I am looking into getting sportlines and D-specs for my cavalier. I am currently on H&R lowering springs. They're 1.6F and 1.4R drop. The sportlines and supposedly 1.7"F and 2.3"R drop. Here are a couple pics if these are good enough to work with. If not I can get better.
2009 Ford Mustang V6
Don't count on a lower ride with Sportlines. Either their impressive-sounding drop rating is exaggerated, or your springs have sagged. Maybe a bit of both. In any case, here's a side-by-side with my car on Sportlines. Keep in mind I have slightly undersized tires, but you get the idea. I'm sure you're already lower than me.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Monday, April 09, 2007 1:46 PM
Shop Manuals, Brochures:
www.kenmcgeeautobooks.com
Yeah thats strange then that i'm actually sitting lower than you are, Hmmmmmm I dunno maybe i'll just put the money into AGX struts and call it a day then.
2009 Ford Mustang V6
sorry to threadjack for a minute but geeky i am sick of seeing ur car on here, it looks too much like mine lol
2000 Redlined wrote:sorry to threadjack for a minute but geeky i am sick of seeing ur car on here, it looks too much like mine lol
It's cool I dont care lol. it's the image manip not overly important
2009 Ford Mustang V6
The01Cav wrote:Yeah thats strange then that i'm actually sitting lower than you are, Hmmmmmm I dunno maybe i'll just put the money into AGX struts and call it a day then.
Even given the extra thumbs-width of tire I should have (you can see it by comparing the gap and the front and back of the wheelwell), I tend to think your springs look lower than rated. I'm not even sure if I'd trust AGXs on those springs. If you want something to sit lower still, you're probably in coilover territory.
2000 Redlined wrote:sorry to threadjack for a minute but geeky i am sick of seeing ur car on here, it looks too much like mine lol
I guess you just need to post your car more often.
Seriously though -- if you're having trouble telling them apart, mine is the older car with bigger wheels, stock tails, worse paint, and no molding strips.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edited Monday, April 09, 2007 3:00 PM
Shop Manuals, Brochures:
www.kenmcgeeautobooks.com
Yeah I dunno we'll see. here are a couple pics of a car I know of on sportlines and d-specs
2009 Ford Mustang V6
2000 Redlined wrote:u forget to mention u have rear mud flaps lol
Not any more. My sig is out of date. Check the picture I used in the side-by-side comparison above.
Shop Manuals, Brochures:
www.kenmcgeeautobooks.com
Thanks man that looks hot for sure. It looks good slammed on those wheels!
2009 Ford Mustang V6
u guys gotta rember u both have the 2.2's so the front wont get drop as much as say a car with the LD9 or even the eco... heres my Z24 on sportlines
and d-specs...
thos were taken right after it got lowered so they havent fully settled yet...
----------
http://corpsemangler.fortunecity.com
^^^^^^ yeah I know what you mean man about the engine. How much weight difference is there between the LN2, the LD9, and the L61? Must be a a significant difference.
2009 Ford Mustang V6
well i kno the LD9 is the heaviest, then the Eco then the LN2... plus u have to rember my car does have the Z24 body kit which also helps making the car look lower.. once i mount my 17's ill take pics for you so you can see what it looks like... IMO if you did switch to the sportlines you would notice a difference mostly in the rear tho...
----------
http://corpsemangler.fortunecity.com
i say we/you turbo the 2200 man.
I'm sure at some point down the road the 2200 will recieve a turbo. Once I get some money together.
2009 Ford Mustang V6
