Progressive rate springs? Thread modified by OP please re-read

[Zapato]

Don't want to hijack other current threads so need to ask it separately.

Who here is running progressive rate rate springs on the front end of their 57? They working ok? Specially would love to hear from anyone who ran stock springs first then switched over.

Looking forward to hear all observations and comments good ,bad or indifferent.

Zap-

OK! If you're running Aerostar springs they are most likely "progressive" springs. Visibly spotted by tighter wound springs at one end. According to the guys at Eaton they won't work on 57 suspension. Not sure if they mean we wouldn't get total benefits normally associated with them or a step back for our suspension. Which is why I'm asking for some real world experience.

[OUTLAW]

Well, I'm using the Moog Aerostar springs and a 3/4 spacer, 292 FOM, it has about a 1 3/4 drop in the front. It will have a alum. head 460+, fiberglass front clip,  but I can stand on the frame horns, 200LB, and the frame doesn't move. Ride feels normal. This is a incomplete car, but it drives.     

[Zapato]

This is exactly what I want to hear. Latest answer from Eaton is that will fit our cars but raise front end 2.5 inches. Which makes me wonder if their springs are made for higher load rates than others.
And could explain why Rich ended up with his nose up gasser look.

Zap-

[John Palmer]

This is exactly what I want to hear. Latest answer from Eaton is that will fit our cars but raise front end 2.5 inches. Which makes me wonder if their springs are made for higher load rates than others.
And could explain why Rich ended up with his nose up gasser look.

Zap-

Zap, that sounds possible to me.  Two different companies making the same replacement part could be very different in spec's.  We are not talking about F1 spring and shock technology on these very common replacement parts.  This is also the reason that springs are meant to be replaced "in pairs" to reduce the difference due to manufacturing tolerance, and vehicle wear.

It would be interesting to have a way of actually measuring the different spring weights "at the installed height", just like we do on valve springs when building a race engine. 

[RICH MUISE]

"Raise the front end 2.5?"....that doesn't seem right. Our springs have a .70 wire size, the replacement that they said may work for me is an inch shorter, with a .672 wire size. He explained to me that the .028 wire size difference made a big difference in load rate. By comparison, an aerostar spring I looked up was about 4" shorter, but had a .80 wire size.  So where does that put us?? seem like it would be lower but with a stiffer ride.
Zap...if you didn't see the reply, Hotrodprimer on the Hamb had the same experience in his '54 wagon. Rebuilt everything and added new 6 cyl Eaton springs and he said it looked like a 4 wheeler it was so high. Took them off and put his old ones back on.
Not to go off on a tangent, but.....ok, going off on a tangent:
Back in '57 the new theme out of Detroit was long and low. Look at old adds...most of them were artist renderings rather than photography. Back then, photography couldn't be manipulated, but an artist could make it anything. I think the cars weren't as low as we think they were. Forward 50+ years, and most of the old cars are low because the worn out springs have come into play. Put new springs back on and the cars raise back up to what they were in '57...it's just higher than what were use to seeing, but I'm not so sure that it's wrong.
Eaton's has been around longer than most of us, and they lay claim to having x number of thousands of factory blueprints that they manufacture springs to. I believe them.

[57 imposter]

 Moog says there springs will drop you 2+ inches and Eaton says they will raise you 2+ inches. Hard to feature anyone would build a spring at anything other than OEM specs which one of these companies must be doing. This could be a real problem if you replacing the springs  in your tired old Aerostar van. I think if I try a set, they are going to be from Moog. It,however, may be a while since my painter seems to be MIA and I really shouldn't be messing with greasy stuff while we are preparing for paint. Man if it ain't one thing its another!

[hiball3985]

I agree with Rich, when I checked the Aerostar springs the are shorter then the originals and I would have to add spacers so I scrapped that idea and used the original springs. I don't see how they could raise it if they are shorter to begin with. Every other post I have seen by people using them said it lowered their car.

[lalessi1]

There are factory spring specs in the Shop Manual, page 4-13. You will notice that there is an "installed height" (compressed length) at "normal load". The installed height is 9.60 inches for each of the EIGHT different factory srings. A coil spring is a long torsion bar. The force is generated by resistance to the twisting of the "wire". A long thick wire CAN deflect more than a short thin one for the same load. The point is that wire diameter is only one thing that determines the stiffness of the spring.  The diameter, the number of coils, and the "free height" come into play. For the factory springs, the free height varies from as much as 15.55" to as little as 13.65", almost a 2" difference!!!! BUT the compressed heights are the same!!! To make things a little more interesting the amount of force on the spring depends on the length of the control arm and to some extent the wheel offset. These things are fixed and measureable so one can calculate. The amount that the car is lowered by changing the "Height at Normal Load" is not 1 to 1. In other words if the 9.60 inches were changed to 8.60 inches it will lower the car a whole lot more than 1". Just saying.... 

[Zapato]

I agree with Rich, when I checked the Aerostar springs the are shorter then the originals and I would have to add spacers so I scrapped that idea and used the original springs. I don't see how they could raise it if they are shorter to begin with. Every other post I have seen by people using them said it lowered their car.

This continues to be so confusing, over and over on most car sites there are hundreds of postings on guys using the Aerostar springs on 49-59 fords and ending up lower than prior to that and surely they were replacing old possible original equipment. Eaton claims it will raise car 2.5 inches using their Aerostar springs. Obviously if your springs are totally worn out then replacing them with new it will/should raise the car.

I will also accept the owners reflection/observation that the ride improved by using the "A" springs. It had to replacing old with new regardless of height had to make a difference. In 1970 I had a 58 Fairlane 500 with the first year 352. Car was a gas sucking (10mpg) beast. Rode hard and fast nowhere as comfortable as my 57 business coupe. One day while driving it heard a loud bang thought I must have run over something but saw nothing behind me. Got home looked the car over and it was leaning a bit to the passenger side. Couldn't hardly see it but my girlfriend spotted it right away. Got to looking and found several coil spring spacers and there were 2 less on the pg side than the drivers. Took them all out and it lowered the car a bunch as the springs were shot almost no room between windings. Worse I've ever. No doubt in my mind any new ones would have raised the car. That I can accept.

We've all seen the before/after pictures with the Aerostar springs. With and without a tape measure. And again replacing old worn springs. So why are there the few that actually ended up raising the car? Were their springs not so bad before being replaced? We tend to replace everything on our builds and since we can really test springs rather than wonder we swap them for new.

Zap-

[OUTLAW]

My front springs was not wore out. I went to the Aerostar springs to lower the car. If I was to redo anything I would use a 1" spacer. There is no way the Moog Aerostar springs will raise the car without spacers. Hope this helps, Zap. Can email pics...........Rick. 

[hiball3985]

This continues to be so confusing, over and over on most car sites there are hundreds of postings on guys using the Aerostar springs on 49-59 fords and ending up lower than prior to that and surely they were replacing old possible original equipment. Eaton claims it will raise car 2.5 inches using their Aerostar springs. Obviously if your springs are totally worn out then replacing them with new it will/should raise the car.


Zap-

I'm wondering if Eaton did a correct calculation when the said 2.5" raised? I'm sure most people who used Moog found the car lower by about 2", seems like a big difference, almost 4" between manufacturers which seems really strange.
But why are people using Aerostar springs?
1. just to lower the car?
2. no one has an OEM type replacement?
Very confusing indeed. 

[RICH MUISE]

 quote from Zap:"So why are there the few that actually ended up raising the car?"
I'm not sure I've heard of anybody having their car raise up with the aerostars. The first I've heard of that was your quote from Eaton's. When you had that discusion with them, what years Aerostar did you inquire about...maybe a different vintage that is totally different from what the guys are using?
Jim...near as I can gather, guys are using the aerostars to lower their cars when they don't want to use a dropped spindle that will also convert them to discs and larger wheels.
I have not inquired, but I am sure Eatons could make a set of custom springs to drop your car a specific amount. With all the variations in drivetrain weights, and all other factors involving weight and it's distribution, I would think it wouldn't be feasible for them to come up with a premade solution that would work the same for everybody.

[petew]

When I restored my wagon I wanted to have the front end a touch lower but found that the Areostar springs would dump the front end more than the 1" I was looking for. A little searching through a spring catalog and I discovered that Chevy S10 front springs looked like they would do the job. I purchased a set through my local autozone for $40.00 or there abouts and they worked perfectly.
I can supply the part # if anyone wants it and a picture of how the car sits as well

Pete

[Zapato]

Pete, please post pictures and part #

Rich, all my contact with Eaton was by e-mail, fwd it to you last night.

I have no springs at all, car is sitting with 2x4 blocks in their place, I like the way it sits now with a slight rake and 3'' channel, would be ok with a slight hike upwards but definitely not 2.5 inches. The S10 springs might be just the trick even if I had to use a spacer.

Have to give the Ford engineers credit for figuring out all the different springs for 57 would love to see the formula they used and plugged into their slide rulers.

Thank you all again for contributing to this very worthwhile but confusing discussion.

Zap-

[RICH MUISE]

Pete...yes, please post pics, along with info on your suspension..stock spindles, etc?