Hack
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2014
- Threads
- 83
- Messages
- 12,318
- Reaction score
- 7,487
- Location
- Minneapolis
- Vehicle(s)
- Mustang, Camaro
If the tight coils are completely compressed and bottomed out on each other when the springs are in the car and the suspension is at full droop, then the rate would be linear. Also, if the tight coils are never completely bottomed out on each other when the springs are in the car, the rate would also be linear (but a combination of the rates produced by the two different areas of the spring). I would expect the latter case is more likely.To have increased flex rate.. The FP spring coils at the top are almost collapsed jacked up in my pic so they are compressed when the car is on the ground. The rest of the coils are the actions coils so if you hit a large dip or bump the compressed ones are there to push the wheel down to make sure it stays in contact with the road. The stock springs have just an extra coil at the bottom because of the deep pocket of the control arm. Effectively they are doing the same thing and making sure the spring doesn't fall out at full extension of the suspension. The stock is doing in a way that the car rides better by the way the coils are packed. And the FP are doing it in a way to provide traction rather than comfort. Both are ride control but for different reasons.
[MENTION=12069]Hack[/MENTION] The design looks similar to a progressive spring however ford advertised this as a linear spring. So think more of an offroad to spring keep the wheel down (dual action spring) rather than a progressive spring which is variable rate. The coils are the same size just tightly packed so they are the same rate. They are packed and compressed at ride height and during normal driving so they have no effective rate until they are decompressed.
If the tight coils bottomed out onto each other somewhere during the wheel travel, then the spring rate would be progressive.
Sponsored