Thanks for the reply. A known issue with "lower" on longer wheelbase vehicles is driving on non-flat roads. Roads with concrete approaches that are nor nearly flat and have "peaks" at the top. NOT to forget the longer rear body section! Which can scrape bumpers even with stock ride height and a load in the trunk. What might look cool is not so cool to deal with when driving. Especially for the OTHERS behind you as THEY have to slow down while you do your self-inflicted pain of navigating these non-flat areas. One night I almost got rear-ended by a pickup truck as I nailed the brakes to slow down for a lowered vehicle at some railroad tracks. As the people in the car in front of me (yes, I was following at a good distance and at the speed limit) creeped across the tracks in their bliss.
Good handling is more related to front suspension geometry than springing methods. The Chrysler front end geometry ALREADY has the outside wheel in negative camber in turns . . . 50 years BEFORE others realized its benefits. Others are using high-caster front control arms to get that now, except more of it. Only thing is that with the wider tires, higher caster can put more on the edges of the tread than the whole tread surface . . . unless the car leans in the turns.
R & P steering is NOT the panacea some perceive it to be. It IS self-contained more than the earlier systems were, but "slack" can be decreased in the older systems with just a few parts changes. Those changes will also put more of the road into the steering wheel in noises and non-luxurious vibrations. Yet, the stock gear can be rebuilt with faster ratios and such.
One reason many perceive tha R & P steering is quicker and more accurate is that it saw its first use on fwd cars, in the USA. FWD needs a stiffer front body structure, which decreases "flex", so the steering system can do its job just a bit quicker, as a result. With all of the "intermediate shafts" and other tight bends that are made on the way to the R & P gearbox, not the best situation at all. The MAIN thing is that those vehicles are "rear steer", which makes the Ackerman angles better in turning. Front steer cars did not have this benefit. Used to be that the only rear-steer cars were Chrysler products and Corvettes (in the '60s and later, until fwd came around). Is there a message there? SO, adding R & P steering will NOT add a lot of benefits to a Chrysler suspension.
Many people complain about "torsion bars" in the fitmnet of headers. As if the bars prevent them from having better products. YET, in fitting headers to ANY GM car back then, more comments about having to "dent and re-form" header tubes to clear suspension (coil spring) and frame components) happened with EACH installation.
I'll tell you that ANY torsion bar suspension will ride better than any "coil-over" suspension. The newer vehicles with the c-o suspensions also have stiffer body structures, which are also Unit Body construction, plus a ton of more sound insulation in them. Better-insulate any older car against road noise and such and they will seem to "ride good", too.
What you seek to do to "upgrade" on your Chrysler product is already included in the basic engineering, no matter your fab skills. Tweak them in some cases, but not delete them all together for little real gain.
I'm NOT against improvements that are REAL improvements, but to "broad brush paint" a Chrysler product as if it was a "normal car" (using GM and Ford as the points of reference) is flawed from the beginning. Rather than seek to "cut and hack", FIRST learn and analyze WHY Chrysler products are what the were back then. Study the camber gain of the front suspension system (there's a MasterTech course on that, which is where I learned of it, back in the late 1960s), for example, without the need of higher caster angles. Chrysler power steering gears might not have the rebuild flexibility of a similar GM Saginaw gear, but they CAN be rebuilt to different levels of firmness and possibly with a faster gear ratio. There are also the Borgeson units, too.
IF you want to lower the car an inch, use shorter and wider tires to do it. Not specifically with suspension modifications/replacements. Add some stiffer bushings to the rear shackles, too! Easier to get taller tires after putting up with a space beneath the car being less that it needs to be. Remember, too, that most of the C-bodies only had 5.5"-6" ground clearance anyway. Certainly, you could put some different mufflers under the car or even move them to beside the gas tank, which might help some, but not much. There's a reason you see more GM cars from the 1960s with hydraulics and air bags on them . . . they are MORE adaptable to them as the cars started with coil spring suspensions and have a full frame.
In an earlier iteration of "C Body Forums" , in here or elsewhere, a guy put a 4-link rear suspension under a '66 Newport 2-dr hardtop. It was very easy to do. Got it to a lower ride height in the process. He added a Panhard bar to the back, as necessary to keep the rear axle located laterally. Coil-overs went into the normal shock absorber location. Adjusted the rorsion bars down so it was level again. Re-aligned the front suspension. DONE.
Want to go corner-carving? Going to need larger front sway bar and add a rear one. No way around that. I'm not "in love" with the current front aftermarket bar arrangements, but the mounting can possibly be improved on somewhat. Stiffer bushings and physically larger bars in the current location, to me. ADDCO used to sell aftermarket rear bars.
Better start looking around at brake system upgrades, too! Other than a dual master cylinder system, 4-whl power disc brakes will be needed. Kits are out there, some which pre-date the Wilwood kits. Possibly more robust in nature than the Wilwood system, too?
Gen III engines? No problem. Adding a 8-spd ZF TF? Controllers are more available. Was a somewhat recent thread in here on doing that in a '66 Newport 4-dr sedan. BUT, considering the negative things I've been seeing online about Gen III Hemis, might it not be better to start with an aluminum RB block, aluminum heads, etc. to build a lighter-weight 440 engine. Fully modernized with EFI and ignition control. Or if you car now has a LA motor, do an aluminum block LA stroker!
In other words, the "car" can be an open pallet to build from, just NOT the pallet you perceived it to be.
Respectfully,
CBODY67