69/70 Rear Leaf Springs

[69 GT350 Vert]

I found this information in a General Spring application chart.  It shows the aftermarket part number of 42-503 as the correct spring for a 69 Shelby.
I don't know if this information is accurate or not.

[Bob Gaines]

Would Eaton have the specifications for these springs?

A few years back when I discussed it with them they argued that they did not exist.    I even sent them a photo but no comment. I guess the know it all I was corresponding with did not want to admit he might not know it all.  FYI although they do have Ford engineering drawings from Ford they are NOT the same EATON that made springs for Ford like they sometimes lead people to believe. That Eaton is or was part of a huge industrial conglomerate.  They are a different company that happens by coincidence or design to have the same name.

[Bob Gaines]

I found this information in a General Spring application chart.  It shows the aftermarket part number of 42-503 as the correct spring for a 69 Shelby.
I don't know if this information is accurate or not.

That would be a replacement substitute no better then the universal replacement that Ford sold for decades to fit just about all Mustangs 65-70. I have bought ones from Virginia Classic Mustang that look the same but are a little less then Eaton plus Brant is a forum contributor. Basically you get a generic replacement regardless of who you buy from.  Eaton covers their springs in a thick black paint which for a driver is fine because they will be well protected from the elements but get ready for a major amount of work trying to get all that paint off if trying to make them look close to original. Virginia's still have paint but not near as thick.   Regardless of where you get a replacement the leaf's will not all be the proper length and the bottom leaf will look different . At least compared to a assemblyline leaf .

[J_Speegle]

Would Eaton have the specifications for these springs?

Not sure that they were even the supplier of the single leaf - early or later versions

[Bob Gaines]

Would Eaton have the specifications for these springs?

Not sure that they were even the supplier of the single leaf - early or later versions

Jeff the aftermarket spring Eaton is NOT the OEM and not the same EATON that made springs for Ford like they sometimes lead people to believe. That Eaton is or was part of a huge industrial conglomerate that is no more.  The after market Eaton currently selling replacement springs are a different company that happens by coincidence or design to have the same name.

[J_Speegle]

Jeff the aftermarket spring Eaton is NOT the OEM and not the same EATON that made springs for Ford like they sometimes lead people to believe. That Eaton is or was part of a huge industrial conglomerate that is no more.  The after market Eaton currently selling replacement springs are a different company that happens by coincidence or design to have the same name.

Understood that    Just a comment about if they were originally

[TA Coupe]

all fords received different springs. it depended on options such as auto/stick, type of suspension, ac or no ac, ht or convert etc. it had to do with weight distribution as much as handeling. if you can find an original (not updated) ford mpc, you can see all the different combos, weights, color stripes and so on.
phred

One of the Boss members had a digital copy of the original MPC made if anyone is interested?

        Roy

[J_Speegle]

One of the Boss members had a digital copy of the original MPC made if anyone is interested?

        Roy

One of the 69 printings

[Royce Peterson]

Would Eaton have the specifications for these springs?

If that were the case I bet the results would not be even similar to the specifications. My experiences with that supplier have been nothing short of dreadful. They are not an original supplier and if they do own any specifications they sure do not know how to use them.

[TA Coupe]

One of the Boss members had a digital copy of the original MPC made if anyone is interested?

        Roy

One of the 69 printings

Link to the post about the MPC that I was referring to which you were part of.
It covered up to 1970 if I remember correctly.

https://www.boss302.com/smf/index.php?topic=86274.0

        Roy

[J_Speegle]

Link to the post about the MPC that I was referring to which you were part of.
It covered up to 1970 if I remember correctly.

https://www.boss302.com/smf/index.php?topic=86274.0

        Roy

Seems to be a mix of two printings but yes covers all or some of 70 depending.
Illustrations is an Aug 70 printing where the text section is an Oct 69 printing .

Good to have compared to the last printing IMHO

[69 GT350 Vert]

I found this information in a General Spring application chart.  It shows the aftermarket part number of 42-503 as the correct spring for a 69 Shelby.
I don't know if this information is accurate or not.

That would be a replacement substitute no better then the universal replacement that Ford sold for decades to fit just about all Mustangs 65-70. I have bought ones from Virginia Classic Mustang that look the same but are a little less then Eaton plus Brant is a forum contributor. Basically you get a generic replacement regardless of who you buy from.  Eaton covers their springs in a thick black paint which for a driver is fine because they will be well protected from the elements but get ready for a major amount of work trying to get all that paint off if trying to make them look close to original. Virginia's still have paint but not near as thick.   Regardless of where you get a replacement the leaf's will not all be the proper length and the bottom leaf will look different . At least compared to a assemblyline leaf .

Based on info in an older thread, the VA Mustang leaf spring is industry replacement number 42-437, which has free arch of 6.25 inches.  The 42-503 spring listed by General Spring for the 69 Shelby has free arch of 3.75 inches, which would provide a lower ride height.  It is likely the spring rates are also different.  Fortunately, my early original leaf springs stamped 5RS68 are not sagging.  However, the original front and rear bushings are cracked.  I should pull them off and change them, but the car rides nice as is so I haven't messed with them. 

[shelbymann1970]

I found this information in a General Spring application chart.  It shows the aftermarket part number of 42-503 as the correct spring for a 69 Shelby.
I don't know if this information is accurate or not.

That would be a replacement substitute no better then the universal replacement that Ford sold for decades to fit just about all Mustangs 65-70. I have bought ones from Virginia Classic Mustang that look the same but are a little less then Eaton plus Brant is a forum contributor. Basically you get a generic replacement regardless of who you buy from.  Eaton covers their springs in a thick black paint which for a driver is fine because they will be well protected from the elements but get ready for a major amount of work trying to get all that paint off if trying to make them look close to original. Virginia's still have paint but not near as thick.   Regardless of where you get a replacement the leaf's will not all be the proper length and the bottom leaf will look different . At least compared to a assemblyline leaf .

I bought my Eaton springs from NPD in the late 90s. I thought they were dark and covered with cosmoline. When the car was done it matched the height in my manuals for the comp suspension. I had an issue with my "great Mi" roads even back in the early 2000s of hitting bumps or pot holes and one of my rear 245-60s hitting the wheel lip. I took my springs off and took them to the Eaton small plant in Detroit(across from the old Tiger Stadium on Mich ave for locals) one morning. I drove around Detroit while they re-arced them. I wanted a 1/2 inch higher. I got 3/8-7/16 close enough. I like my ride height now. Now ironically while changing out a sending unit yesterday on my Vert I was looking at my springs and they do not have a heavy coat of black paint on then. Might be a newer thing now? I'll investigate further today  as my car is still high on jack stands. I eventually want to put my originals back on or use the lower leaf. in the pic below I have my original front coil springs on the car also.

[Bob Gaines]

I found this information in a General Spring application chart.  It shows the aftermarket part number of 42-503 as the correct spring for a 69 Shelby.
I don't know if this information is accurate or not.

That would be a replacement substitute no better then the universal replacement that Ford sold for decades to fit just about all Mustangs 65-70. I have bought ones from Virginia Classic Mustang that look the same but are a little less then Eaton plus Brant is a forum contributor. Basically you get a generic replacement regardless of who you buy from.  Eaton covers their springs in a thick black paint which for a driver is fine because they will be well protected from the elements but get ready for a major amount of work trying to get all that paint off if trying to make them look close to original. Virginia's still have paint but not near as thick.   Regardless of where you get a replacement the leaf's will not all be the proper length and the bottom leaf will look different . At least compared to a assemblyline leaf .

I bought my Eaton springs from NPD in the late 90s. I thought they were dark and covered with cosmoline. When the car was done it matched the height in my manuals for the comp suspension. I had an issue with my "great Mi" roads even back in the early 2000s of hitting bumps or pot holes and one of my rear 245-60s hitting the wheel lip. I took my springs off and took them to the Eaton small plant in Detroit(across from the old Tiger Stadium on Mich ave for locals) one morning. I drove around Detroit while they re-arced them. I wanted a 1/2 inch higher. I got 3/8-7/16 close enough. I like my ride height now. Now ironically while changing out a sending unit yesterday on my Vert I was looking at my springs and they do not have a heavy coat of black paint on then. Might be a newer thing now? I'll investigate further today  as my car is still high on jack stands. I eventually want to put my originals back on or use the lower leaf. in the pic below I have my original front coil springs on the car also.

Decades ago the Eaton Co.in question did not paint them. Sometime later they started to paint them but would leave them unpainted on special request. For the past ten years or so thick heavy black paint is the rule  and if you ask to leave it off the answer is no citing that they are all done in batch's . At least that is the scoop based on numerous posts on the concours forum . I haven't bought any from Eaton for years as I have found the VC Mustang to be be comparable in appearance ,quality plus I would rather give the business to a forum member all things being equal or better.   

[shelbymann1970]

Thanks Bob. I agree on giving Virginia Mustang our business. When I bought my springs they were the only ones I was aware of that did them for a specific application and not one size fits all. NPD is local. So was Eaton so easy choice at the time. I bought the clamps from Shelby Parts a few years ago and plan on restoring mine as the ride height was still good with my old springs. Retirement project: Replace/restore as many original parts on my vert to bring it up to SAAC gold standards sans the gold stripes and underneath paint wise. My rear frame rails and floors look as good as the top side still.