Yeah, the more I think about this, the more it makes sense.
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires
on 8/19/06 5:43 AM, Bob Howard at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> Hi Max,
> I don't know about measuring the spring rate. Chances are that if the
> height is non-standard, the rate would be non-standard also. That would
> seem to be the case, as the rear end hopped less after the leaf had been
> On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:57:09 -0700 Max Heim <email@example.com>
>> Interesting. I would think that would change the spring rate,
>> however, when all we want to do is change the spring height.
>> Max Heim
>> '66 MGB GHN3L76149
>> If you're near Mountain View, CA,
>> it's the primer red one with chrome wires
>> on 8/17/06 4:15 AM, Bob Howard at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>>> Replacement rear springs for my GT ( this was 4-5 years ago --
>> may not be valid today ) raised it too high. I considered lowering
>> blocks but was put off by what seemed high expense for simple chunks of
>>> Asked a spring shop about de-arching. The owner said that he had
>> seen a number of MGB rear springs that were too high when new. He
>> suggested removing the 12" leaf ( second leaf) for a year or two,
>> the springs settle, then reinstalling it if/when the others flattened
>> too much. Easy to do, and free. It's worked well for me, and the car
>> is still a bit higher than we would like it to be.
>>> It's a cost-free way to experiment with height.