xxcarguy
Well-Known Member
So does anybody know if they made rear leaf spring shackles in a longer length?
Rear leaf spring shackles
- Thread starter xxcarguy
- Start date
The Goose
Senior Member
LoL the 1970’s are calling. That was the way a lot of my buddies jacked up their cars back in the day. Air shocks and big ol shackles. I don’t know where you’d find those now. A shop like Dunbar spring in Arizona might know. I last went there in ‘90 or so for 8&3/4 U bolts - they know what they’re doing, been around for ages. Old school.
I’m assuming this is for a nonstock modification. No idea what the factory did as far as tow options,cop cars, taxis etc.
dunbarspring.com
I’m assuming this is for a nonstock modification. No idea what the factory did as far as tow options,cop cars, taxis etc.
dunbarspring.com
Last edited:
The FEW Mopars I saw locally that put long shackles on the back did NOT make much difference in the ride height, by themselves. Which is where the air shocks came in.
As the Chrysler leaf springs are assymetrically mounted, shorter section to the front, longer section to the rear, those longer shackles, by themselves only served to put more reverse arch in the main leaf of the spring, with not a lot of rise in the rear for the work involved. By comparison, other GM and Ford vehicles with more centered rear axle mounting on the leaf springs DID get more rise with just the longer shackles.
The reason, if I might inquire, as to the perceived need for the longer shackles?
Thanks,
CBODY67
As the Chrysler leaf springs are assymetrically mounted, shorter section to the front, longer section to the rear, those longer shackles, by themselves only served to put more reverse arch in the main leaf of the spring, with not a lot of rise in the rear for the work involved. By comparison, other GM and Ford vehicles with more centered rear axle mounting on the leaf springs DID get more rise with just the longer shackles.
The reason, if I might inquire, as to the perceived need for the longer shackles?
Thanks,
CBODY67
xxcarguy
Well-Known Member
I would like to raise it about 2 inches.
I have air shocks on it now and hate the ride.
I loved the stock style shocks and ride, bounce and all.
I read some of the threads here about re-arching
and then flattening our not long after.
Not a lot of people happy with the new one available.
I have air shocks on it now and hate the ride.
I loved the stock style shocks and ride, bounce and all.
I read some of the threads here about re-arching
and then flattening our not long after.
Not a lot of people happy with the new one available.
Thanks for the information.
From my experiences, the air shocks, even with 60psi in them to compensate for sagged rear springs on my '70 Monaco, did not affect the ride as most of the air shocks had the larger pistons of the factory HD shocks anyway. But with more pressure, things might get a little stiffer, BUT still should not really adversely affect the ride per se. Except that the "rise" might well make the front end's effective caster way out of whack, which might affect highway stability, possibly.
If your desires might revolve around larger rear tires, that extra bit of rubber might look good, but in reality, might not be worth the added expense to make them happen, I suspect. Plus any added stresses their possibly greater traction (upon acceleration) would pout on the driveshaft assy. As in u-joints which might be close to needing replacement anyway. But that's just me AND some might have other orientations.
To me, Chrysler vehicles, or any vehicle for that matter, is best at factory ride height, or possibly 1" either way. This way, there's still enough wheel travel to handle bumps/dips and not cause other issues. Even at factory ride height, the factory dual pipes on the Monaco could drag going into some places, so extra care was necessary in doing the approach to those places. Chrysler C-bodies tend to have longer rear overhangs than other vehicles do, by observation.
ONE other thing about the longer shackles, seems like on the Chrysler versions, they needed a bolt-in-tube about middle way down, for added strength for side/cornering loads, to keep things parallel in these situations?
Your money. Your dreams and desires.
Enjoy!
CBODY67
From my experiences, the air shocks, even with 60psi in them to compensate for sagged rear springs on my '70 Monaco, did not affect the ride as most of the air shocks had the larger pistons of the factory HD shocks anyway. But with more pressure, things might get a little stiffer, BUT still should not really adversely affect the ride per se. Except that the "rise" might well make the front end's effective caster way out of whack, which might affect highway stability, possibly.
If your desires might revolve around larger rear tires, that extra bit of rubber might look good, but in reality, might not be worth the added expense to make them happen, I suspect. Plus any added stresses their possibly greater traction (upon acceleration) would pout on the driveshaft assy. As in u-joints which might be close to needing replacement anyway. But that's just me AND some might have other orientations.
To me, Chrysler vehicles, or any vehicle for that matter, is best at factory ride height, or possibly 1" either way. This way, there's still enough wheel travel to handle bumps/dips and not cause other issues. Even at factory ride height, the factory dual pipes on the Monaco could drag going into some places, so extra care was necessary in doing the approach to those places. Chrysler C-bodies tend to have longer rear overhangs than other vehicles do, by observation.
ONE other thing about the longer shackles, seems like on the Chrysler versions, they needed a bolt-in-tube about middle way down, for added strength for side/cornering loads, to keep things parallel in these situations?
Your money. Your dreams and desires.
Enjoy!
CBODY67
stubs300
Senior Member
I get the impression that you want to create a new problem to fix a already old problem of weak springs, why don't you just get new springs and be done with it! Why make your life harder and more expensive then it already is?
New springs and hardware is less than 500 shipped.
Best thing you will do to your car...
Don't wait!
Best thing you will do to your car...
Don't wait!
^This^ and from these guys: Buy Quality Automotive Leaf Springs, Coil Springs and Suspension Parts for your Classic or Antique Auto
Whenever I hear "long shackles" I think of this:
Website suggestions forum? Isn't this about suspension? Contact Espo Springs and Things and they can fix you up. Don't bandaid the problem with overload shocks and shackles. Fix it once, fix it right!
Last edited:
4spd300J
Member
Over the years, I've parted out several sixties and seventies B and C body cars. Most that had the longer rear shackles and air shocks also had issues with the front lower control arm mounting. The control arm pins would work loose in the k-frame sockets, it usually bent the pins and the sockets would be severely egg-shaped. I would recommend new springs.
xxcarguy
Well-Known Member
I would like new springs but a few members didn’t really like the ones available.
Who has them?
Is it springs and things?
Has anyone bought them from these folks?
Who has them?
Is it springs and things?
Has anyone bought them from these folks?
xxcarguy
Well-Known Member
I would like it to be the stock height and kind of soft.
xxcarguy
Well-Known Member
This is with the air shocks.
It just bangs over bumps
It just bangs over bumps
xxcarguy
Well-Known Member
Don’t want to increase tire size, just want it to ride like the big heavy car that it is.
xxcarguy
Well-Known Member
Hahaha
No.
xxcarguy
Well-Known Member
So do I go stock?
Go 1 inch raised?
So we can put another couple in the back without dragging bumper or tail pipes.
Suggestions please.
Go 1 inch raised?
So we can put another couple in the back without dragging bumper or tail pipes.
Suggestions please.
1" over. They will settle slightly over the next 5 years or so.
Similar threads
