# Rear springs and shocks for 1969 GTO



## Grant1969 (Mar 15, 2014)

My back end is sitting pretty low and I was curious if anyone has suggestions on replacement rear springs and shocks to get the back end back up to the stock height?


----------



## rvp986 (Sep 19, 2012)

These are the original replacement dimensions for your springs, stock height and diameter. When they were new, they would measure...

Rear springs = approx .531" coil diameter and 13.1" free height.
Front springs = approx .625" coil diameter and 17.391 free height.

Been there, done that. I replaced all four springs on my '69 GTO and replaced the shocks at the same time. My car was a total frame-off with no bolt unturned, and in most cases, replaced. I purchased them from PST. They sell three different versions for the front and rear. Small block light duty for front and rear are $109 ea., Big block for front and rear $169 ea. and Heavy Duty for front & rear $169 ea. Website: Welcome - Performance Suspension Technology or just Welcome - Performance Suspension Technology or simply 800-247-2288. Granted, I'm not selling for PST or promoting their product, in any way. Just saying they were very helpful in advising me which ones I needed. These guys, including one of their techs (one in particular named "Mike R.") will bust their hump to get it right. (He's the one that gave me the dimensions). Guess people talk about a good experience.

After receiving the new springs, I sat them up against the old ones and I was really surprised to see the fronts had staged about 3-3.5 inches and the rears about 2-2.5 inches. Think they had seen their days. A lot, of the fix, truly (I believe) is in replacing the shocks. I replaced mine with the Bilstein shocks they also sell. They do give you $50 off a $500 purchase and likewise $100 off a $1,000 purchase. I know it's not much, but the shipping was free and the coupons did help. 

In conclusion... when you think about it... the 1969 is 45 years old. You do the math. Nothing lasts forever. And... by the way... you might want to replace the Rear Coil Spring Upper Isolators. They're now "Polygraphite" material. Helps to eliminates the squeaks and noises. At least check out your old ones. Mine were all weathered and cracked, again... after 45 years. 

Good Luck and Happy GTOing!


----------



## rvp986 (Sep 19, 2012)

Hey Grant1969... I told you wrong... those prices are per pair, not per spring. Wasn't thinking right, I guess. Sorry.


----------



## Matthew (Feb 11, 2011)

Grant, yes, replacing your rear coil springs and shocks will get you back to the original height. If you want a little more, you can get spacers that go under the coil springs. As RVP said, replace/install new insulators on top of the coil springs. If you want firmness, you can install drag bags. Matt


----------



## Grant1969 (Mar 15, 2014)

Thanks for the information. I have ordered new insulators , springs (Moog 5401) and shocks (Gabriel Ultra 69604). I think it will do the trick.


----------



## wishihaditback (Jun 9, 2011)

Anyone still out there monitoring this thread? Have a few Q's about lifting the rear on my '68.


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

wishihaditback said:


> Anyone still out there monitoring this thread? Have a few Q's about lifting the rear on my '68.


This has been covered a number of times in other threads. If you do a search using the search box in the right hand corner, you should find a lot of ideas on spring choices. You did not state how high you want to go? 

Many want a little lift and go with the station wagon springs. If you want a lot of lift, as I did with my '68 Lemans, I added a 3" lift spacer that goes under the spring and on top of the axle spring mount to get my car's rear up high for the wide tires that'll hang out the wheel wells, ala 1970's look. However, the problem will be a very undesirable angle on your upper and lower control arms which is not good as you may get limited travel, and even bottoming out & binding of the control arms, not to mention the dreaded wheel hop under hard acceleration.

Geometry has to be restored. I fabricated my own adjustable "no hop" bars which raises the height of the upper control arms, but I also fabricated my own upper control arms using aftermarket tubular pieces - using an aftermarket Ford 9" rear with GM brackets to bolt under my '68. 

This article will give you a lot of insight on the rear suspension IF you are looking to put the rear of your car up in the air: Drag Racing Traction: Rear Suspension: Coil Springs and Four-Link


----------



## wishihaditback (Jun 9, 2011)

Thanks for your reply. I'm sure it has been covered many times, and this thread was one of the many. I put new correct stock front and rear springs on and saw that i have the rear end droop that many speak of and some say that was how they sat when new. I'm looking for the best way to raise the rear to level it out (or a smidge higher) and again, i've seen choices ranging from air bags, station wagon springs, spring spacers to install under the existing coil and so on. What i haven't come across is anyone addressing the point of possibly having to use longer shocks or adding extensions. I've read adding air shocks actually puts more of the body weight on the shock perch instead of the coil spring fully doing it's job, and that damage can occur. I'm not looking to rod or drag race the car and would like some input on an economical way to level the goat.


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

You should not need shock extensions. Air shocks will put extra strain on the upper attachment at the frame IF you use the shocks to lift the car because you are taking the weight off the spring and transferring it to the shock and the attachment. I've never seen the frame area crack other than in photos and I have run air shocks, but not to excessively jack the car up - just a slight lift. If you run air shocks, it is best to have individual lines as opposed to the combined line which comes in a kit with the shocks. The shocks want to lift and if one side of the suspension is weaker than the other, the shocks will force the car to rise higher in favor of the stronger spring and lower at the weaker spring - it doesn't level the car side-to-side, only jacks it at the back. Learned that on my worn out Lemans as sometimes looking at the rear, it had a lean that was obvious. 

The difference in factory ride height, front to rear, is only slight. Looking at my '68 Service manual, the Tempest & Lemans models without HD suspension show a measured height from the bottom of the rocker panel to the ground (full fuel tank & specified tire pressure) as 9.5" front/9" rear. The GTO, listed as HD suspension is the same both front & rear at 10.5" Your '69 should be similar.

So, you should not have a drop that is that noticeable. Did you "clock" your front springs so the lower coil pigtail set into the pocket of the lower control arm? If not, this would affect the front ride height as it will raise it up some.

There are different front spring rates based on HD or not, the engine, and if A/C or not. A/C, or even the HD GTO springs ( as noted above) would raise the front and then if you got a "standard" rear spring, you would have a drop. Using the above, if you had HD springs up front (10.5") and "standard" rear springs (9"), you would have a 1.5" drop difference from front to rear right off the bat. If the front springs were not "clocked", you could have a 2" drop at the rear.

Aftermarket coils can also be the problem. Not all springs are created equal.

My first option for the fix, pull the springs at the rear and measure the free height. Then measure the diameter of the spring wire. Match this against the factory specs, both "standard" and "HD" springs. It could be the spring itself as there are so many versions and some generic makers will list one spring fits all, Chevy, Olds, Buick, & Pontiac A-Body. You want one specific to Pontiac.

If the spring meets "Pontiac specific" dimensions, you could either try another brand, or go with the station wagon springs. Several on the forums have used these and note the height increase, so you might be able to gauge this against your needs.


----------



## wishihaditback (Jun 9, 2011)

I purchased the springs in June 2015. I installed the rear with isolators and a shop installed the front when i had the front end suspension rebuilt. At the time i thought i'd done my due diligence in researching the correct part numbers and ordered the following: ACDelco 45H2019 for the rear and ACDelco 45H0163 for the front. The isolators i ordered for the front did not fit the perch and were not installed. I have a '68 non-ac 400 4 speed. If these are correct, i have at least a 2" difference, lower at the rear. So am i reading that if i use taller springs, there is no need to correct for the increased shock travel? Thanks again.


----------



## Pinion head (Jan 3, 2015)

wishihaditback said:


> I purchased the springs in June 2015. I installed the rear with isolators and a shop installed the front when i had the front end suspension rebuilt. At the time i thought i'd done my due diligence in researching the correct part numbers and ordered the following: ACDelco 45H2019 for the rear and ACDelco 45H0163 for the front. The isolators i ordered for the front did not fit the perch and were not installed. I have a '68 non-ac 400 4 speed. If these are correct, i have at least a 2" difference, lower at the rear. So am i reading that if i use taller springs, there is no need to correct for the increased shock travel? Thanks again.


what springs did you order?


----------



## wishihaditback (Jun 9, 2011)

I ordered the ones listed in my post.


----------

