Dedicated to the Promotion and Preservation of American Muscle Cars, Dealer built Supercars and COPO cars. |
|
|||||||
| Register | Album Gallery | Thread Gallery | FAQ | Community | Calendar | Become a Paid Member | Today's Posts | Search |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
03-29-2013, 11:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Is "stance" important?
I posted a few pages back the L72 1968 SS427 Impala I had back in 1973. That stance was a little high in the rear whereas my 67 "Canadian Gold" SS 427 that I sold two years ago sat a tad bit lower in the rear versus the front, even with the F41 suspension. God, I loved this car too. What a pleasure cruising at 80 with 390+ horses up front, a T400 in the middle and factory 2:73 gears bringing up the rear....... Have a great Easter my fellow muscle car comrades.
__________________
Jersey Jeff 69 Day-2 L89 T400 BX 2015 ZL-1 Auto 98 Surburban 
|
|
#4
03-29-2013, 01:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is "stance" important?
Juan:
Very cool. Especially the one next to Dick Landy's car. Noticed the front appears a bit lower on your car in pic one vs pic 3. That is one thing I always envied about the mopars. You want to change the front height a bit, just turn the old torsion bar adjusters. Was also very convenient back when I did alignment work in the 70's to get the trim height perfect from side to side.
__________________
Don't believe everything you read on the internet ... Ben Franklin
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
