To lower or not to lower, that is the question

[For Your Pleasure]

I am new to owning a Stag but I am pleased to say that I am not new to owning classics having had many over the years, ranging from an Mark one Triumph 2.5 pi, Rover P5b, Rover P6b, two MGB V8's, Mark 2 Jaguar and may others together with a whole array of modern classics! I presently, obviously have the Stag and a modern car being an BMW M2. Anyway, after all that waffle, back to the title! I am on a refurbishment and enhancement mission and I have seen that slightly lowered springs are around with many dealers and my question is this, are these of any benefit or is it only aesthetic? I have had modern fast cars which derive a benefit from having lowered springs fitted and this certainly improves the handling but sometimes the ride is compromised and is often a bit "crashy". Let's be honest here, the Stag is not a sports car but more of a tourer and therefore the lowering springs offer nothing in that respect so my conclusion is that it must be for aesthetic purposes only?

I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has installed the lowered springs and glean their opinion as to the ride quality and indeed any negatives. Likewise I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has considered the option but then completely dismissed the idea? In addition to those changing the springs, have you also changed the shox from standard to another such as spax or whatever? Is the installation of replacement non standard shock absorbers of any benefit or is it generally considered that this is not necessary and in fact does it take away the whole originality?

Thanks for your opinions!

All the best

Terry

[Stagdad]

I expect a lot of the time new springs are fitted as part of a suspension rebuild so what could be thought of as the springs improveing handling might just be new bushes. Mine has slighly lowered springs but it also has a bmw rear subframe so not really a fair comparison from when i first had it which was a bit all over the place with the famous stag twitch etc.

[Neil in Deal]

Morning Terry,

My car is a '77 Mk2 which sits on standard springs, Spax adjustable shockers and is fully blue poly-bushed all round. (All fitted sometime between 2001-2008 when the car was restored - thank you to the previous owner !! )
The ride is good, not harsh or crashy over bumps. The car has covered less than 6,000 miles after all the work was done, so I think it safe to say the springs/shocks are still quite young. The Stag isn't meant to be an out-and-out sports car, and as such feels like one.

There are many owners who want a slightly sportier feel to their cars, so yes, lowered springs, Koni/Gaz shocks, bigger diameter wheels (15 or 16 inch) and wider section tyres are not uncommon.
I do agree that lowering, with bigger diameter wheels does tend to "fill" the wheel arches, and give the car a slightly more "purposeful" stance.

I think it's very much (as usual) a personal choice kind of thing - like "Fast Fords" and Minis - there are the purists, and there are the modifiers.

So, basically, your car, your choice!

Stay safe,

Neil.

[desmk11]

Hi Terry, I shall start before other more experienced owners come along. This is my own experience and opinions, nothing more.

Very nice car by the way Lovely colour .

Similar to you I have owned a couple of Triumph big saloons, I did put uprated adjustable rear shocks on them to improve handling and body roll but even back then I found each car to be almost individual.
What I mean is we don't actually know everything about each component purchased and fitted etc, by ourselves or previous owners.

I have restored much of my car myself and after test driving many many cars before purchasing this one I had considered doing some kind of suspension upgrade myself, I personally think slightly lowered Stags look really good, to the point where i think it actually suits them.

Upon completion of my car with 15inch alloy wheels but with standard suspension , springs, shocks, ride height etc I found it to be more than exceptable with no need for upgrade or improvement, the ride is comfortable and stable with excellent handling unlike others I had driven.
I think wheel size and width, tyres and tyre profile can make a difference too, just by putting a different set of wheels on can make quite a difference. That does not mean you have to put modern alloys on it, the original tyres I think were 80 profile, beautiful for comfort driving.

I am sure you will find a solution that you are happy with, there is so much experience and information on this forum.

Just one last thing from me, I also find it makes a difference what other vehicles we drive day to day, this can also alter our comparisons to what is a wonderful 50 year old grand tourer.

Saffron Stags are Beautiful
Des.

[Phil S]

I have had my stag for 3 years now, knowing it had several issues when I got it.
I put the car into faversham classics for a full suspension overhall and poly bush
on their advice standard springs and shocks were fitted.
just go with this would be my advice, it will happily run over speed bumps at 30 mph and the ride is better than my daily drive. I've just gone to 6x14 minilight copies
but you pay your money.......

[For Your Pleasure]

Hi Terry, I shall start before other more experienced owners come along. This is my own experience and opinions, nothing more.

Very nice car by the way Lovely colour .

Similar to you I have owned a couple of Triumph big saloons, I did put uprated adjustable rear shocks on them to improve handling and body roll but even back then I found each car to be almost individual.
What I mean is we don't actually know everything about each component purchased and fitted etc, by ourselves or previous owners.

I have restored much of my car myself and after test driving many many cars before purchasing this one I had considered doing some kind of suspension upgrade myself, I personally think slightly lowered Stags look really good, to the point where i think it actually suits them.

Upon completion of my car with 15inch alloy wheels but with standard suspension , springs, shocks, ride height etc I found it to be more than exceptable with no need for upgrade or improvement, the ride is comfortable and stable with excellent handling unlike others I had driven.
I think wheel size and width, tyres and tyre profile can make a difference too, just by putting a different set of wheels on can make quite a difference. That does not mean you have to put modern alloys on it, the original tyres I think were 80 profile, beautiful for comfort driving.

I am sure you will find a solution that you are happy with, there is so much experience and information on this forum.

Just one last thing from me, I also find it makes a difference what other vehicles we drive day to day, this can also alter our comparisons to what is a wonderful 50 year old grand tourer.

Saffron Stags are Beautiful
Des.

Des...…..how are you? Great to hear from you. I have cannibalised the interior that I purchased from you but some of it I'm afraid was beyond saving! Speak soon maybe?

All the best

Terry

PS yes I agree Saffron is the best colour...:-)

[For Your Pleasure]

I have had my stag for 3 years now, knowing it had several issues when I got it.
I put the car into faversham classics for a full suspension overhall and poly bush
on their advice standard springs and shocks were fitted.
just go with this would be my advice, it will happily run over speed bumps at 30 mph and the ride is better than my daily drive. I've just gone to 6x14 minilight copies
but you pay your money.......

Thank you Phil. I am sticking with the original steel wheels whcih have been powder coated and also the same size tyres that it came out of the factory with, being Michelin MXV-P 185 HR14's.I want it to look fairly stock to be perfectly candid. I am inclined to have the springs and shockers replaced with originals but have the suspension rubbers replaced with poly's.

[mole42]

I have standard ride height springs, although the rears are much stiffer than standard (new ones for a late model 2500 estate, I believe) and the dampers are all Gaz adjustables. Wheels are standard steel ones, tyres I run 175/80 and much of the car is polybushed. I feel the handling and ride are pretty good, in fact, I've said many times that I haven't found a car I would rather drive.
However, I drive about 10,000 miles a year and do quite a few historic rallies and extended continental tours, so my use is not typical for a Stag owner!

[mjheathcote]

I fitted leda lowering springs and adjustable koni dampers, albeit over 25 years ago.
The springs are one and a half inches lower, the rears standard rate and the front slightly stiffer.
The rears from memory are 400 ftlb as standard, no way do they need to be stiffer!
The front I got made something like 160 ftlb, which was again from memory, something like 30% stiffer.
I've been happy, and it doesn't look lowered to be honest, more that Stags with new standard springs look like a 4x4!

[022Dave]

My suspension was lowered 1 1/2 inches by Tony Hart some 20-odd years ago, along with poly suspension bushes. This greatly improved handling, but I see that he now does variable rate springs, which I'm sure would give even better handling. I too feel the car looks better slightly lowered, but as others have said, it's down to individual taste.

Dave

[flying farmer]

I have the lowered progressive rate springs fitted to both my Stags. The first set for my MK2 came from Tony Hart with the camber correction brackets, the second set came from Chris Witor without the brackets and were a fair bit cheaper. I was able to use the left over brackets from my MK2 conversion to correct the camber on my MK1

My first conversion (the mk2) still has its original front and rear shocks which I feel are slightly under damped under certain driving conditions. When I converted my Mk1 Stag I went for KYB non adjustable shocks (from James Paddock), front and rear as the originals were knackered. These are cheaper than adjustables but strike a very good balance between ride quality and performance and I will be using these again when my mk2 needs new shocks.

I found the transformation from standard springs on my MK2 to the lowered progressive rate ones was amazing but the car did sit rather high to begin with and as I didn't actually measure the ride height I don't know if it was standard but it wobbled like a jelly.

When I rebuilt my MK1 I fitted a full set of poly bushes, the progressive springs and the KYB shocks and it drives so much better than the MK2 I will be finishing the MK2 to the same specification when it gets to the top of the project pile!

I recently had a front spring snap on my PI estate so I replaced the front springs with the progressive rate ones on that too with good results

I was so impressed with the progressive rate springs I was able to obtain a specially made set for my TR5 which was running on tooth rattling uprated springs previously, and is now a much more pleasant car to drive
Neil

[DZP]

I have now completed my Mk1 suspension upgrade with standard height progressive rate springs, poly-bushed, all-round.
My car is sitting higher than standard height at the moment, but I am expecting it to "sit-down" once it gets on-the-road.
Contrary to most views, I prefer a higher stance and I like the rear to sit slightly higher than the front, although I do realize this is not the optimum setting for best handling, just my personal preference.

[maverick]

I have the lowered progressive rate springs fitted to both my Stags. The first set for my MK2 came from Tony Hart with the camber correction brackets, the second set came from Chris Witor without the brackets and were a fair bit cheaper. I was able to use the left over brackets from my MK2 conversion to correct the camber on my MK1

My first conversion (the mk2) still has its original front and rear shocks which I feel are slightly under damped under certain driving conditions. When I converted my Mk1 Stag I went for KYB non adjustable shocks (from James Paddock), front and rear as the originals were knackered. These are cheaper than adjustables but strike a very good balance between ride quality and performance and I will be using these again when my mk2 needs new shocks.

I found the transformation from standard springs on my MK2 to the lowered progressive rate ones was amazing but the car did sit rather high to begin with and as I didn't actually measure the ride height I don't know if it was standard but it wobbled like a jelly.

When I rebuilt my MK1 I fitted a full set of poly bushes, the progressive springs and the KYB shocks and it drives so much better than the MK2 I will be finishing the MK2 to the same specification when it gets to the top of the project pile!

I recently had a front spring snap on my PI estate so I replaced the front springs with the progressive rate ones on that too with good results

I was so impressed with the progressive rate springs I was able to obtain a specially made set for my TR5 which was running on tooth rattling uprated springs previously, and is now a much more pleasant car to drive
Neil

Hi Neil,
Sorry for being a bit thick here but what does progressive mean in this context ,...……...is progressive another term for lowered,

Thanks Mark

[flying farmer]

Progressive rate means they are wound so the spring rate rises the more they are compressed.
Not quite sure what the standard rate is for the Stag, but Chris Witor does "cruise" springs for the Stag that are rated at 175lb/in so I suspect they are close to standard rate.
175lb/in means that for every 175 lb applied to the spring it will compress 1", therefore 350lb would compress it 2" etc

Ride height is totally separate from spring rate, that depends on the free length of the spring less however far it compresses due to the static load imposed upon it

The progressive rate springs are rated 205/400, therefore the first inch will only take 205lb, but as they get to full travel it will take 400lb/in to compress them.

I note the uprated rear springs are quoted at 475lb/in against 395lb/in standard but these are not progressive so are a straight 20% increase in spring rate.

I suspect that at normal ride height the progressive front springs are probably close to 20% uprated, but as you throw the car into a corner the increase in compression ups the spring rate considerably which tends to resist body roll.

Although the rear springs are much higher rated than the fronts, they are operating part way down the trailing arm and they need to be stiffer due to the effect of leverage. The travel of the front springs is directly proportional to wheel travel as they are mounted on the strut.

Wishbone suspension as on the front of my TR also requires much stronger springs due to the leverage effect, the ones on my TR are 350/700 on the front which is close to standard at the beginning of travel and double at full compression.

One factor that must not be overlooked is the shock absorber. Reduced suspension travel due to stiffer springs needs stiffer shocks to compensate, but over doing it leads to a rapid deterioration in ride quality, so a balance has to be struck, basically the least stiffness possible while preventing the suspension bouncing under certain road surface conditions is what we are looking for.

Neil

[maverick]

Progressive rate means they are wound so the spring rate rises the more they are compressed.
Not quite sure what the standard rate is for the Stag, but Chris Witor does "cruise" springs for the Stag that are rated at 175lb/in so I suspect they are close to standard rate.
175lb/in means that for every 175 lb applied to the spring it will compress 1", therefore 350lb would compress it 2" etc

Ride height is totally separate from spring rate, that depends on the free length of the spring less however far it compresses due to the static load imposed upon it

The progressive rate springs are rated 205/400, therefore the first inch will only take 205lb, but as they get to full travel it will take 400lb/in to compress them.

I note the uprated rear springs are quoted at 475lb/in against 395lb/in standard but these are not progressive so are a straight 20% increase in spring rate.

I suspect that at normal ride height the progressive front springs are probably close to 20% uprated, but as you throw the car into a corner the increase in compression ups the spring rate considerably which tends to resist body roll.

Although the rear springs are much higher rated than the fronts, they are operating part way down the trailing arm and they need to be stiffer due to the effect of leverage. The travel of the front springs is directly proportional to wheel travel as they are mounted on the strut.

Wishbone suspension as on the front of my TR also requires much stronger springs due to the leverage effect, the ones on my TR are 350/700 on the front which is close to standard at the beginning of travel and double at full compression.

One factor that must not be overlooked is the shock absorber. Reduced suspension travel due to stiffer springs needs stiffer shocks to compensate, but over doing it leads to a rapid deterioration in ride quality, so a balance has to be struck, basically the least stiffness possible while preventing the suspension bouncing under certain road surface conditions is what we are looking for.

Neil

Neil,
Wow Im no so glad I asked,there is a lot more to this than I thought,i have considered lowering my car which is why I asked the question ,and understand the benefits of lower centre of gravity and reduced body roll etc,but definitely don't want a harsh ride.
As you say a balance has to be struck,and I don't want to make an expensive purchasing mistake by buying the wrong kit.My existing set up standard springs front and rear, is poly bushed and KYB no adjust shocks which I have been pleased with.
I am going to do some research on this subject now in particular the spring rates etc,

As always I am grateful for your detailed answer,thank you for taking the time for your comprehensive reply
Kind Regards Mark

P.S At least isolation form the cows is not reqd