CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
rear springs
- Thread starter JTB
- Start date
Burt4x4
1 Ton First Gen
Just measure eye to eye then eye to center bolt bothy ways. Most likly they are the same! I am running SuperLift rear springs made for 73+ P/U....
Good Luck
72K5
Led Zeppelin
Rock ON!
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.geocities.com/baja/5099>www.geocities.com/baja/5099</a>
Good Luck
72K5
<a target="_blank" href=http://www.geocities.com/baja/5099>www.geocities.com/baja/5099</a>
californiak5
1/2 ton status
The rear springs are the same 52" springs. It is the front springs that are different on our K5's than the 73-91 K5's. So if you are just selling the rears you should be just fine.
See Ya,
Keith
<font color=green>Born to Drive My K5</font color=green>
<a target="_blank" href=http://coloradok5.com/gallery/californiak5>CaliforniaK5's Pictures</a>
See Ya,
Keith
<a target="_blank" href=http://coloradok5.com/gallery/californiak5>CaliforniaK5's Pictures</a>
R72K5
Banned
i thought all 71-79 front springs were 44" ?!?!
Oh, and on 2wd 73-80 the springs are 55 eye to eye, I just measure out of reasons like boredom and insomnia.
Wonder why GM made 4x4 springs 52"long on 73- up 4x4 also.
And why they lengthened them only 3" more on the 2wd 73-up?
Odd....
'72 K-5 4x4, CST, 3.07, 4 speed, NP 205, 31' x 10.5", Olive green and primer, rusted out, rice smasher!
Oh, and on 2wd 73-80 the springs are 55 eye to eye, I just measure out of reasons like boredom and insomnia.
Wonder why GM made 4x4 springs 52"long on 73- up 4x4 also.
And why they lengthened them only 3" more on the 2wd 73-up?
Odd....
'72 K-5 4x4, CST, 3.07, 4 speed, NP 205, 31' x 10.5", Olive green and primer, rusted out, rice smasher!
californiak5
1/2 ton status
You might be right about the fronts. I just thought I remembered hearing from Stephen(ORD) and a few others (suspension shops) that this was why the kits are sold as 69-72 and from 73-91. I have been wrong before thou.
As far as two wheel drive goes I really don't know. I would assume (or ass-u-me) that the 55" measurement was either a 52" spring that has flatened out or a 56" (some 3/4 tons and all 1 tons) spring that is very new. But these are just random thoughts since I haven't heard of 55" springs. But, then again I didn't know the difference between a D60 and D44 before I found this place.
See Ya,
Keith
<font color=green>Born to Drive My K5</font color=green>
<a target="_blank" href=http://coloradok5.com/gallery/californiak5>CaliforniaK5's Pictures</a>
As far as two wheel drive goes I really don't know. I would assume (or ass-u-me) that the 55" measurement was either a 52" spring that has flatened out or a 56" (some 3/4 tons and all 1 tons) spring that is very new. But these are just random thoughts since I haven't heard of 55" springs. But, then again I didn't know the difference between a D60 and D44 before I found this place.
See Ya,
Keith
<a target="_blank" href=http://coloradok5.com/gallery/californiak5>CaliforniaK5's Pictures</a>
R72K5
Banned
very interesting, gotta love learning new info.
I suppose they made different lengths for different ride characteristics...
'72 K-5 4x4, CST, 3.07, 4 speed, NP 205, 31' x 10.5", converting to 2wd and pickup body(I did not want to do this- rust made me do it)
I suppose they made different lengths for different ride characteristics...
'72 K-5 4x4, CST, 3.07, 4 speed, NP 205, 31' x 10.5", converting to 2wd and pickup body(I did not want to do this- rust made me do it)
Steve_Chin
1/2 ton status
Yup... A longer leaf with the same number of leaves, leaf thickness, and leaf width will be softer in rate than the shorter one.
R72K5
Banned
what about when it comes to wheel hopping ? Do you think the shorter length springs would control hoping better than the softer longer springs ?
Reason I ask is because I dunno if I want to retain the 52" on the back of the 72 chassis, I want the rear to squat good on accelration, but dunno if short springs would allow this as much as say 55" springs would. but with longer springs I may have a wheel hop issue to deal with.
opinions/info ?
'72 K-5 4x4, CST, 3.07, 4 speed, NP 205, 31' x 10.5", converting to 2wd and pickup body(I did not want to do this- rust made me do it)
Reason I ask is because I dunno if I want to retain the 52" on the back of the 72 chassis, I want the rear to squat good on accelration, but dunno if short springs would allow this as much as say 55" springs would. but with longer springs I may have a wheel hop issue to deal with.
opinions/info ?
'72 K-5 4x4, CST, 3.07, 4 speed, NP 205, 31' x 10.5", converting to 2wd and pickup body(I did not want to do this- rust made me do it)
Triaged
1/2 ton status
I don't think that the longer springs would contribute much to wheel hop seeing as the extra length is behind the center pin.
'71 Blazer CST w/ a 400sbc, 4" lift, 36" Supper Swampers, and alot of rust
<a target="_blank" href=http://community.webshots.com/user/triaged>See it Here </a>
'71 Blazer CST w/ a 400sbc, 4" lift, 36" Supper Swampers, and alot of rust
<a target="_blank" href=http://community.webshots.com/user/triaged>See it Here </a>
Steve_Chin
1/2 ton status
Squat is detrimental to traction when accelerating. I'd rather have a suspension that's designed to plant the heck out of the tires by pressing the springs back up against the body. Think about Newton's first law of physics (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction - if you let the body move downward on acceleration, part of the available traction is being used up in that downward pitch, if you use the suspension to push up against the body, the tires are planted harder on the ground). FWIW, axle tramp can be caused by an insufficient amount of anti-squat dialed into the rear suspension. Anti-squat is determined by the CG height of the vehicle, the longitudinal instant center of the rear suspension, and the center of the contact patch of the rear tires.
