Topic: 1968 San Jose GT 390 Fastback NOS Leaf Springs vs Repro

[Coralsnake]

Comp suspension cars that used the AR springs include some 1968 Shelbys

[bullitt68]

Comp suspension cars that used the AR springs include some 1968 Shelbys

Thanks. I was told that they came off a 68 Shelby. I think that the previous owner installed new aftermarket 1 inch lowered springs. Hopefully they clean up nice. I just have to check the arch and make sure that are not sagging

[bullitt68]

Quick leaf Spring update. So I have be diligently searching locally for some nice original used leaf springs and I have acquired a few new sets. I will be media blasting them all to see if any other them are worthy of restoration. If not I will just order a set of repos from Virginia Classic Mustang and call it day. Then strip and treat and use a donor lower lear from one of these sets. My question is all of the sets of leaf spring have roughly the same arc except the AR springs. Should I assume that if they all have the same arc as the ones I pulled out of my car that they will have give me the same ride height. I am concerned if the old springs will sag and if there is a way to determine this or would they already be sagging if that was the case. I have blown all of the sets of springs apart will start the chore of cleaning them up soon.

Also is there any value in restoring these original springs and finishing with a suitable faux finish to replicate the correct natural finish as close as possible. Just trying to determine if I should dedicate any time to the old springs. I am not sure how desirable they might be. I would have 2-3 sets for sale with new pads and clamps etc. So far leaning towards the Eastwood Phosphate rattle can product. I didn't some test sprays and it looked pretty close to a natural finish. Well as nice as can be expected compared to everything else I have tried so far.

Thanks

[Bossbill]

The ARs are also used on 67 Shelby Comp Suspensions. My 67 has the AR springs.

The SAAC Forum has more than one guy looking for a set of those lower leafs.
Real hard to find.

[bullitt68]

The ARs are also used on 67 Shelby Comp Suspensions. My 67 has the AR springs.

The SAAC Forum has more than one guy looking for a set of those lower leafs.
Real hard to find.

Thanks Bill appreciate it

[bullitt68]

Here are the non AR springs. Assuming that the AS code is correct for my car. The set on the left is the roller set for my car. The middle set needs to be painted, Set of right will get blasted and assessed, but have decided to order a new set from Virginai Classic Mustang to be safe. Just a question regarding the cups. There is a difference between the cups on both sets of springs. Is this common. Very noticeable on the bottom leafs. Also the stamp on the leafs on the right have the stamp in the vertical orientation compared to horizontal on the middle set.

I will use the best stamp on the bottom spring with the new springs. So far I think the set of the left has the best stamp and less pitting than the centre set

[J_Speegle]

Here are the non AR springs. Assuming that the AS code is correct for my car. The set on the left is the roller set for my car. The middle set needs to be painted, Set of right will get blasted and assessed, but have decided to order a new set from Virginai Classic Mustang to be safe. Just a question regarding the cups. There is a difference between the cups on both sets of springs. Is this common. Very noticeable on the bottom leafs. Also the stamp on the leafs on the right have the stamp in the vertical orientation compared to horizontal on the middle set.

Yes as posted in the paint mark thread the AS is likely the correct rear springs for your specific application


There were multiple different design (dimple, pointed dimple and no dimple) found on the short leaf on cars built at San Jose during 68 production. This may have been the results of multiple suppliers/providers who may have supplied one specific rear spring or more to San Jose at that time. On some springs we find one of these physical details (dimple for example) while different springs on cars built at the same time have a different design.

In general most of the springs I've seen originally on 68 San Jose cars lacked any dimple but there are other applications where they are present

A couple of examples of the dimple and no dimple on 68 San Jose examples as well as the orientation of the stamping normally found. Not to say one of the length-wise stamping is never found. Have never cross referenced the dimple style with the style/orientation of the stamping  a logical task

[bullitt68]

Yes as posted in the paint mark thread the AS is likely the correct rear springs for your specific application


There were multiple different design (dimple, pointed dimple and no dimple) found on the short leaf on cars built at San Jose during 68 production. This may have been the results of multiple suppliers/providers who may have supplied one specific rear spring or more to San Jose at that time. On some springs we find one of these physical details (dimple for example) while different springs on cars built at the same time have a different design.

In general most of the springs I've seen originally on 68 San Jose cars lacked any dimple but there are other applications where they are present

A couple of examples of the dimple and no dimple on 68 San Jose examples as well as the orientation of the stamping normally found. Not to say one of the length-wise stamping is never found. Have never cross referenced the dimple style with the style/orientation of the stamping  a logical task

Great thanks Jeff I will most likey go with that spring orientation if I can clean them up to look good enough. Always nice to have a nice crisp stamp. What about date code. Should I be concerned with that at this point or mainly just the correct t application.

Can you explain the dimple?

[bullitt68]

So after shopping around there look to be 3 options that I have found for aftermarket leaf springs. Scott Drake (Photo 1&2), Virgina Classic Mustangs (Photo 3&4) and Eaton (No photo). Any opinions or advice with any of the 3 vendor springs.

Concerns would be ride height and spring end detail/shape

Thanks

[J_Speegle]

Great thanks Jeff I will most likey go with that spring orientation if I can clean them up to look good enough. Always nice to have a nice crisp stamp. What about date code. Should I be concerned with that at this point or mainly just the correct t application.

Looks like both are 330 EC7 Suggesting the 330th day of the year 1967

Can you explain the dimple?

Just a term chosen for the small raised dot (much smaller than the cup depression in the longer leaves that held plastic inserts/insulators) found on some short leaves


To left shows one such feature at the rear (engineering and date end) on that example while the lower right was formed with the feature at the front end/opposite of the short leaf with the engineering number and date




On other examples both ends are flat with no "raised dimple" as on a car I looked at yesterday

[bullitt68]

Looks like both are 330 EC7 Suggesting the 330th day of the year 1967

Just a term chosen for the small raised dot (much smaller than the cup depression in the longer leaves that held plastic inserts/insulators) found on some short leaves

To left shows one such feature at the rear (engineering and date end) on that example while the lower right was formed with the feature at the front end/opposite of the short leaf with the engineering number and date

On other examples both ends are flat with no "raised dimple" as on a car I looked at yesterday

Great thanks Jeff appreciate it

[bullitt68]

Looks like both are 330 EC7 Suggesting the 330th day of the year 1967

To left shows one such feature at the rear (engineering and date end) on that example while the lower right was formed with the feature at the front end/opposite of the short leaf with the engineering number and date

Hi Jeff which leaf would be best suited for my car discounting the AR spring of course. The one on the right with the horizontal stamp does not appear to have a date code, unless the date code is 0548, 54th day of 1968. Do you think that spring could have come on a San Jose car

[bullitt68]

Just checking to see what the correct finish should be on the leaf springs clamps. I know that the leafs should be treated (I plan to phosphate them) natural steel, and the clamps that I have are new aftermarket (they look fairly correct) and are bare metal. Should they be installed bare natural metal or treated like the leaf springs.

Thanks

[Bob Gaines]

Just checking to see what the correct finish should be on the leaf springs clamps. I know that the leafs should be treated (I plan to phosphate them) natural steel, and the clamps that I have are new aftermarket (they look fairly correct) and are bare metal. Should they be installed bare natural metal or treated like the leaf springs.

Thanks

They are bare metal from the originally spring mfg back in the day with a coating of cosmoline (rust inhibitor) over the leafs and clamps typically .  The only metal treatment I would suggest is one of the good metal protector products like T9 etc. that goes on relatively clear.

[bullitt68]

They are bare metal from the originally spring mfg back in the day with a coating of cosmoline (rust inhibitor) over the leafs and clamps typically .  The only metal treatment I would suggest is one of the good metal protector products like T9 etc. that goes on relatively clear.

Ok thanks Bob. On a new set I would chemical strip to give the correct bare metal finish treated with T9. On original leafs especially if pitted painting would be the only option I assume as T9 on pitted springs especially after media blasting would not look correct at all. For some reason I thought that the original springs were phosphate and oil. Glad I didn't phosphate them yet!

I am actually surprised to see so many guys painting suspension parts. I figured most would want the correct factory look. Obviously painted springs would be a better form of protection and rust prevention. I have seen several different finishes being used. I guess for a driver/trailer car this would be an acceptable practice