cars at least) has two shims presumably due to the weight of the LT5, whereas the coupe/vert came with just a single shim or no shim.

[mike100]

The ZR-1 front spring color code is green- it's a square ink spot on the top face near the end.



recently completed: stock spring back in because I couldn't stand dragging the car over speed bumps any longer- control arm out because nobody owns the special transverse leaf compression tool.