I just installed Mach 1 springs

Discussion in 'SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech' started by vrpirata, Nov 3, 2003.


  1. vrpirata

    vrpirata Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    I did it during the weekend, I got the springs from a guy that took them off from his Mach 1, side by side they are actually shorter than the factory GT ones, before I did it I check how low the car was and I wrote down the numbers in a piece of paper, then after the change I measure it again and my surprice was that the drop was basically zero :shrug:

    When I was doing the spring change I was also going to install the Tokico struts/shocks from the Mach 1 (yes they have the tokico label on them), but when I took the GT ones off I notice that they were as hard to compress as the tokico from the Mach 1, so I decided to reinstall the stock struts/shocks, at least this way I'll have the tokico ready when the stock ones goes bad.

    So what is the parameter that tells the difference between struts/shocks, I know the stock struts are "32 mm piston, valve shocks" and the rear are "30 mm piston", versus the tokico "35 mm piston" for the front and "30 mm piston" for the rear, is that a good parameter for comparison?, does it means that the stock ones perform similar than the tokico?, I believe the tokico are should be better quality anyways.

    For the rear swaybar, the tickness is the same between the GT swaybar and the Mach 1, however few websites claim that the rear GT swaybar is tubular and the Mach 1 is solid, I went to check to the Ford dealer and the computer showed the same swaybars for both GT and Mach 1 :shrug: , so I'm keeping the one I already have I guess.
     
    #1
  2. mrvax

    mrvax Stay thirsty my friends Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 1999
    Messages:
    6,083
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    79
    Location:
    SN Moderator: Orlando, Fl.
    We learn something new each day.
     
    #2
  3. blkgt714

    blkgt714 New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Messages:
    143
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    LA/Orange County
    Damn, your post is an overview on how Stangnet has become.. Even the mods are sarcastic and won't miss a chance to try to make someone look like an idiot.. Save it.

    I don't care what anyone says.. The Mach does not have a noticeable lowered stance, especially the front. Just as high as my 02 GT was pre steeda springs. I think the back sits slightly lower. Ford should have lowered it to at least bullitt levels, but probably were afraid of too many scuffs on that all so important piece of plastic on the bottom of the bumper...
     
    #3
  4. ttown

    ttown Founding Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2002
    Messages:
    819
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    #4
  5. kennym01

    kennym01 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think the mach 1 springs drop is much more than 3/4" compared to gt's. I put the eibach pro kit springs on my gt and I've had my car sitting next to the mach 1 and my stance is noticeably lower. I did have to replace my stock shocks. They weren't valved right for the new springs. I went with mach 1 tokicos and I am very happy with the results.
     
    #5
  6. 351CJ

    351CJ New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,769
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There are some errors in that chart.
     
    #6
  7. Wills Black 98

    Wills Black 98 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2002
    Messages:
    2,457
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Western North Carolina
    how can you detect sarcasm on the internet through someones typing? you cant... He wasent be sarcastic at all... just my .02
     
    #7

Share This Page