WARNING, one of my classic RANTS follows:
WTF?!!?!?!?!!?
Uhm, you do realize, DON'T YOU, that the GT IS A LOWERED PLATFORM ALREADY - don't you? And, the RICERS that lower the car more than 1" are just that RICERS! Unless someone COMPLETELY CHANGES the kframe and rear suspension ~3/4" is the MAX drop that a Fox or SN95 can be lowered before handling is DRASTICALLY EFFECTED!!
Sorry, B springs and C springs are FOR LOOKS ONLY! A good driver can drive better on stock GT springs!
Oh, wait, don't take what I say, or every technical site/paper, how about if we go by the EXPERTS - the people that DESIGNED THE STANG! Check out the height of the 100% PURE RACE ONLY 95 Cobra R - NOT available to the general public - no radio, no ac, no power anything - meant purely to meet the min required production numbers for racing (circle track).
BTW, the 95 Cobra R was lowered ~1/2" to 3/4" from the GT. There are PLENTY of books, specs, and sites to confirm that.
Then again, WTF do engineers know? And, why the **** bother to make ALL of those minor changes in the 87-93 front suspension over the years.
As I said, the GT is a *LOWERED PLATFORM*. This FACT is so simple so basic, so easy to verify, it's*****ING amazing that there still is the "adjust the TPS to .999999v mentality" with the GT suspension.
But, hey, using a tape measure requires at least 6 Ph.D's and 20 years experience. And, clearly, finding a non Fox or sn95 Stang to measure/compare is *****ing impossible!
Even lowering the Stang 1/2" introduces more suspension issues.
For one, I like lowering the Stang 1"+. Nothing says "I'm *******ing intelligent as all **** about handling" when the roll center is below the ground, and the bump steer & camber change are massive.
Rant off.
BTW: Yes, I do have springs for a 95 Cobra R that "one day" will go on my Stang. They are at the limit for a street-able Stang. But, they are still considered "a little soft" for the hard-core handling group. But, then again, they also don't run an otherwise stock suspension setup. So, it's not a 100% valid comparison to say that the 95 Cobra R springs "should be a little stiffer". Ford did a lot of testing in doing the 95 Cobra R. The even adjusted sway bar rates and bushing densities. So, I very much doubt that something as simple and trivial and going to a stiffer spring rate would make much difference on the "stock" suspension configuration.
Forget to take your meds today?
You must be a psychological genius to have inferred all this crap from my one basic statement.
Ever think of asking a question before going nuts?
You act as if i suggesting getting a blow torch out and heating up the springs.
And since you are suspension guru following in the footsteps of ford's greatest engineers who accomplished the feat of engineering the 95 cobra R, you think a fox and the 95 cobra R are close enough in specs to use the springs on both cars? One of which has a 351?
I'd think with all your extensive knowledge you would know that the spring rates can't possibly be perfect for both cars.