Which Shocks For Handling??

IMHO, if he desires more handling performance from the car with current .92" T-bars, KYBs, 1 1/8" front bar, then he need to increase front spring rate T-bar size.

I think the .92" are a good starting point from what it sounds like the cars is going to be used for.

.99" is not that choppy on the street. The deal with the KYB's is that they have a hard time controlling the higher spring rates. The KYB have a lot a gas pressure that adds to the spring rate as opposed to increasing the control of the spring. Still the .99" and KYB were not that stiff and obnoxious on the street.

I ran KYB's with .99" T-bars for about 12 years on and off (80K miles.) I've blown a couple KYB's out during that time, one was used. I ran some used Konis, Herb Adams VSE, and Qa1's during that same time with the same springs. The KYB's would pull you down on your seatbelt if you ran over large pavement seperation like a bridge overpass at 65mph plus. But the Koni's and QA1's were did not do that so much. Heck my current huge 1.14" T-bars and Bilstein don't do that quite like the .99's and KYB's did.

When people run very large T-bars like 1.10" and above and leave the KYB's on, they report very rough and strange ride. It's not fair to the KYB's, they are just not matched to those big springs. When those same people put Koni's, Spax, or Bilstein shocks on the same car, the ride actually gets much better.

Just running real large sway bars with small springs takes away from concept of an independently suspendened front end. It just links both sides.

If the front leaf segment is paralell with the ground that car will not have any anti squat. I'd think from the factory there was some arch up there. Mine still had a little arch after 40 years wear. Move the front eye up and you add anti squat. A little arch in the front segment will do that too. But will give you a little roll steer. Not really the end of the world.