I'm curious what springs can I use if I want around a 2" drop

I was thinking for the fronts I could get Rodney's 1" Lowering Ball Joints for the 88 and take a half or full coil off the stock springs (I know cutting isn't that great but springs for just the front are $130 (West Coast Fiero) and make the ride to stiff. I've been in a Fiero with lowering springs and I hated the ride...maybe they were too high of a spring rate? I don't know anything about spring rate except the higher the rate the mor firmness the ride has.
what were the stock spring rates on a 1988 Base Coupe?

then for the rears, I'm thinking the West Coast fiero "rear only" kit...costs $220 whihc is a lot for just two...is there a cheaper set I can get?

links to less expensive springs or different solutions would be very appreciated.
Thanks!!

------------------
F.I.E.R.O. - Fantastically Imaginative Engineering Racing Object

For any Paint Work: http://www.kurtcarloni.com/
www.fquick.com/GTXBULLET
Certified Tech/Mechanic (Restorations, Modifications, and Maintenence)
1985 Fiero GT 69k Miles (All Options) - Daily Driver
1988 FIERO Coupe "IRON DUKE" 5-Speed (the show car ;-)
1992 Firebird T-Tops V-8 30k original miles(collectors car)

Here is how to lower the rear. It is adjustable and if you are good at shopping and searching ebay, you can do it pretty cheap
https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/046456.html

Here is a thread on 88 spring rates
https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...050119-2-054238.html

Everyone says cutting coils is bad, then you watch TV and see people like Foose doing it. Using a cutoff wheel and not a torch, which will result in less damage to the spring.

quote Originally posted by LitebulbwithaFiero: Here is how to lower the rear. It is adjustable and if you are good at shopping and searching ebay, you can do it pretty cheap https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/046456.html Here is a thread on 88 spring rates https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...050119-2-054238.html Everyone says cutting coils is bad, then you watch TV and see people like Foose doing it. Using a cutoff wheel and not a torch, which will result in less damage to the spring.

WOW, my eyes hurt and the back of my neck is kinked. I've been wide eye'd starring at those threads like Egor from young frankenstien. although my eyes arent seperating...lol
Thanks for the help. I now understand why my Fieros have had different length springs.

now I need to figure a cheap way for the front to get to at least 2" drop. well for the rear I think I'll do searching for the coil over change out. for the fronts if worse comes to worse i'll get the lowering ball joints from Rodney D. and carefully with fresh cool air blowing on it cut each front spring to get the desired height.

More info would still be good for future reference so anyone want to chime in please do so.

[This message has been edited by gtxbullet (edited 03-28-2010).]

Lowering ride height and maintaining a comfortable ride are conflicting demands.

When you reduce suspension travel, one of two things occur:

1. With a stiff spring, all bumps rattle your tooth fillings loose.

2. With a stock-stiffness spring, small bumps aren't a problem, but big ones cause the suspension to bottom out.

Lowering balljoints are a way to drop the car without affecting travel, as well as drop spindles. But these, especially the drop spindles, and going to be $$$. But you asked for cheap...

Pick any two of the following three:

Cheap
Low
Comfortable

quote Originally posted by pmbrunelle: Lowering ride height and maintaining a comfortable ride are conflicting demands. When you reduce suspension travel, one of two things occur: 1. With a stiff spring, all bumps rattle your tooth fillings loose. 2. With a stock-stiffness spring, small bumps aren't a problem, but big ones cause the suspension to bottom out. Lowering balljoints are a way to drop the car without affecting travel, as well as drop spindles. But these, especially the drop spindles, and going to be $$$. But you asked for cheap... Pick any two of the following three: Cheap Low Comfortable

I know the 2 out of 3 deal. that's why it's taken me so long (so far) to figure out exactly what I wanted.

I'd like to spend under $300 to lower the whole car a total of 2" as for ride quality, as long as my back doesn't hurt after a day of driving I'd be fine with a little firmer of a ride.
would gas or hydraulic shocks/struts be best when lowering? I already have new ones on my 88 so I'm just curious.

[This message has been edited by gtxbullet (edited 03-29-2010).]

For a some sort of cost-conscious compromise with some sort of respect for comfort, I'd suggest:

Front:
1" lowering ball joints
Cut stock springs slightly

Rear:
Cut stock springs
Flip the upper strut mounts upside-down. This will allow for more travel before the shock bottoms out. You may have some clearance issues with the decklid vent that will require cutting/trimming of some parts. I credit this idea to fieroguru who mentioned this in another recent thread.

All shocks are hydraulic/oil-filled. When a shock is "gas-charged", that means it's filled with pressurized gas, which pressurizes the oil, reducing the oil's tendency to foam and lose effectiveness.

did other fieros come with softer suspensions? My 86 is super stiff...feels like I have almost no give in it.

------------------
Cliff's 610th Positive Feedback Giver.

Lowering is all about compromises....

The 88's front spring rate is about 205 lbs and the rear about 143. They are quite soft and were too soft for my tastes. The issue with lowering via springs - either cut sock ones or lowering springs, is you lose suspension travel on the compression side. Cutting the stock springs will make them about 10% to 20% stiffer depending on how many coils you remove. You will notice this increased firmness, but it will not be as firm as the lowering springs that are normally in the 300 to 400 lb/in range.

Trimming down the front bump stop and flipping the rear upper strut bushing plate will gain you some additional suspension travel, but you must check for tire rubbing on the front fenders. If you only lower the front with springs, you need to add a spacer to shim the front shock mounting point down or you will bottom the shock and bend the mounting bar. The lowering ball joint helps this some - because the A-arm outer pivot is lower.

I am really pleased with the ride on my blue 88 and run spring rates about 35% stiffer than stock.


The cheapest way to lower the 88 and end up with a spring rate about 30 to 40% stiffer is to use 84-87 springs up front (must cut off 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 coils depending on how low you want to go and then take the stock 88 front spring, cut 1 coil and install it in the rear (you need to make a circular ring to fit in the top of the strut and weld a piece of 3" exhaust tubing to it to keep the sping centered).
Here is a pic with a stock 86 front spring, stock 88 front spring, 88 spring with 1 coil removed.


88 front spring (1 coil removed) mounted in the rear with the circular plate and a piece of 3" exhaust tubing:


Here is a trimmed down front bump stop on top of a stock one (it is best to make the tip of the bump stop shaped like the stock one to soften the impact when you hit them.


Here is a stock 88 rear strut bushing plate:


Here is a stock 88 buching plate flipped (and the 88 front springs on the rear):



Here is the lowest my blue 88 has been (86 front springs with about 2 1/2 coils removed and 88 rear springs with 1 coil removed:


Here is its current stance with H&M lowering springs for a BMW (1 coil removed) and 88 front springs with 1 coil removed in the rear... (I like the ride of this one much, much better).

pmbrunelle - thanks for the thoughts, I think as far as suspension travel goes I'll definetly go with the 1" lowering Ball joint up front no matter what.

fieroguru, it's always an honor to get good info from you, I did use to wonder if we could put front springs on the rear, and you've answered it perfectly.

from what I've seen now I think i'll start with lowering my 88 1" check the handling and road comfort, then if I feel like doing it all the way I'll go with fieroguru's write up and use front spings in the rear and so on.

I think I'm going to treat myself to some new parts

quote Originally posted by gtxbullet: quick question what's the differnce between regular springs and "progressive" spings? which are on a stock fiero? just enjoy learning some good facts Thanks!!

Regular springs have a linear rate, where progressive springs have a rate that increases exponentially.

You can usually tell the difference between then because on the regular spring the active coils are spaced the same.
Then on the progressive spring, they coils start out spaced far apart then gradually get closer.

On progressive springs, the spring rate changes as you compress them... so the first inch of travel might require 150 pounds, while the next inch of compression might take 200 lbs. Springs that aren't a constant diameter like the rear ones are progressive springs, whereas the ones on the front which maintain the same OD are constant rate springs. For constant rate springs, (theoretically at least) it takes the same force to compress them for every inch of travel.

Edit: rats... that damn light-bulb-less-Fiero guy beat me to it... he brings up another way to change the spring rate as well though... through coil spacing.

[This message has been edited by Bloozberry (edited 03-29-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Bloozberry: On progressive springs, the spring rate changes as you compress them... so the first inch of travel might require 150 pounds, while the next inch of compression might take 200 lbs. Springs that aren't a constant diameter like the rear ones are progressive springs, whereas the ones on the front which maintain the same OD are constant rate springs. For constant rate springs, (theoretically at least) it takes the same force to compress them for every inch of travel.

good info.
which is better though?

It's a matter of taste, and suspension design. The lower your car, the more linear I'd want my spring rate since you won't necessarily have the height to be able to afford a soft initial compression.

quote Originally posted by Bloozberry: It's a matter of taste, and suspension design. The lower your car, the more linear I'd want my spring rate since you won't necessarily have the height to be able to afford a soft initial compression.

I was thinking maybe you could get progressive springs that start out close to the stock spring rate, that might help with the soft daily driving bumps and when the bumps get harsher, so will the spring to help stay off the bump stops.

Normally, to avoid lowering Civic bouncing down the road syndrome, you want a certain Q damping factor.

With adjustable shocks, you would adjust the knob so that when you go over a bump, the car would quickly settle to its normal state, but without bouncing.

Shocks (that I'm aware of) normally have the same damping throughout their travel.

I wouldn't go with progressive rate springs, because the Q would change as the suspesion is compressed.

Practically, I mean the initial soft part would be ricer style bouncy and floaty, and the stiff section would be rock-hard, the shock not allowing the spring to compress on bumps.

[This message has been edited by pmbrunelle (edited 03-29-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Bloozberry: It's a matter of taste, and suspension design. The lower your car, the more linear I'd want my spring rate since you won't necessarily have the height to be able to afford a soft initial compression.

quote Originally posted by LitebulbwithaFiero: I was thinking maybe you could get progressive springs that start out close to the stock spring rate, that might help with the soft daily driving bumps and when the bumps get harsher, so will the spring to help stay off the bump stops.

good points. the reason I ask is I just hopped on ebay and found a nice used set of "130 lb / 200 lb" progressive springs (coil over style),
and a set of regular "175 lb" (coil over style) that would work for the rear either would be good for me as they wouldn't be as hard as cut stock springs or the 250lb, 350lb, or 450 lb rates most lowering springs have.

any thoughts?
just so it's out there, I do a lot of city-type driving (20-40mph). there are a lot of bumps from poor street work, not terrible on the main streets, but back roads are worse.

When you reduce the spring rate, it will take less force to use all the available travel.

You will bottom out more frequently.

The problem is exacerbated when you're dropping the car - although the flipped strut mounts mitigate this somewhat.

Bottoming out WILL occur frequently with reduced travel, softer than stock springs, and poor roads.

Overall ride will degrade - bottoming out is rough on one's bum!

quote Originally posted by pmbrunelle: Normally, to avoid lowering Civic bouncing down the road syndrome, you want a certain Q damping factor. With adjustable shocks, you would adjust the knob so that when you go over a bump, the car would quickly settle to its normal state, but without bouncing. Shocks (that I'm aware of) normally have the same damping throughout their travel. I wouldn't go with progressive rate springs, because the Q would change as the suspesion is compressed. Practically, I mean one part would be bouncy, and the other overly stiff.

well that answers that question. I wouldn't want to replace my newer perfectly good shocks with another new set just to satisfy a 1-2" or so drop...
Thanks!!


also to ad my 88 does sit rather high...and when I say that I mean even though I have the Offset 1988 Formula/GT 15" wheels and stock sized tires on it the wheel wells have a lot of room, may not be able to tell from the picture though:

I wasn't really suggesting an amount of drop; I was just not reccomending using progressive rate springs, because Iin my opinion, they aren't going to give the best driving experience. Well that's my opinion anyway, but another driver may feel otherwise.

quote Originally posted by pmbrunelle: I wasn't really suggesting an amount of drop; I was just not reccomending using progressive rate springs, because Iin my opinion, they aren't going to give the best driving experience. Well that's my opinion anyway, but another driver may feel otherwise.

Thanks for your opinion. I'm very thankful for it, I'd rather find out from folks like you what is best because I know enough about Fieros to do most work on them; but when it comes to customizing suspension I have absolutely no clue.

Food for thought: Most, if not all coil over conversions for the rear use some type of centering device at the top to keep the unseated spring on track. I would suggest a longer spring that would keep the spring seated throughout the shock travel. BUT that spring would need to be a progressive rate spring that would be "soft" during full extension of the shock and "stiff" at full compression. In the sweet zone of ride height you should have a slightly stiffer spring for the lowered suspension to prevent bottoming.

------------------

Check "r u lo" @ https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...050410-1-044648.html to see how your current setup compares. I lowered the red one so much it crashed on the front bump stops regularly. I put my old springs back in.

quote Originally posted by 30+mpg: Check "r u lo" @ https://www.fiero.nl/forum/A...050410-1-044648.html to see how your current setup compares. I lowered the red one so much it crashed on the front bump stops regularly. I put my old springs back in.

here's my 88 Coupe as it sits in the garage with perfect tire pressure:

205/60R15 15" by 6" Stock 88 GT/Formula wheels - 26 3/4"
215/60R15 15" by 7" Stock 88 GT/Formula wheels - 27 3/4"