I’ve been very slowly putting together a basket case ‘68 XR-7. I bought it in about 25 boxes of parts. It was last on the road in 1984. It’s a factory 4 speed AC PS PDB car.
One part that was assembled was the front end although it was all completely worn out. The engine and transmission were not in the car and it sat very high in the front.
I had a very lightly used set of global west upper and lower arms. I also did the Shelby drop and welded in the reinforcement at the bottom of the shock towers.
Putting the springs back in was a real pain. But I got them in.
Due to the engine being improperly built, there was an extended delay as I rebuilt it with aluminum heads intake hipo exhaust manifolds and EFI. There were many other side projects but I digress.
Finally with the engine and drive line installed I got it back on the ground and it still sat very high in n front. I gave it a couple of months to settle. No dice.
So I had a pair of Mustang front springs from. 289 automatic AC car. I counted the coils and found there were two fewer than what was in the Cougar. Same 5/8” wire diameter.
So today I found some time and put the first of the Mustang springs in. This gave me the opportunity to compare the springs.
What you are seeing from left to right is a Moog 390 spring. The spring I removed is next. Then the Mustang spring, and finally the 620 lowering springs that used to be popular. The 620 is larger in wire diameter at 3/4”. All others are 5/8”
Bill, I am going to go with …the unpainted springs, as my guess as to what came in your Cougar.
Seriously, I have been through the Mercury, and Ford MPC, and there are so many springs. Is there any paint stripes remaining on the original springs?
So many variables, including (but not limited to) bench seat or bucket seats is one that I remember from the MPC.
If you are looking for a slight nose down stance, I would cut one full coil from the supposed OEM Cougar coils. They will still be slightly taller than your existing Mustang ones. You have lost a few pounds with the aluminum engine parts.
On my 1968 XR7 I repurposed 1970 Cougar 351C-4V front coils, with 1 full coil removed. My 1968 XR7 has manual steering, disc brakes, no A/C, and T5 transmission. I am really happy with the handling and ride height. 15x7 wheels with 225’s.
It does ride quite a bit higher than desirable with those springs. If I had to guess you have worn big block springs based on what the new one looks like? But who knows what happened in its previous ownership.
What’s the unsprung height of a new 1” drop spring? Maybe compare that too the 620spring and see how it stacks up? However that 620 spring rate is probably too stiff. I think the cougar 1” lower springs around the 500ish mark if im not mistaken
You have seen my car ride height and that’s done with 1” drop springs and the Shelby drop only, granted it’s also on 17”s so it can be hard to compare apples to apples. I would need to check where the springs came from as they had already been on the car and did not get the originals. They very well could just be mustang lowering springs. Speaking of mustangs my cougar sits noticeably lower than a 67 mustang on stock height suspension.
You know there are always coilovers, adjustable ride height to suit your preference! Ok maybe that’s just my wish list!
67/68 cougars have 3 somewhat parallel horizontal lines…the top of the fenders ,the rib going thru the lower door over the wheel wells, and the rocker panel. They form a wedge to the front. IMHO, one of those lines needs tp be parallel to the ground to reduce the effect on your eyes… I like the rib on the lower door parallel to the ground,giving the hood a slight rake and the rocker kinda goes away and the car looks great .How you get there is sometimes tough…
.springs , spindles ,tires . This wedge is what makes these cars look great .
Agree with this. Most of the time 1/2 coil removed from the stock coil spring will result in a level ride. Combined with rebuilt rear leaf springs and all new suspension components the ride will be perfect.
Merry Christmas. The stance not the height makes the car. That’s why its hard to make a 67/68 mustang have a good stance cuz of the rearwad body reveal !!
I’m going to try the Mustang springs and see what happens. It looked maybe 5 to 6 inches too high. I’m going to guess that it will be too low but that will help me better understand what I need to cut off the original springs (assuming that they are the original springs?)
Thats a PITA way to find the right springs, but I don’t have any better suggestions. For what it’s worth, the Mustang springs at 7+ turns look alot closer to what I am used to seeing in small block cars than the 8+ turn springs that were in it.
A little digging in the ‘65 to 72’ Mercury Master Parts catalog shows a code 87 spring that is indeed 16 1/2" tall with 9 1/2 turns of .600 wire. Hmmm. It also shows a rating of 1720lbs.
If there is some one with the Ford MPC can you look in the beginning of section 53.68 and see what the 4E code matches up to? As luck would have it my MPC is missing all the pages up to that very page.
Hmm, I guess I was wrong about 7+ turns being typical. Maybe those are your original springs. Any sign of the color stripes left on them? My car was undercoated and I was lucky enough to be able to chip it away to find original color stripes. So maybe Royce and Scott’s earlier suggestions to cut the original ones down for correct ride height would be the best way to go.
There are two Master Parts Catalogs involved here: Ford and Mercury. I was trying to figure out the specs for the alleged Mustang springs. In general the Mustang was lighter than the Cougar and I was hoping that the Mustang springs might be what I needed since the Cougar was so nose high. So the 4E and 4F springs are listed for Mustang in the Ford Mater Parts Catalog but not in the Mercury MPC.
