Moving front spring eyes rearward

-
On my car, the amount that weight distribution was changed by the wheelbase change, was quadrupled in a positive direction by simply moving the battery to the trunk.
 
On my car, the amount that weight distribution was changed by the wheelbase change, was quadrupled in a positive direction by simply moving the battery to the trunk.

Yup and moving the axle back by moving the front spring hangers back acts against that 100% by giving less rear overhang. You could see it on wheel scales, too.
 
Quick and dirty calculations on my car shows i lost about 12 lbs on the rear wheels from the axle relocation, about .85%. Removing 40 lbs from the front, adding 60 to the rear, i figure compensated. And so did the difference in tire contact patch, from 26" tall tire to 29.
And besides, it just looks so much better.
Do you really think traction will be much worse at 117" than 116"?
 
Thanks for the info. 72 Scamp, installing 405 h.p. 360 Magnum, A518, 323 sure grip, just wanting to get all the tire under it I can.

Sounds like a street car build?? If that's the case, you can fit a 275/60/15 (28" tall) by simply moving the the front spring hanger the 1/2"-5/8" to the frame rail and the rear hanger/rearend spring perch to match.

If you want to run a taller tire than that, I wouldn't lose sleep over moving the axle back 1/2"-1". Plenty of folks have with great results. roccodart440 comes to mind - and his car is a racecar. For your street car (I'm assuming here), you'll never notice it. Apparently some would lose sleep over it though.
 
Quick and dirty calculations on my car shows i lost about 12 lbs on the rear wheels from the axle relocation, about .85%. Removing 40 lbs from the front, adding 60 to the rear, i figure compensated. And so did the difference in tire contact patch, from 26" tall tire to 29.
And besides, it just looks so much better.
Do you really think traction will be much worse at 117" than 116"?

12 pounds is a lot of you're on the ragged edge. The last think I would want would be to LOSE weight over the rear axle. It's not up for debate at my house. My house, my rules and I don't like pushin the axle back. You have at it. lol
 
12 pounds is a lot of you're on the ragged edge. The last think I would want would be to LOSE weight over the rear axle. It's not up for debate at my house. My house, my rules and I don't like pushin the axle back. You have at it. lol

Well said , I agree.
 
If I just HAD to have "that" big a tire, I would reshape the front of the wheel well before I moved the springs.
Agreed I put in a 14x32 slick on my 68 dart. Had to back halve the car and take 3 inches from the front of the wheel well. The body work was done nicely and I rebuilt a new inner fender lip. If I did not tell anyone they were cut, you cannot tell.
 
Agreed I put in a 14x32 slick on my 68 dart. Had to back halve the car and take 3 inches from the front of the wheel well. The body work was done nicely and I rebuilt a new inner fender lip. If I did not tell anyone they were cut, you cannot tell.

I hit the like button , have done 2 cars that way . If I could do it easily I`d move the rear end forward ,------some !
 
Stretched the rear opening forward 3"....the front opening forward 2". Those fender stretchers make the job easy.

Besides better bite by moving the differential forward 1-1/2" you also get the extra room for coil overs and the OEM fuel tank and the fill tube still fits / works.

On the front, when the K / front suspension (I know a guy) was fabricated, the axle centerline somehow got relocated forward 1"



ATTACH=full]1715698333[/ATTACH]

dsc_6802.jpg
 
Last edited:
Moved the rear opening forward 3"....the front opening forward 2". Those fender stretchers make the job easy.

Besides better bite by moving the differential forward 1-1/2" you also get the extra room for coil overs and the OEM fuel tank and the fill tube still fits / works.

On the front, when the K / front suspension (I know a guy) was fabricated, the axle centerline somehow got relocated forward 1"



ATTACH=full]1715698333[/ATTACH]

View attachment 1715698333
Denny, I freaked when I saw your car at the Nats the first time. Those ghost stripes are over the top!
 
Denny, I freaked when I saw your car at the Nats the first time. Those ghost stripes are over the top!

Thanks....Butchs poppy red 72 Duster, the restoration of his 75 Direct Connection Duster and the silver HemiDuster were a warm up .......the next Butch build will really test our creativity and skills.
 
Last edited:
The only reason I would ever do that was if the rear axle was crooked side to side.....and then I'd look for the difference to be in a frame rail or the unibody of the car before I even considered moving the spring brackets. I've just never thought it was a good idea. Beside the bad rear shackle angle, it will also pull the drive shaft out of the transmission tail shaft a little.

I have been told that on my very stock 69 car. Never considered it as there are "No" mods at all in axle and drive train location. No vibes while driving.

The front yoke of the drive shaft would seem to be to far out as pictured but pure stock! The longer rear balloon tranny seal is not used. What is the real engagement length required? Any one know what that dimension is?

GOPR0720.JPG
 
Beside being able to install larger diameter tires, advantage or dis-advantage of moving front spring eyes rearward? Whats normal or maximum amount allowed? I have read some of 3/4 or one inch. I think it would move rear hangers to a bad angle?

The shocks won't fit on the mounting points correctly as they will be angled slightly. They will also come in contact with a stock gas tank. I tried this with the mopar "oval track" springs, which have the centering pin 5/8"ish back from stock. It caused a bunch of other problems that I hadn't expected. Those springs are in a land fill now.
 
On my car, the amount that weight distribution was changed by the wheelbase change, was quadrupled in a positive direction by simply moving the battery to the trunk.

BE EVEN BETTER WITH THE WHEELS NOT MOVED BACK !!
 
I have been told that on my very stock 69 car. Never considered it as there are "No" mods at all in axle and drive train location. No vibes while driving.

The front yoke of the drive shaft would seem to be to far out as pictured but pure stock! The longer rear balloon tranny seal is not used. What is the real engagement length required? Any one know what that dimension is?

View attachment 1715698603

1'' FROM BEING BOTTOMED OUT IN THE TRANS.
 
Stretched the rear opening forward 3"....the front opening forward 2". Those fender stretchers make the job easy.

Besides better bite by moving the differential forward 1-1/2" you also get the extra room for coil overs and the OEM fuel tank and the fill tube still fits / works.

On the front, when the K / front suspension (I know a guy) was fabricated, the axle centerline somehow got relocated forward 1"



ATTACH=full]1715698333[/ATTACH]

View attachment 1715698333

That looks fantastic! Pretty much undetectable.
 
I have been told that on my very stock 69 car. Never considered it as there are "No" mods at all in axle and drive train location. No vibes while driving.

The front yoke of the drive shaft would seem to be to far out as pictured but pure stock! The longer rear balloon tranny seal is not used. What is the real engagement length required? Any one know what that dimension is?

View attachment 1715698603

That does look like a lot of stick out. My drive shaft guy want's 1" subtracted for stick out. He says that's plenty.
 
Not a good angle, but when i moved my springs inboard I moved front spring mount back about an inch. It was just too close for comfort to the front edge of quarter with a 28" tire, and gives me room for a larger tire down the road. Plus it looked goofy sitting that far forward. I know it wasn't optimal for traction, but I was more after looks and function and didn't want to alter my quarter at that point.

dartrear.jpg
 
I ran a 8 3/4 in my 1965 Dart GT moved back in the axle spring purch's front holes on the spring's pin. This not only made the 215/75 14's look better but did nothing to the ET or feel of the car. It was a 85% street/15% strip Weekend toy and I drove it from Seattle to Georgia and back three times doing over 120 MPH at times.

I will add that on this 1965 Dart GT the 8 3/4 was very close to the fuel tanks sending unit when done. I had taken a deadblow hammer and massaged the tank in about 1/4 inch 'Just for Giggles'

On my sons 1968 Dart 270 build we relocated the springs into the frame and then tubbed the wheelwells. Then I cut the rear fender opening 2 inches and welded it back in. Running some 325/40 20's in the rear now.
68 Dart 6.jpg
 
Last edited:
I made some shims and moved the rear back on my Duster. About 1/4 in IIRC. A 28 tire can get pretty close at the front and you also have to account for tire growth if running slicks. As mentioned, shocks and rear may be very close to the gas tank. I wouldn't move the rear back if running a Dana.

2-15-09 004.JPG
 
-
Back
Top