Cutlasskyle

Looking at replacing the front suspension whats a good brand to replace with want better handling this may already have a thread . Car is a 1972 cutlass s with ac removed at the moment all original parts already removed.

Fun71

"Better handling" is very subjective. I replaced the original Supreme springs on my car with 442 equivalent FE2 suspension springs and I feel that gave much better handling.

So are you looking for autocross level handling or what?

Cutlasskyle

Looking at getting best bang for a decent buck .Nothing too expensive . With that said I live near some nice curvy roads and plan on running it hard . Want something so when I do upper and lower control arms I wont wanna buy /upgrade them again . 400 to 700 $ range possibly more if need be . Next Ill be upgrading front and installing rear sway bar after I get brake swap complete and new tires .

Fun71

Firmer springs, larger sway front sway bar, rear sway bar, good shocks, and decent tires may get you there.

Here's a thread with spring info:
https://classicoldsmobile.com/forums...0-cutlass.html

Cutlasskyle

Everytime I do a part check to see if they fit it says not compatible . With 5374

70sgeek

OEM replacement suspension parts can work well for what you want if you match them to the right support pieces. Stock control arms, tie rods, center link, ball joints, etc are pretty stout pieces. Add urethane front end links, good performance shocks, larger than stock diameter front sway bar + a good rear sway bar bolted to a good set of rear aftermarket control arms. I'd also install a good fast ratio/firm feel steering box such as the CPP 500 series or maybe a Jeep Grand Cherokee conversion.


I rebuilt my 72 Cutlass ragtop with all new, mostly Moog OEM front end parts - 5415 springs out back to give it a slight height increase, stock 5536 front springs. 1-5/16" front bar, 1" rear bar, UMI rear control arms and Bilstein shocks all around. CPP steering box provides firm feel and faster ratio - just under 3 turns L-to-L.


Watch for online sales - you can save $$$ if you're vigilant - JC Whitney typically runs 20% sales + free shipping, Ebay is a good source for OEM stuff as well. Summit/Jegs not bad for the aftermarket stuff.


Topping all off with 15x8 wheels on 245-60-15 rubber all around, there isn't a curve I've rounded yet that it can't muscle through.

Sunshn

picking up on this older thread. when I first got my 72 cutlass convert, 350 Rocket, AC, I replaced springs with Moog 5450 / 5385. This picture best shows the results...

Never liked the look... too high in the front. I don't want to make the same mistake twice, and I notice a lot of posters recommend the 5536 for the front. This will lower the front by 1", from 12" to 11" free height. not sure that's enough to make me happy. Before I call Moog, any other recommendations.

70sgeek

What size wheels/tires are you running and do you want to stay with stock configuration components - i.e. direct fit upgrades like shocks, sway bars, etc?


for example as I noted in August, my 72 cutlass ragtop has 245-60-r15 all around on 15x8" wheels - stock front control arms, 1-5/16 front sway bar, 1" rear bar coupled to UMI performance tubular control arms - moog 5536 front springs, 5415 rear. Bilstein shocks all around.


car handles on rails and still rides reasonably comfortable over rougher roads - nothing overpriced/exotic but very effective

Fun71

Here's mine with 5536 front shocks:

Sunshn

Thanks 70sgeek and Fun71.

Actually, I just got new Cooper Cobra's 225/70/14. And, I'm a bit embarrassed to admit, I don't know what shocks are on the car. I might have at one point, when I did the coils, but that was 3 years ago, so I'll need to revisit.

One thing that is a bit confusing to me: the load is a lot more for the MOOG 5536 (1,984 lbs) versus the 5450's I currently have (1,642 lbs). The 5450's have an installed height of 12" versus 11" for the 5536, but, since the load is over 300lbs more on the 5536, I would think this would offset, and be about the same.

Does anyone know how I can determine the front load for the car? My next step is to call MOOG and see what they say, with a goal of lowering the car 1-2"

Fun71

Well, from my research I settled on the "installed height" and "rate per inch" as my criteria and I was very happy with the results. The new 5536 springs gave the same ride height as the 40+ year old, worn original springs even though they were nearly 2" shorter free height.







Here's some spring info I archived a while back:

> 5390 small block - no AC
> wire diameter = 0.650"
> load height = 11.000"
> load = 1952 pounds
> rate per inch = 336 pounds
> free height = 16.808"
>
> 5382 big block - no AC, small block - AC
> wire diameter = 0.660"
> load height = 11.000"
> load = 2066 pounds
> rate per inch = 360 pounds
> free height = 16.724"
>
> 5400 big block - AC
> wire diameter = 0.660"
> load height = 11.000"
> load = 2167 pounds
> rate per inch = 360 pounds
> free height = 17.004"
>
> 5536 442 small block - AC - heavy duty, 442 big block - no AC - heavy duty
> wire diameter = 0.690"
> load height = 11.000"
> load = 1984 pounds
> rate per inch = 488 pounds
> free height = 15.063"
>
> 5450 small block - AC - heavy duty, big block - no AC - heavy duty, -442 big block - AC - heavy duty
> wire diameter = 0.690"
> load height = 12.000"
> load = 1642 pounds
> rate per inch = 454 pounds
> free height = 15.616"

Sunshn

Thanks again Fun71.

The spring information is super. Not sure it solves my question though, only because the 5536 indicate a lower installed height (11") for the 442 small block, versus the 5450 (12", which I have), for the 442 big block. (which the 5536 says as well). Yet again, 5536 load is 300+ pounds more...

Am I reading that right? I'm assuming my 350 Rocket/AC is lighter than both the 442 small block and 455, so wouldn't the heavier-load spring not "sink" as much...

Challenging situation, as I mentioned, I can't afford to make the same mistake twice.

Fun71

I think the information is right there and it says the ride height will be 1" less with the 5536 than it would be with the 5450.

Both applications show "small block - AC - heavy duty, 442 big block - no AC - heavy duty".

FYI, the SBO is about 60 pounds lighter than the BBO, so add in the AC and a SBO w/AC would be equivalent to a BBO w/o AC.

Sunshn

Once again, thanks Fun71.
I realize that post is over a week old, but since we jut got 2' of snow here, my Spring Fever got crushed hard.
Anyway, the thing that still confuses me on the 5536 is the heavier load. Totally clear it has a lower ride height, but with 300+ heavier load. Wouldn't that mean my engine won't offset that spring as much, because it's rated for 300lb heavier than the 5450?

On another note, does anyone have any experiencer with loweringsprings?
Particularly: BMR Suspension® SP013R - 1" Front Lowering Coil Springs more details on - https://www.carid.com/bmr-suspension...specifications