[68ragtop]

I never realized there was a big difference in the springs. At least, in the way the cars sit. I got the chance to compare a 77 & 78 non-ws6 cars, against my 78 WS6.

I was at a friends house, who owns a 77, low mile T/A, Then another guy he knows stopped in with a 78 non-WS6. So we started looking at things closer.

What I found was the front of my WS6 car sat nearly 3/4" higher in the front & 1/2" higher in the rear. All three cars have never been messed with suspension wise.

I also thought that my car was supposed to have urathane bushings. & I didn't see that. The bushings in the rear springs are rubber & the only thing that looked like poly was the front stabilzer links.

Any thoughts?

[2manyT/A'S]

The ONLY urethane bushings that I know of in the 2nd gen WS6 package are in the front sway bar end links.
WS6 springs WERE specific (higher rate)
In the old days Herb Adams (VSE) used to advise taking OUT the WS6 springs,especially the fronts & replacing them with base bird springs with 1/2 coil removed.
Cutting the coil lowered the car by an inch & increased the spring rate at the same time.
Softer springs & big bars kept the car on the road,even if it was a bumpy one.
Camero Z28's always came with high rate springs & tiny sway bars.
That's why they always ended up in the ditch!

[72 Street Bird]

Your ride hight seems odd to me. Back in 78-79 I had a 78 WS6 and my two friends had non WS6 T/As, Mine was always lower than the non WS6 cars. All three were W72 engines. The only difference was that mine is Automatic and theirs were 4 speeds.
The urethane bushing were only on the front sway bar links.

[JBanna]

What do you mean by a "high spring rate"? Why would a high spring rate and small sway bars but you in the ditch?

[2manyT/A'S]

The Camero stiff spring/small sway bar package works OK on a SMOOTH road,but if you hit a bump in a tight fast corner,the stiff spring will rebound hard enough to shift/transfer weight & cause potential loss of control.

Softer springs with bigger bars gave T/A's better ride & more predictable / precise handling on MOST road conditions

[opnwide]

You can go surprisingly high on spring rates for the street if you keep the shock damping correct. Look at the rates that the new vettes are running. Balance is the key. Its hard to find matching rear springs unless you go with a coilover conv.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by opnwide

You can go surprisingly high on spring rates for the street if you keep the shock damping correct. Look at the rates that the new vettes are running. Balance is the key. Its hard to find matching rear springs unless you go with a coilover conv.

No offence opnwide, but "Going with Coil overs" is a bunch of crap as far as 2nd gens go!

My 79 with HO Racing dropped front 1/2 Coil cut springs, Standard KONI shocks, stock rear WS6 springs with 15x8 Snowflakes, 255/60/15 tires and alingnment spec's outta of the original Thunder Am mag (Herb Adams caster/camber/toe-in, etc.) would WALK away from the early 4th Gen TA's. That's with RUBBER bushings, frame mounts, etc. It's a simple matter of tuning the suspension that was designed into the original WS6 Firebirds. Yeah, that's right - you can imagine the suprised look of the then NEW 4th Gen TA owner after I spanked him through the twisties using this set up and the torque of the Poncho motor.

[Larry Navarro]

Originally Posted by Alvin

No offence opnwide, but "Going with Coil overs" is a bunch of crap as far as 2nd gens go!

Nope, not anymore.........
With the coil-over suspension conversions available for the 2nd gens, anyone can have the option of infinite adjustability, along with ease of "tuning", for a variety of road conditions.
Your not going to accomplish this with leaf-springs, unless you have multiple sets and alot time on your hands.

[2manyT/A'S]

The stock suspensions in ALL 70-81 T/A's was pretty respectable right out of the box,especially the WS6 cars & with a bit of tweaking,are still VERY competitive.

I still say,LOOK STOCK & RUN FAST.

STEALTH is the way to go!

There is ALWAYS somebody (with more $$$) that will beat you,no matter WHAT you run.

The best parts is when the guy with all the radical suspension mods comes over to check out your "stock" set-up & is likely wondering why he threw out all of his factory parts.

MY 2 cents!

[Alvin]

IMO - My experience with the "Original Equipment Specs" Eaton replacement leaf springs: I called to order replacement WS6 leafs with our T/A's original build sheet in hand. The salesman answered the phone: "Hello". Thought I had the wrong number...as no Detroit Eaton Springs greeting, etc. When I asked about the Eaton springs available for our 1979 WS6 TA - the "Spring Guru" on the phone advised that Eaton only had (2) spring numbers for 1970 - 1981! I asked him which one he advised for direct replacement for WS6 springs and he was clueless. The choices were for standard or performance... So yes I ordered the performance springs but have not installed as when I compare my originals to the "Original Equipment Specs" Eaton replacement leaf springs there are too many differences for my comfort. For one, they lack the metal shim plate that mounts between Shock Mount pad and the spring base, etc. His comments were the same about the front springs when I asked about those...he couldn't use the Build Sheet Data and A/C or Non A/C were the only options. I could tell that by looking at any MOOG (or other) Spring Parts Catalog. So that was a no Front Coil Spring sale for me.

IMO - I bought off on Eaton Springs adverts in the Poncho (and other) Mags that they had "45,000 (or something like that) OEM Spring Specifications on File" to build to match the originals. Lesson learned here.

I'm sure that others have had a "better" experience? If so maybe you could share the Eaton Spring Part numbers that worked for your T/A, which options - A/C, Auto or Manual, Pontiac/Olds/Chevy OEM engine, WS6 or Non-WS6, etc.

[79ws6&74sd]

Just a little input for what its worth.. Ive been driving my 79 WS6 TA around quite a bit this summer. The other day I jumped into my girlfriends 81 Z28. Her chevy rides so much smoother with less head bobbing than does my TA. TA has a much stiffer ride.

[Precision Transmission]

If I may jump in here, the original posting concerned differences between WS6 and non-WS6 ride heights. I remember an article in Hot Rod magazine from 1979, I believe, called "One Good Turn". A two part series concerning the WS6 option. They put the parts on a stock '77, and I remember the major components being rear springs, with a 25 pound higher rating, rear stabilizer bar and bushings, rear spring shackle bushings, steering box, 8 inch wide Snowflakes with 225 70R-15 Goodyears, polyurathane front stabilizer bar link grommets, and very importantly, the specially valved shock absorbers. No changes were called for regarding front coil springs, stabilizer bar, etc. Even when I checked the Pontiac parts book way back then, the same front springs were shown as applicable with or without "Special Performance Pkg." But, like others have said, I noticed the WS6 cars around here at the time had a different ride height that non WS6 cars. In most cases, the WS6 cars were slightly nose high. I only remember one being lower in the front, and that was corrected when the broken coil was replaced.

When I needed to replace the rear springs in my '79 6.6 Litre car, the only choices in the Pontiac Parts book were with or without "Special Performance Pkg." Interestingly enough, the same springs were called for in older cars with "Trailer Towing Pkg." The replacement springs were identical to what came originally on the car, and when compared to non WS6 springs, the only visual clue was the bottom leaf extending further forward. This would have made the spring less prone to wind-up. I never checked the leaf dimensions with calipers or for length to see where that extra 25 pound rating came from. A very important feature of the rear suspension was the inclusion of the harder shackle bushings. These were only available separately, and did not come with any shackle kits. Shackle kits were supplied with the softest bushings I have ever seen, and if the person doing the spring swap didn't know, or more likely didn't care, the handling deteriorated tremendously.

Regarding front springs, I have no experience there. My fading memory tells me that the 6.6 Litre (403) cars sat higher in front than the T/A 6.6 cars. The later T/A 4.9 and 5.0 Litre cars all seemed to sit level, and at a lower height than the 6.6 Litre cars. A friends '81 4.9 Turbo, with every available option, sat even with my '79 6.6 Litre car, with only WS6, rear defroster, deluxe interior, and radio delete.

One final note, when the special WS6 shock absorbers were discontinued, I never was able to find an affordable, suitable replacement. I do remember the shocks were very soft on compression, and ungodly stiff on rebound. Most replacement shocks, even Delcos, are much stiffer on compression, and much softer on rebound; almost to a 50/50 ratio Now, I know that adjustable shocks are out there, but I like things to look stock. Has anyone ever found the engineering specs on these shock absorbers?

I think that's enough for now. Lets all digest and discuss this for now. If positively received, I'll continue later; if not, I'll shut-up

Regards
Don