64/98 original ride height

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 27, 2015 | 11:15 AM
  #1  
1Fastolds's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 157
64/98 original ride height

Does anyone have the specs of how high a 64/98 rode from the factory? Im trying to get a comparison to how it looked from the factory to compare a 2" drop. I figure my 64 is probably already sitting at least 1.5" down, so I am trying to figure out what springs I should look at.

Thank you.
Adam
Old Dec 28, 2015 | 05:46 AM
  #2  
m371961's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,163
From: Sistersville, WV
Do you have a Chassis Manual? Heights for the 65 are listed in the suspension section under spring carrying height, showing where and how to measure.
Old Dec 28, 2015 | 02:17 PM
  #3  
Ozzie's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,614
From: S.E. Louisiana, so far still in U.S.A.
As suggested, it is probably shown in manual #3 of the 1964 Oldsmobile Service Manual set. Unfortunately I only have #1, 2, & 5.
Old Dec 28, 2015 | 07:11 PM
  #4  
1Fastolds's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 157
One of the first things I purchased was a CD of the service manuals. But I always forget that I have it.

So I'm looking through it, and I ran up on the answer, I think. The manual separates the models by 33-34-35-36-38-39 series and 30-31-32 series.

I have a 38 series, 3829, 98 Luxury sedan. Of course, for the 30-31-32 series, they have measurements that are from the bottom of the fender/quarter to the ground. The measurements in the manual for my car have you basically measuring the compressed spring height for the front, and from the bottom of the frame to the top of the axle tube. They couldn't make it easy like the smaller series cars.

For the record, the front curb load measurement for my car is 11 7/8"- 12 5/16" and for the rear, 6- 6 3/4". I'll have to measure my car at some point to compare. But I can tell you that without the rear air shocks inflated, the rear sags a lot.

Thanks for reminding me about the stupid service manual. I'd like to get a a set of original manuals, paper type and all.

Adam
Old Dec 29, 2015 | 07:04 AM
  #5  
jaunty75's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 15,191
From: southeastern Michigan
Attached is what 1fastolds is talking about, and he is right. Unlike the later-year service manuals (I have a manual for my '67, and the nice, clean ride-height diagram is on page 3-25), the '64 manual does not give a clean "ride height" measurement where you're measuring the distance from the ground to some point on the car. Rather, you have to do these "spring carrying height" measurements.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
Picture1.jpg (177.9 KB, 22 views)
Old Dec 29, 2015 | 04:58 PM
  #6  
1Fastolds's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 157
Originally Posted by jaunty75
Attached is what 1fastolds is talking about, and he is right. Unlike the later-year service manuals (I have a manual for my '67, and the nice, clean ride-height diagram is on page 3-25), the '64 manual does not give a clean "ride height" measurement where you're measuring the distance from the ground to some point on the car. Rather, you have to do these "spring carrying height" measurements.
Thanks, you would have thought that I would figure out how to put pics up right. Funny thing about it, is they have the simple measurement for the smaller series cars.

Thanks for the help.
Adam
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bonezarally
Chassis/Body/Frame
1
Jul 9, 2011 08:35 AM
runner66
Cutlass
4
Aug 11, 2010 04:13 PM
joades
Chassis/Body/Frame
2
May 24, 2009 12:58 AM
68Tom
Chassis/Body/Frame
12
Dec 3, 2008 03:30 PM
Want-A-Vert
Chassis/Body/Frame
1
Jan 7, 2007 05:39 AM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:31 PM.