If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah... My first wife didn't like my 72 'stang, so she found a 72 Nova
hatchback, w/12" steering wheel w/deep dish chrome reverse, mag fronts, graphic equalizer in the glove box, 14" wide rear skins, air shocks, lifter bars, dual outside exhaust, etc, etc, etc. The owner, Pepe, sold it to her cheap 'cause it had a leak in the air shocks. That was about the time my next door neighbor, Cindy, got herself a passion wagon and invited both of us to go try it out with her. Early 70s with some leftover 60s... LOL On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:39:30 GMT, "SVTKate" > wrote: >Dang Spike, an old coot like you should remember THAT. > >*sigh* >In the 70's, that was the thing to do. raise the rear, drop the nose. > > >"Spike" > wrote in message .. . >| The thread was about the appearance of a car... NOT "anyone's" home >| life.... raking the yard and doing WHAT?????? LOL >| >| >| On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 00:19:04 GMT, "SVTKate" >| > wrote: >| >| >RAKE IT! >| >Drop it on it's nose and put some nice fat meats on the back ----- OH >YEA! >| > >| > >| >"Spike" > wrote in message >| .. . >| >|I know the 65/66 had that nose up look. Seems to me that nearly all >| >| the models up through about 72/73, and possibly later, had that nose >| >| up look to some degree. I am not sure you can actually accomplish >| >| "straight" because of the natural lines of the body. You can verify >| >| the level down the length by measuring from the ground at different >| >| points along the sides.... or using a level even. Not something I ever >| >| gave much thought to doing. >| >| >| >| I don't see a problem with dropping the nose an inch or two as long as >| >| it does not interfere with safe operation and handling, since the >| >| small alteration does not change things all that much. Filling up the >| >| wells with more wheel/tire may also help reduce the visual effect. >| >| >| >| In the 60s Shelby engineers did what is called the "Shelby Drop" which >| >| dropped the nose about 1". A Negative Wedge Kit (available from such >| >| vendors as www.npd.com, www.mustangsplus.com, www.summitracing.com , >| >| etc) does the same thing but in a somewhat different manner, and drops >| >| the nose about 1 5/8" (think that figure is right). There are also >| >| springs designed to do the same thing without the need for cutting >| >| (see classic Mustang vendors). >| >| >| >| Some aftermarket wheel vendors like Vintage Wheel Works say that >| >| putting 16" or bigger wheels on an early model Mustang requires >| >| installing a Negative Wedge Kit. True? I don't know. Apply to your >| >| year? Again, I don't know. I know I have one installed on my 65 FB >| >| (along with a Bump Steer Kit). Seems to do the job it's designed to >| >| do. >| >| >| >| I've also known others who raised the back end (for a different >| >| reason) which gives the same general impression. >| >| >| >| On 14 Mar 2005 11:20:17 -0800, wrote: >| >| >| >| >69 coupe. everyone always asks me why the front end sits so high. >| >| >i cant decide if it actually does or if the wheel openings in fender >| >| >are just higher. whether its supposed to or not, what are my options >to >| >| >get rid of that goofy look. Ive heard that cutting the springs is not >a >| >| >good idea. if i got lower springs i dont want the back end to be >higher >| >| >than the front. I just want it to be straight. sometimes it seems like >| >| >it just seems like its the angle you are looking at it and that the >| >| >body is actually parrallel to the ground. ive heard this is a common >| >| >thing for older mustangs. >| >| >any thoughts? >| >| > >| >| >thanks, >| >| >| >| Hey! Spikey Likes IT! >| >| 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok >| >| Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior >| >| Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" >| >| w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 >| > >| >| Hey! Spikey Likes IT! >| 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok >| Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior >| Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" >| w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 > Hey! Spikey Likes IT! 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Take a look at a P-51 Mustang aircraft sitting on the deck... it has
the same nose in the air stance.... On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:41:13 GMT, "SVTKate" > wrote: >I have noticed that many of the 70's Mustangs look like that, and never >liked it a bit. They seem to look as it they are a bout to leave the runway >like a jet plane. >If it were mine, I'd change it too. The nose it too high on them - IMO - > > > Hey! Spikey Likes IT! 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Ahhhhh.. those were the days!
"Spike" > wrote in message ... | Yeah... My first wife didn't like my 72 'stang, so she found a 72 Nova | hatchback, w/12" steering wheel w/deep dish chrome reverse, mag | fronts, graphic equalizer in the glove box, 14" wide rear skins, air | shocks, lifter bars, dual outside exhaust, etc, etc, etc. The owner, | Pepe, sold it to her cheap 'cause it had a leak in the air shocks. | That was about the time my next door neighbor, Cindy, got herself a | passion wagon and invited both of us to go try it out with her. Early | 70s with some leftover 60s... LOL | | On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:39:30 GMT, "SVTKate" | > wrote: | | >Dang Spike, an old coot like you should remember THAT. | > | >*sigh* | >In the 70's, that was the thing to do. raise the rear, drop the nose. | > | > | >"Spike" > wrote in message | .. . | >| The thread was about the appearance of a car... NOT "anyone's" home | >| life.... raking the yard and doing WHAT?????? LOL | >| | >| | >| On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 00:19:04 GMT, "SVTKate" | >| > wrote: | >| | >| >RAKE IT! | >| >Drop it on it's nose and put some nice fat meats on the back ----- OH | >YEA! | >| > | >| > | >| >"Spike" > wrote in message | >| .. . | >| >|I know the 65/66 had that nose up look. Seems to me that nearly all | >| >| the models up through about 72/73, and possibly later, had that nose | >| >| up look to some degree. I am not sure you can actually accomplish | >| >| "straight" because of the natural lines of the body. You can verify | >| >| the level down the length by measuring from the ground at different | >| >| points along the sides.... or using a level even. Not something I ever | >| >| gave much thought to doing. | >| >| | >| >| I don't see a problem with dropping the nose an inch or two as long as | >| >| it does not interfere with safe operation and handling, since the | >| >| small alteration does not change things all that much. Filling up the | >| >| wells with more wheel/tire may also help reduce the visual effect. | >| >| | >| >| In the 60s Shelby engineers did what is called the "Shelby Drop" which | >| >| dropped the nose about 1". A Negative Wedge Kit (available from such | >| >| vendors as www.npd.com, www.mustangsplus.com, www.summitracing.com , | >| >| etc) does the same thing but in a somewhat different manner, and drops | >| >| the nose about 1 5/8" (think that figure is right). There are also | >| >| springs designed to do the same thing without the need for cutting | >| >| (see classic Mustang vendors). | >| >| | >| >| Some aftermarket wheel vendors like Vintage Wheel Works say that | >| >| putting 16" or bigger wheels on an early model Mustang requires | >| >| installing a Negative Wedge Kit. True? I don't know. Apply to your | >| >| year? Again, I don't know. I know I have one installed on my 65 FB | >| >| (along with a Bump Steer Kit). Seems to do the job it's designed to | >| >| do. | >| >| | >| >| I've also known others who raised the back end (for a different | >| >| reason) which gives the same general impression. | >| >| | >| >| On 14 Mar 2005 11:20:17 -0800, wrote: | >| >| | >| >| >69 coupe. everyone always asks me why the front end sits so high. | >| >| >i cant decide if it actually does or if the wheel openings in fender | >| >| >are just higher. whether its supposed to or not, what are my options | >to | >| >| >get rid of that goofy look. Ive heard that cutting the springs is not | >a | >| >| >good idea. if i got lower springs i dont want the back end to be | >higher | >| >| >than the front. I just want it to be straight. sometimes it seems like | >| >| >it just seems like its the angle you are looking at it and that the | >| >| >body is actually parrallel to the ground. ive heard this is a common | >| >| >thing for older mustangs. | >| >| >any thoughts? | >| >| > | >| >| >thanks, | >| >| | >| >| Hey! Spikey Likes IT! | >| >| 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok | >| >| Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior | >| >| Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" | >| >| w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 | >| > | >| | >| Hey! Spikey Likes IT! | >| 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok | >| Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior | >| Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" | >| w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 | > | | Hey! Spikey Likes IT! | 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok | Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior | Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" | w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
My point exactly. The CARS are not suppose to look lile they are ready to be
airborne. *TSK* Men! "Spike" > wrote in message ... | Take a look at a P-51 Mustang aircraft sitting on the deck... it has | the same nose in the air stance.... | | On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:41:13 GMT, "SVTKate" | > wrote: | | >I have noticed that many of the 70's Mustangs look like that, and never | >liked it a bit. They seem to look as it they are a bout to leave the runway | >like a jet plane. | >If it were mine, I'd change it too. The nose it too high on them - IMO - | > | > | > | | Hey! Spikey Likes IT! | 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok | Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior | Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" | w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Hey!
Take some before and after photos, and let us see what you did Kate > wrote in message oups.com... |i got some new PST leafs a couple years ago. in hind site i probably | really didnt need to at the time. but its done now. So i guess i will | try the least expensive stuff first. im positive i need new rear shocks | so will try that first. then maybe bigger rear tires. | |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
SVTKate wrote:
> Hey! > Take some before and after photos, and let us see what you did > > Kate > > > wrote in message > oups.com... > |i got some new PST leafs a couple years ago. in hind site i probably > | really didnt need to at the time. but its done now. So i guess i will > | try the least expensive stuff first. im positive i need new rear shocks > | so will try that first. then maybe bigger rear tires. > | After the "Kate tastes good" portion of that other thread, and now this one, I'm beginning to wonder just what goes on offline with some of you guys... =) Generally speaking about RAMFM, some of these things reveal themselves over time, and some are best left as they are, I guess. -- Wound Up ThunderSnake #65 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Absolutely NOTHING goes on off line..... not even any personal
communicating offline.... why, we'd probably never speak to each other if we met on the street... right Kate? By the way.... the steaks are marinating and the beer is cold... spa is hot... and life's good as gold! So grab yer ol' man and make a plan across the nation to roam and mosey back home.... LOL : D On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:18:29 GMT, Wound Up > wrote: >SVTKate wrote: >> Hey! >> Take some before and after photos, and let us see what you did >> >> Kate >> >> > wrote in message >> oups.com... >> |i got some new PST leafs a couple years ago. in hind site i probably >> | really didnt need to at the time. but its done now. So i guess i will >> | try the least expensive stuff first. im positive i need new rear shocks >> | so will try that first. then maybe bigger rear tires. >> | > >After the "Kate tastes good" portion of that other thread, and now this >one, I'm beginning to wonder just what goes on offline with some of you >guys... =) > >Generally speaking about RAMFM, some of these things reveal themselves >over time, and some are best left as they are, I guess. Hey! Spikey Likes IT! 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Faust wrote:
> i got some new PST leafs a couple years ago. in hind site i probably > really didnt need to at the time. but its done now. So i guess i will > try the least expensive stuff first. im positive i need new rear shocks > so will try that first. then maybe bigger rear tires. Shocks do not affect static ride height. Bigger tires are not cheap. Cheapest thing is to cut the springs. Yes it will increase your spring rate slightly, and you also will be subtracting camber, maybe even enough to require a new alignment job. But the cutting itself requires only a spring compressor (rentable from Kragens for $5, free from Autozone) and a hacksaw. (Actually I use a wimpy little Dremel tool, but if you don't own one they cost about $50.) Just don't cut too much. I'd say two inches equals off the tip of the spring equals about a quarter inch drop. 180 Out |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Spike's right NUTHIN goes on.
This our story and we're sticking to it. You got it sweetie... But I betcha I see you here before you see me there! Only 5 more weeks! K. (nice little prose ya scrawled out there Spikie!) "Spike" > wrote in message ... | Absolutely NOTHING goes on off line..... not even any personal | communicating offline.... why, we'd probably never speak to each other | if we met on the street... right Kate? By the way.... | | the steaks are marinating | and the beer is cold... | spa is hot... | and life's good as gold! | So grab yer ol' man | and make a plan | across the nation to roam | and mosey back home.... | | | LOL : D | | On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:18:29 GMT, Wound Up > wrote: | | >SVTKate wrote: | >> Hey! | >> Take some before and after photos, and let us see what you did | >> | >> Kate | >> | >> > wrote in message | >> oups.com... | >> |i got some new PST leafs a couple years ago. in hind site i probably | >> | really didnt need to at the time. but its done now. So i guess i will | >> | try the least expensive stuff first. im positive i need new rear shocks | >> | so will try that first. then maybe bigger rear tires. | >> | | > | >After the "Kate tastes good" portion of that other thread, and now this | >one, I'm beginning to wonder just what goes on offline with some of you | >guys... =) | > | >Generally speaking about RAMFM, some of these things reveal themselves | >over time, and some are best left as they are, I guess. | | Hey! Spikey Likes IT! | 1965 Ford Mustang fastback 2+2 A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok | Vintage Burgundy w/Black Standard Interior | Vintage 40 Wheels 16X8" | w/BF Goodrich Comp T/A Radial 225/50ZR16 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1990 BMW 525i Nose Panel R&R | BMW | 0 | March 11th 05 03:01 AM | |
Factory Options for Mustangs 64 / 65 / 65 | MJT | Ford Mustang | 2 | November 29th 04 01:23 PM |
Removeing nose cone and rear panel | yar | Corvette | 10 | November 19th 04 02:23 PM |
Nose repair | Morien Morgan | Mazda | 0 | September 10th 04 10:22 PM |