[Hudc]

Thanks guys and gals for the feedback. I ended up deciding to go with the Moog Production Coil Springs and I "sprang" for the Bilstein HPS 1000 shocks from Hotchkis... a little on the expensive side but what the hell?

I figure the stock ride height (which may put the back end slightly lower than the front) can be compensated for when I drop the front end 1 inch in the future. Thanks again everyone! I'll be sure to post some pics once I get my rear set up.

[triathlonx13]

1" drop springs in the front and standard height in the back will make your car sit... pretty much level.

.

[Hudc]

Originally Posted by triathlonx13

1" drop springs in the front and standard height in the back will make your car sit... pretty much level.

.

Perfect!

[triathlonx13]

http://www.jegs.com/i/Hotchkis/515/1916F/10002/-1

.

[north]

Factory ride height was about 9.5 inches in front and 9" in rear (measured from the lower edge of the rocker molding) this was with no driver, a tank of gas and base tires (G78-14). Judges ran about a 1/4 inch lower due to G70 tires (as would a regular GTO with optional G70 tires).

The reason for the rear being a bit lower was styling (makes the car look smaller) and braking, cars that are high in back lock up easier.

[69Customs]

I read somewhere that factory height was 28-30 inches to the highest point on the fender wheel opening lip on all four corners. Mine sits at 29 inches all the way around. Stock front springs with 137,000 miles and the rear were replace years ago with 1978 malibu station wagon springs from junk yard because the stock springs were shot. Its a 1969 conv.
It works for me.

I am not sure why everyone says they sat low in the back from factory. I mean did all the engineers have crocked drafting boards back then that made them sit slanted? I remember those cars when they came out and they sat level. It was only until they got some miles on them that they started to sit low in back. Weak underrated springs? I worked with engineers back then and everything on the design boards came out straight! If you look at the manuals you will not see any ref. to them being lower in back!

[Greg Reid]

Originally Posted by 69Customs

I read somewhere that factory height was 28-30 inches to the highest point on the fender wheel opening lip on all four corners. Mine sits at 29 inches all the way around. Stock front springs with 137,000 miles and the rear were replace years ago with 1978 malibu station wagon springs from junk yard because the stock springs were shot. Its a 1969 conv.
It works for me.

I am not sure why everyone says they sat low in the back from factory. I mean did all the engineers have crocked drafting boards back then that made them sit slanted? I remember those cars when they came out and they sat level. It was only until they got some miles on them that they started to sit low in back. Weak underrated springs? I worked with engineers back then and everything on the design boards came out straight! If you look at the manuals you will not see any ref. to them being lower in back!

I've definitely got some documentation showing them lower in the back...Can't remember exactly where it is right now but it's either the '69 Assembly manual or some of the information in the Zazarine Resto Guide which was copied from some factory manual.
The height difference is so small though that it would not be obvious, in my opinion anyway, from a casual glance. You'd just about have to measure it. We're talking maybe a quarter to a half inch difference.
Personally, I prefer dead level or very slightly lower in back. Never liked the look of an A-body of any year with a jacked up tail end.

[69Customs]

Thats interesting Greg. I would really like to know what that small difference is like1/2"? or .010" and where do they take the measurments from? Rocker sills? End of Car? Also is that height difference on all A bodies, Lemans, Tempest too or just GTO? Chevelle's and Skylarks, Cutlass?
If you run across that I would like to see that! It isn't something Delorean slipped in there is it?

[north]

It's in the 69 shop manual, measured from the outer (as opposed to the lip) bottom of the rocker molding about a foot in from the wheels. The difference is 1/2" with a full tank of gas.

[Greg Reid]

Originally Posted by 69Customs

Thats interesting Greg. I would really like to know what that small difference is like1/2"? or .010" and where do they take the measurments from? Rocker sills? End of Car? Also is that height difference on all A bodies, Lemans, Tempest too or just GTO? Chevelle's and Skylarks, Cutlass?
If you run across that I would like to see that! It isn't something Delorean slipped in there is it?

Well, I guess north answered it and I was thinking too that it was the assy manual.
As for the other GM A-bodies...That's an interesting question actually... I really don't know the answer to it.

[marauder]

Originally Posted by triathlonx13

http://www.jegs.com/i/Hotchkis/515/1916F/10002/-1

.

I used thes Hotchkis "Big Block" springs on mine at the reccomendation from the Hotchkis tech line as I was considering their "small block" springs. Since our Pontiac engines weigh somewhere inbetween the two they said the small block ones would lower the car too much. The ones I bought lowered the front of my car about 3/4" which is ok with me however it does tend to bottom out more in the front which surprised me since it was only a 3/4" drop. Someone else reported this and suggested that it is a characteristic of these particular springs. You may want to consider different springs.

You can see pics here.
http://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/...d.php?t=519051

I'm going to KRE aluminum heads so the front should raise a little and hopefully drop the rear, we'll see.

[gto-owner]

Hey Hudc,
How is the your project going, just wondering

Mike

[The Nitemare]

We carry some really trick rear springs for all 68-72 GTO's. Our most popular are our 300 lbs ones, which give the rear a nice stance. You must use our rear perches which fit right over you exhisting perches on the 10 or 12 bolt rear. See this link for spring info
http://www.nitemareperformance.150m.com/spring.html

Also we have front springs in many ratings which you can taylor to your ride height. See this pbase site for stance on many of our cars which I can dublicate for you www.pbase.com/pontiac_performance

Nitemare Performance

[Hudc]

Originally Posted by gto-owner

Hey Hudc,
How is the your project going, just wondering

Mike

I ended up going with the Moog stock replacement springs and the Hotchkis/Bilstein Shocks. It sits slightly lower in the rear than initially desired but I will probably drop the front eventually 3/4 of an inch. It sits a lot better than before and I am enjoying commuting in it from time to time. The hybrids in the city tend to do a double take.

I'll post some pics when I get my laptop back from the geek squad. I'm planning a 700r4 swap out this winter and then turning the keys over to my father when the weather breaks in the spring for him to enjoy. Right now the turbo400 w/the gearing in it doesn't allow for the car to go on the highway as you're revving at 60mph. Look forward to getting it a little more roadworthy.

But Mr. P-Body from Central Virginia Machine Shop definitely built a strong motor with a really nice set up.

-Hud

[robbiet1962]

I lowered mine an inch at the front, I know I am not the tallest person in the world but it did help visability and seems to sit better on the road