You need camber adjusters if you lower your car
7/7/05 | 09:54 PM
#101
Cobra Member
Joined: November 27, 2004
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 2
From: Albuquerque, New Mexico
I still don't understand the need for an adjustable panhard bar. Even if you lowered it two inches, the MOST the panhard bar could shift the axle is less than 1/10 of an inch. You are NOT going to notice that...
I have very carefully looked at the rear of my car since I installed my Eibach Pro springs. The rear tires are still pretty well centered. Even using my hand as a ROUGH measurement from tire to inner fender, it is very well centered.
Oh. And I just double checked my calculations on the worse case shift with a 2" drop: 0.04" shift. Max.
I have very carefully looked at the rear of my car since I installed my Eibach Pro springs. The rear tires are still pretty well centered. Even using my hand as a ROUGH measurement from tire to inner fender, it is very well centered.
Oh. And I just double checked my calculations on the worse case shift with a 2" drop: 0.04" shift. Max.
7/8/05 | 08:03 AM
#102
Member
Joined: February 15, 2005
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
FYI - The camber kits from FORD are slowly coming in, I had FORD install mine and the alignment is now back to FORD spec's. The kit worked perfectly. (FORD part # 4R3Z 3B236 AB) Now that thats done I can concentrate on the next mod. 
7/8/05 | 08:04 AM
#103
The Analog Admin!
Joined: November 27, 2004
Posts: 11,139
Likes: 3,304
From: Visalia Ca.
Originally posted by Bill Z@July 8, 2005, 6:06 AM
FYI - The camber kits from FORD are slowly coming in, I had FORD install mine and the alignment is now back to FORD spec's. The kit worked perfectly. (FORD part # 4R3Z 3B236 AB) Now that thats done I can concentrate on the next mod.
FYI - The camber kits from FORD are slowly coming in, I had FORD install mine and the alignment is now back to FORD spec's. The kit worked perfectly. (FORD part # 4R3Z 3B236 AB) Now that thats done I can concentrate on the next mod.
kc
7/8/05 | 10:17 AM
#104
Mach 1 Member
Joined: November 21, 2004
Posts: 701
Likes: 0
From: Buffalo, NY
Originally posted by 05stangkc@July 8, 2005, 8:07 AM
I have a couple in stock but when I tried to order more they went back on Back order!
kc
I have a couple in stock but when I tried to order more they went back on Back order!
kc
You got my E-mail right?
7/9/05 | 03:55 PM
#107
Thread Starter
I Have No Life
Joined: May 26, 2004
Posts: 10,606
Likes: 2
Ya, that is what I found. Several places are telling people that they don't need them, but if you get it aligned you will see that you do need them. I had a shop say "Ya, you are fine" after they checked the alignment. I went to another place and sure enough it was out of whack. I went to FORD and they confirmed that I needed to get an alignment done.
7/13/05 | 09:12 AM
#109
Bullitt Member
Joined: June 28, 2004
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Good question Scott.
Adrenalin, what cast/camber set did you use? That is if you used one.
I bought the Steeda set and it still wasn't enough to get it right. Sooo I called them up and they sent me two bolts w/ weird plates on them, I hope it works.
Adrenalin, what cast/camber set did you use? That is if you used one.
I bought the Steeda set and it still wasn't enough to get it right. Sooo I called them up and they sent me two bolts w/ weird plates on them, I hope it works.
7/13/05 | 09:18 AM
#110
Thread Starter
I Have No Life
Joined: May 26, 2004
Posts: 10,606
Likes: 2
I can't remember exactly. I recall something about -1 camber. Honestly I don't know. All I know is the eibach lowered it enought that it could not be properly aligned without the holes being sloted and using camber bolts.
7/14/05 | 08:15 PM
#111
Mach 1 Member
Joined: July 10, 2005
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Alright, I have made numerous phone calls in the last 3 days and I found out this.
1) Eibach doesn't really care about the problem and they say that if installed correctly all their springs should fit the 2005 Mustang with a normal alignment. (The Truth? Eibach springs fit about 15-20% of Mustangs that come staright off the line)
2) As noted in number 1, not all of the mustangs have the same rear end when coming out of the factory, therefore some of them fit with no problem, and some are way off.
3) Steeda springs have a 95% rate of fitting without a problem in the front or rear with alignment.
4) Steeda spings did not only take into consideration how much the car is lowerd and handling (like Eibach) they actually did R&D. The Steeda sprins are much stiffer and would be anyones best bet.
5 Stick with Steeda, their customer service is amazing as well.
This is the email which helped me most. If you have questions, call Steeda and ask for Gus.
The Eibach Pro-Kit is stated by Eibach to drop your car about 1.3 to 1.4 inches. The actual drops we have seen are actually closer to 1 3/4. With this much drop on some vehicles the negative camber becomes excessive and needs to be corrected to avoid tire wear issues. This is not required by every vehicle though. Cars are not built to exacting tolerances and there is always variance from car to car. This also reduces suspension travel which can accelerate wear on the shocks and struts. There is also a dramatic change in the front roll center geometry. This produces more body roll which must be compensated with more spring rate to overcome and preserve handling. They do up the spring rate, but not as much as ours. The other issue you run into is the shifting of the rear end. What you have heard about this is true. The rear end is actually offset slightly from the factory. The geometry of the panhard rod set up in the back results in the rear end shifting further from its already offset position when you lower the vehicle. This is why we manufacture our adjustable panhard rod. It allows length adjustment of the panhard rod allowing you to re-center the rear end.
Our springs only drop the vehicle about 7/8 to 1 inch in the front and just over 1 inch in the rear. This does several things. First it almost eliminates any alignment issues. There is still variance from car to car, but 95% of the cars we have done do not need camber adjusters. We are not cutting suspension travel as much as others so there is little difference in shock and strut wear. We are not dramatically changing the front roll center geometry. This combined with our higher spring rate than theirs results in a car with less body roll for better handling. We also do not cause a dramatic shift in the rear end which eliminates the requirement for an adjustable panhard rod. Using one would be of benefit, but its not a requirement at all.
We gave a lot of thought into what we wanted out of our springs. Many people associate a car that’s slammed with good handling but there is more to it than that. A car that’s really low may look good. But our parts are not for just looks. Hope this information helped.
1) Eibach doesn't really care about the problem and they say that if installed correctly all their springs should fit the 2005 Mustang with a normal alignment. (The Truth? Eibach springs fit about 15-20% of Mustangs that come staright off the line)
2) As noted in number 1, not all of the mustangs have the same rear end when coming out of the factory, therefore some of them fit with no problem, and some are way off.
3) Steeda springs have a 95% rate of fitting without a problem in the front or rear with alignment.
4) Steeda spings did not only take into consideration how much the car is lowerd and handling (like Eibach) they actually did R&D. The Steeda sprins are much stiffer and would be anyones best bet.
5 Stick with Steeda, their customer service is amazing as well.
This is the email which helped me most. If you have questions, call Steeda and ask for Gus.
The Eibach Pro-Kit is stated by Eibach to drop your car about 1.3 to 1.4 inches. The actual drops we have seen are actually closer to 1 3/4. With this much drop on some vehicles the negative camber becomes excessive and needs to be corrected to avoid tire wear issues. This is not required by every vehicle though. Cars are not built to exacting tolerances and there is always variance from car to car. This also reduces suspension travel which can accelerate wear on the shocks and struts. There is also a dramatic change in the front roll center geometry. This produces more body roll which must be compensated with more spring rate to overcome and preserve handling. They do up the spring rate, but not as much as ours. The other issue you run into is the shifting of the rear end. What you have heard about this is true. The rear end is actually offset slightly from the factory. The geometry of the panhard rod set up in the back results in the rear end shifting further from its already offset position when you lower the vehicle. This is why we manufacture our adjustable panhard rod. It allows length adjustment of the panhard rod allowing you to re-center the rear end.
Our springs only drop the vehicle about 7/8 to 1 inch in the front and just over 1 inch in the rear. This does several things. First it almost eliminates any alignment issues. There is still variance from car to car, but 95% of the cars we have done do not need camber adjusters. We are not cutting suspension travel as much as others so there is little difference in shock and strut wear. We are not dramatically changing the front roll center geometry. This combined with our higher spring rate than theirs results in a car with less body roll for better handling. We also do not cause a dramatic shift in the rear end which eliminates the requirement for an adjustable panhard rod. Using one would be of benefit, but its not a requirement at all.
We gave a lot of thought into what we wanted out of our springs. Many people associate a car that’s slammed with good handling but there is more to it than that. A car that’s really low may look good. But our parts are not for just looks. Hope this information helped.
7/26/05 | 11:59 PM
#115
Team Mustang Source
Joined: October 11, 2004
Posts: 711
Likes: 0
From: Surrey, BC
I find two statements in the following email contradictory.
Steeda states that Eibach springs have less suspension travel than theirs. Then they state that they up the spring rate on their own springs to compensate for body roll, more than Eibach does. Doesn't an increased spring rate serve to reduce suspension travel or am I misunderstanding???
So if Steeda springs are stiffer, they should have less actual suspension travel. Or are they referring to available suspension travel? And does reduced suspension travel accelerate wear on shocks and struts?
Steeda states that Eibach springs have less suspension travel than theirs. Then they state that they up the spring rate on their own springs to compensate for body roll, more than Eibach does. Doesn't an increased spring rate serve to reduce suspension travel or am I misunderstanding???
So if Steeda springs are stiffer, they should have less actual suspension travel. Or are they referring to available suspension travel? And does reduced suspension travel accelerate wear on shocks and struts?
Originally posted by scotts05custom@July 14, 2005, 7:18 PM
Alright, I have made numerous phone calls in the last 3 days and I found out this.
1) Eibach doesn't really care about the problem and they say that if installed correctly all their springs should fit the 2005 Mustang with a normal alignment. (The Truth? Eibach springs fit about 15-20% of Mustangs that come staright off the line)
2) As noted in number 1, not all of the mustangs have the same rear end when coming out of the factory, therefore some of them fit with no problem, and some are way off.
3) Steeda springs have a 95% rate of fitting without a problem in the front or rear with alignment.
4) Steeda spings did not only take into consideration how much the car is lowerd and handling (like Eibach) they actually did R&D. The Steeda sprins are much stiffer and would be anyones best bet.
5 Stick with Steeda, their customer service is amazing as well.
This is the email which helped me most. If you have questions, call Steeda and ask for Gus.
The Eibach Pro-Kit is stated by Eibach to drop your car about 1.3 to 1.4 inches. The actual drops we have seen are actually closer to 1 3/4. With this much drop on some vehicles the negative camber becomes excessive and needs to be corrected to avoid tire wear issues. This is not required by every vehicle though. Cars are not built to exacting tolerances and there is always variance from car to car. This also reduces suspension travel which can accelerate wear on the shocks and struts. There is also a dramatic change in the front roll center geometry. This produces more body roll which must be compensated with more spring rate to overcome and preserve handling. They do up the spring rate, but not as much as ours. The other issue you run into is the shifting of the rear end. What you have heard about this is true. The rear end is actually offset slightly from the factory. The geometry of the panhard rod set up in the back results in the rear end shifting further from its already offset position when you lower the vehicle. This is why we manufacture our adjustable panhard rod. It allows length adjustment of the panhard rod allowing you to re-center the rear end.
Our springs only drop the vehicle about 7/8 to 1 inch in the front and just over 1 inch in the rear. This does several things. First it almost eliminates any alignment issues. There is still variance from car to car, but 95% of the cars we have done do not need camber adjusters. We are not cutting suspension travel as much as others so there is little difference in shock and strut wear. We are not dramatically changing the front roll center geometry. This combined with our higher spring rate than theirs results in a car with less body roll for better handling. We also do not cause a dramatic shift in the rear end which eliminates the requirement for an adjustable panhard rod. Using one would be of benefit, but its not a requirement at all.
We gave a lot of thought into what we wanted out of our springs. Many people associate a car that’s slammed with good handling but there is more to it than that. A car that’s really low may look good. But our parts are not for just looks. Hope this information helped.
Alright, I have made numerous phone calls in the last 3 days and I found out this.
1) Eibach doesn't really care about the problem and they say that if installed correctly all their springs should fit the 2005 Mustang with a normal alignment. (The Truth? Eibach springs fit about 15-20% of Mustangs that come staright off the line)
2) As noted in number 1, not all of the mustangs have the same rear end when coming out of the factory, therefore some of them fit with no problem, and some are way off.
3) Steeda springs have a 95% rate of fitting without a problem in the front or rear with alignment.
4) Steeda spings did not only take into consideration how much the car is lowerd and handling (like Eibach) they actually did R&D. The Steeda sprins are much stiffer and would be anyones best bet.
5 Stick with Steeda, their customer service is amazing as well.
This is the email which helped me most. If you have questions, call Steeda and ask for Gus.
The Eibach Pro-Kit is stated by Eibach to drop your car about 1.3 to 1.4 inches. The actual drops we have seen are actually closer to 1 3/4. With this much drop on some vehicles the negative camber becomes excessive and needs to be corrected to avoid tire wear issues. This is not required by every vehicle though. Cars are not built to exacting tolerances and there is always variance from car to car. This also reduces suspension travel which can accelerate wear on the shocks and struts. There is also a dramatic change in the front roll center geometry. This produces more body roll which must be compensated with more spring rate to overcome and preserve handling. They do up the spring rate, but not as much as ours. The other issue you run into is the shifting of the rear end. What you have heard about this is true. The rear end is actually offset slightly from the factory. The geometry of the panhard rod set up in the back results in the rear end shifting further from its already offset position when you lower the vehicle. This is why we manufacture our adjustable panhard rod. It allows length adjustment of the panhard rod allowing you to re-center the rear end.
Our springs only drop the vehicle about 7/8 to 1 inch in the front and just over 1 inch in the rear. This does several things. First it almost eliminates any alignment issues. There is still variance from car to car, but 95% of the cars we have done do not need camber adjusters. We are not cutting suspension travel as much as others so there is little difference in shock and strut wear. We are not dramatically changing the front roll center geometry. This combined with our higher spring rate than theirs results in a car with less body roll for better handling. We also do not cause a dramatic shift in the rear end which eliminates the requirement for an adjustable panhard rod. Using one would be of benefit, but its not a requirement at all.
We gave a lot of thought into what we wanted out of our springs. Many people associate a car that’s slammed with good handling but there is more to it than that. A car that’s really low may look good. But our parts are not for just looks. Hope this information helped.
7/27/05 | 01:40 AM
#116
Mach 1 Member
Joined: February 17, 2005
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Originally posted by scotts05custom@July 15, 2005, 12:18 PM
Our springs only drop the vehicle about 7/8 inch in the front
Our springs only drop the vehicle about 7/8 inch in the front
7/8" drop!!!! OOOOH count me in!!!
8/8/05 | 06:46 AM
#118
Thread Starter
I Have No Life
Joined: May 26, 2004
Posts: 10,606
Likes: 2
Originally posted by ex-Galaxie500@August 7, 2005, 8:22 PM
So do you have to put up with all these extra camber plates/adjustments, etc if you only lower the rear end of the car? Or just the adjustable panhard rod? Or neither?
So do you have to put up with all these extra camber plates/adjustments, etc if you only lower the rear end of the car? Or just the adjustable panhard rod? Or neither?
8/9/05 | 11:33 AM
#119
V6 Member
Joined: September 14, 2004
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Redfire 05Gt@July 27, 2005, 1:02 AM
I find two statements in the following email contradictory.
Steeda states that Eibach springs have less suspension travel than theirs. Then they state that they up the spring rate on their own springs to compensate for body roll, more than Eibach does. Doesn't an increased spring rate serve to reduce suspension travel or am I misunderstanding???
So if Steeda springs are stiffer, they should have less actual suspension travel. Or are they referring to available suspension travel? And does reduced suspension travel accelerate wear on shocks and struts?
I find two statements in the following email contradictory.
Steeda states that Eibach springs have less suspension travel than theirs. Then they state that they up the spring rate on their own springs to compensate for body roll, more than Eibach does. Doesn't an increased spring rate serve to reduce suspension travel or am I misunderstanding???
So if Steeda springs are stiffer, they should have less actual suspension travel. Or are they referring to available suspension travel? And does reduced suspension travel accelerate wear on shocks and struts?
Most stock struts are not designed to be run at a lower ride height for extended periods of time and result in premature wear. The more a car is lowered, the faster the struts will wear out. Most lowering aftermarket struts are designed to be run lower and will last much longer than the stock ones.
8/10/05 | 03:42 PM
#120
Team Mustang Source
Joined: October 11, 2004
Posts: 711
Likes: 0
From: Surrey, BC
Originally posted by PottyScotty@August 9, 2005, 10:36 AM
The Steeda springs are longer than the Eibach springs, and thus allow the suspension to travel more under compression. The fact that they are stiffer only makes it harder for the suspension to travel its full length.
The Steeda springs are longer than the Eibach springs, and thus allow the suspension to travel more under compression. The fact that they are stiffer only makes it harder for the suspension to travel its full length.
Most stock struts are not designed to be run at a lower ride height for extended periods of time and result in premature wear. The more a car is lowered, the faster the struts will wear out. Most lowering aftermarket struts are designed to be run lower and will last much longer than the stock ones.