Mercury Cougar Owners banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
292 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Not sure if this is the right forum, but while at Carlisle last weekend I noticed that a number of the 67 and 68 cats sat lower in the rear of the car... I've noticed this in advertisements from the era, but I wanted to ask you all.

If the correct springs and suspension are put in the car, does the 67 and 68 cougar sit lower in the rear and higher in the front?

And if so, what's the easiest way to even it out?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
Well, I'm sure there are others on the forum here who could explain why this is true, but I've had a few '67s and '68s. All of the '67s sat evenly front-to-rear, and the '68s sat a bit higher in the front, so they look more like they are "leaping" ahead. All cars had original stock springs, front and rear.
 

·
Contributing Member
Joined
·
1,881 Posts
Here is an alternative that may be worth looking into. http://www.activesuspension.com/


If they work for trucks they’ll work for cars as long as there is enough clearance.



<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" /><o:p></o:p>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,364 Posts
The stock stance was always a little nose high, at least for the '68's. You'll see it in the original brochures. I can't speak for the 67's since the one I have now is the first one I've owned. However, it did sit slightly nose-high until I had the 620 lowering springs installed. The Shelby drop would have had a similar effect.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,577 Posts
The old 67/68 "load in the pants" stance, huh? :buck:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
I prefer ready to pounce! ;-)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
413 Posts
I though you called that the "two bodies in the trunk" stance in New Jersey.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,577 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,044 Posts
with the wedge shape of the 67/68 cars , there is three horizonal lines on the side---top of the fender--the body line between the wheel wells and the rocker---ALL ARE DIFFERENT----it really helps the eye to get one of them level to the ground--if all threeare off your eyes get confused
doctordesoto
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
I lowered the front on mine. I actually will be cutting the coil springs a bit so I can get it to look like the cat is stalking its prey. Thats what I'm going for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
292 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I think the front should be slightly lower than the back, but that's just me. But I think it looks better. However, I just saw an ad surfing the web last night (I can't remember where, so if I find it again, I'll post it) of the '67 and the front end was definitely higher than the back end. I've also seen '68 pictures like this, as well as both '67s and '68s at car shows. So, in doing my restoration, if I use stock springs in front and back, will the car most likely be sitting in this nose-high position?

Like coug67, I'll have to cut the front springs to lower the front end if that's the case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Well here is my stance with stock leafs in the back and 1 inch drop coil springs in the front. they are grab a track got them from mustangs plus.
IMG_0179.jpg
It's still a bit high up front. Like you I want my front just a bit lower than the back. So with the 1 inch drop springs I will also have to cut them. Not much though. They were only 80 bucks so if i mess up it won't be too bad of a loss.
If you use stock springs you will definately be high up in front. Thats just they way they came I guess. And it probably won't ride well at all if you cut the stock springs to make it as low as you want. You want beefier coils designed to drop the front to start out with for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,126 Posts
My GT-E came HIGH in front, I didn't like it, personally I figured they didn't take the time to correct that, and I bet the engineers hid their faces when they saw it on the street too.

It bordered on a 4-wheel height look, IMO. It is rare that I see a 68 with a slight rake, MY CHOICE. Just look at ALL the clearance within the wheel well, it can't be they were concerned with BOTTOMING OUT, or WHEEL RUB.

Oh well, now that's its done, it is costly to lower it right.

Dale in Indy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
67-68's were a little high in the front, look much better when the top of the tire is just visible in the arch of the fender.
I have 620's cut 1/2 coil and Shelby drop
Rear, eliminated the rubber isolator and have 2" lowering blocks (Stock springs).

 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top