Hotchkis leaf springs sagg brand-new

-
dustbull

dustbull

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2010
Messages
258
Reaction score
5
Location
Cape Coral
Hello everyone,

Im writing this thread to give a bit of feedback about the Hotchkis leaf springs i bought for my A-body. I am a huge fan of the idea of pro-touring and wanted to go with the name brand pro-touring specific suspension piece(s) when rebuilding my car. I had heard nothing but good things about hotchkis on the web, so i thought nothing of paying more than double what i did for my mopar performance leaf springs for their A-body kit.

The stance initally seemed low, but thought nothin of it until i had the opportunity to drive it, when i found the rear shackles to be resting on the subframe.
DSC01874_zpsfc23a0a6.jpg

DSC01872_zps1084dabb.jpg

DSC01868_zpse8e0fee5.jpg

The shackles are stock, everyhing installed correctly. Its hard to see but on the last picture the driveshaft is very close to the tunnel.

Under VERY moderate acceleration my axle torques over my pinion snubber, and allows the u-joint to hit the driveshaft tunnel.

Sadly, i learned that this issue has come up at least twice before:

http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=194835&highlight=hotchkis


With all that being said i have had a mixed responses from Hotchkis to this issue. On a non-mopar forum i have yet to recieve a pm a month after my submittal to them. on another mopar forum the rep has been quick to respond, however the measurement requests have been drawn out (partly by my unavailability to take them) for a month now. But in all honesty youve seen the pics, send me the new springs; you (hotchkis) can keep the old and take all the measurements you want on your own time...It took us 11 months to build the car ground-up, it has sat a whole month, registered and insured, JUST because of these springs. As my dad said "make it right, or make them gone"...

Just thought that the more threads giving the facts about these products may help someone decide on the right products to purchase. Thanks for letting me vent too...
 
Wow, that is LOW.

But, those aren't stock shackles, that's just flat stock with some regular old bolts. Not that it really makes a difference if they're the same length.

I was dealing with Hotchkis just recently myself after one of the heims on my Challenger's Hotchkis UCA's wiped out after less than 7k miles. They were nice enough to send me replacement heims and dust boots for them though, and were right quick about it after I posted about the failure over on another mopar board.

Hopefully they help you resolve what's going on with those springs. I think Hotchkis is probably one of the most reputable businesses out there for what they produce, and seem to put a lot of time/effort into doing their homework to get their products right.

Of course, any time you're making parts for 40+ year old cars there's bound to be some issues with fit. Factory tolerances on these cars weren't the best, but Hotchkis should know that and help get this figured out.
 
In Hotchkis defense I bet if you had factory shackles they wouldn't be touching the frame. I have their springs and they are to low and do not control axle wrap as good as I want. Handling wise they're excellent.
 
You are not stock shackles. Leaf spring shackle angle between the bolt centerlines are susposed to angle back. Straight up and down is acceptable. But not preferred. See page 166 of the Mopar Performance Chassis manual.

Put the stock front hanger back on it and it will raise the rear 1"

Now check you pinion angle. You will most likely have to adjust it with angled shims. If you run the Hotchkis lowered front shackles you will really probably have to check and change the pinion angle.

My A-body with Hotchkis springs and stock shackles:
 

Attachments

  • Hotchkis7_27_10TVSbuildSm74.JPG
    151.8 KB · Views: 2,145
First...These guys are right, those shackles gotta go!Those are the ill ticket for handling, I'm betting, too. Nothing to keep them from 'parallelogramming'.

Second, the spring ends on those Hotchkiss springs look, I dunno, wrong.
Like, how they make a saucer-hook bend instead of just being rolled up n' over the bushing. It just "seems" weak to me.
Third, if it's been a month, that's on you. There's a million and one leaf spring shops on this planet. They haven't sold you anything special. You could have de-arched some MP springs, or even stockers, and been dollars and miles ahead.

The adage holds true: Just because they make it for your car doesn't mean you should buy it for your car.
 
Thanks everyone for the quick responses...i know the shackles arent stock, what i should have probably said was 'stock length'. Ive shown hotchkis the same images, they did not suggest to change rear shackles or the front mounts out. I will be replacing them though, i did not see them as that big of an issue before.

I understand when working with 40 year old cars unexpected things come up...And yes jos51700, i wish i had bought some MP springs (what i had run before) and de arched them, but now i dont want to be out more money trying to fix the issues that an already expensive kit has; i feel that theres a reason their kit costs double what other leaf springs cost, usually thats quality, but hopefully its also support (like ive heard)...Ill see what Hotchkis has to say and will know what im doing by mid-week.

EDIT: This interests me from your link abodyjoe, a quote from GMachineDartGT:

"I measured the arc of these springs against the factory 340 arc measurements and they aren't far off. Since they sag so much, I am led to believe they are way less in rate than the 130lb they advertise. Factory 340 leafs are 110 lbs. In fact, I just replaced the Hotchkiss springs with 102 lbs springs that have a stiffer feel without the height issue I had with the Hotchkiss pieces.

For the record, I did call Hotchkiss and ask for designed install heights, and they had none."

In all the measurements i took for hotchkis in this process, they were correct length, eye position, etc...
I had mentioned to Hotchkis that my rusty, 40yr old stock slant six leaf springs held the car up better than their springs. Sure i could change the front mounts back to stock, and the rear shackles arent stock and may be causing some slight issues, but to me those changes are band-aids to the real issue- everything still points back to the springs themselves. I can lift the rear end up by hand at the bumper, ~150-200lbs of force will move the shackles off the subframe.
 
Those are probably the 56" springs (SS length), plus the way they are designed along with the front hangar flip is causing your problems. Like jos57100 said, that eye roll although probably not any "weaker," lowers the car another inch. This is intended, for this application. Stock length springs (55") will cure the rear shackle issue. But if you want it that low you should probably consider some Caltracs to keep the axle under control. I ran my Duster with flipped front hangars for a couple years and liked the way it handled with the rear down low. Recently I put it back to stock just because it was bottoming too much.
 
jos51700 said:
...
Second, the spring ends on those Hotchkiss springs look, I dunno, wrong.
Like, how they make a saucer-hook bend instead of just being rolled up n' over the bushing. It just "seems" weak to me.
Third, if it's been a month, that's on you. There's a million and one leaf spring shops on this planet. They haven't sold you anything special. You could have de-arched some MP springs, or even stockers, and been dollars and miles ahead.
....
Click to expand...

That's called a Mid Eye leaf springs. The feature is used to lower the car without loosing too much free arch. Used in many other performance leaf springs for years. Leaf springs are offered in Reverse Eye also.

This is the front leaf pack on a Hothckis handling leaf spring. They have two thick supporting leafs that go to the eye. Then there is a special leaf on top of the main leaf, that is to control axle hop under heavy braking. So they are special compared to a MP Super Stock drag race spring.
 

Attachments

  • Hotchkis7_27_10TVSbuildSm37.JPG
    90.8 KB · Views: 1,926
  • Hotchkis7_27_10TVSbuildSm38.JPG
    126.2 KB · Views: 1,970
340-4spd said:
Those are probably the 56" springs (SS length), plus the way they are designed along with the front hangar flip is causing your problems. Like jos57100 said, that eye roll although probably not any "weaker," lowers the car another inch. This is intended, for this application. Stock length springs (55") will cure the rear shackle issue. But if you want it that low you should probably consider some Caltracs to keep the axle under control. I ran my Duster with flipped front hangars for a couple years and liked the way it handled with the rear down low. Recently I put it back to stock just because it was bottoming too much.
Click to expand...

Please, don't screw up the handling of those leaf springs with Cal Tracs.

If you pinion angle is incorrect, it give you wheel hop. The original poster has never said he had wheel hop problems.
 
autoxcuda said:
The original poster has never said he had wheel hop problems.
Click to expand...
But he DID say the (not pinion) u-joint was hitting the floor. My bad, those things have to be seriously wrapped to get the u-joint into the floor. It's either new springs or something to control them. I don't believe handling is even on the table yet at this point. But I think the biggest part of the problem is it's just sitting way too low the way it's set up now.

dustbull said:
Under VERY moderate acceleration my axle torques over my pinion snubber, and allows the u-joint to hit the driveshaft tunnel.
Click to expand...
 
Great comparison pics Steve!!

I havnt been able to accel/decel hard enough to experience wheel hop issues. As i said if i roll into the throttle, the rear end squats down the ~3/4" it has before the pinion snubber is on its stop, then it either overpowers the snubber or the axle wraps to allow the u-joint to hit the driveshaft tunnel...
 
dustbull said:
Great comparison pics Steve!!

I havnt been able to accel/decel hard enough to experience wheel hop issues. As i said if i roll into the throttle, the rear end squats down the ~3/4" it has before the pinion snubber is on its stop, then it either overpowers the snubber or the axle wraps to allow the u-joint to hit the driveshaft tunnel...
Click to expand...

Put the factory front hanger back on.

Do you have a stock pinion snubber on it?

Are you running a stock K-member, stock motor and trans mounts?
 
autoxcuda said:
Put the factory front hanger back on.

Do you have a stock pinion snubber on it?

Are you running a stock K-member, stock motor and trans mounts?
Click to expand...

Stock pinion snubber would be WAY too tall. Im running a bump stop on top of a piece of 1/8" steel...The rear end is a Dana 60.

Im running a stock k-member, DS motor mount is solid, pass side is stock. Trans mount is not stock, im running a T56, but it is at the correct angle and am using a rubber mount.
 
dustbull said:
Stock pinion snubber would be WAY too tall. Im running a bump stop on top of a piece of 1/8" steel...The rear end is a Dana 60.
Click to expand...

So it was too close to run a stock snubber plate even before you ran the Hothchkis Springs?

Im running a stock k-member, DS motor mount is solid, pass side is stock. Trans mount is not stock, im running a T56, but it is at the correct angle and am using a rubber mount.
Click to expand...

Is the rear at the height you want? Is the rear wheel tucked into the rear wheel well like you want? That will determine how close the rear end and driveshaft are to the floor pan of your car no matter what rear suspension you use (leaf, 3 link, 4 link angled, etc)

What size rear tires are you using?
 
autoxcuda said:
So it was too close to run a stock snubber plate even before you ran the Hothchkis Springs?



Is the rear at the height you want? Is the rear wheel tucked into the rear wheel well like you want? That will determine how close the rear end and driveshaft are to the floor pan of your car no matter what rear suspension you use (leaf, 3 link, 4 link angled, etc)

What size rear tires are you using?
Click to expand...

Before was ~2yrs ago in another A-body but yes, i could fit the stock snubber on with stock slant 6 springs...with that being said i have bent/broken several pinion snubbers when the car would squat down and accelerate before I sufficiently reinforcing a snubber to work.
My previous springs were Mopar Performance springs, they were stiff enough and the car washigh enough up that i had no issues with the snubber taking excessive forces.

The rear height is way too low, id like it to be up ~2" more which is what i think it would be if the springs were the proper rate. Im running 275/40/17's
Hotchkis leafs below:
DSC01856_zpsb4107b4e.jpg

Stock /6 springs below:
DSC00367.jpg

Mopar Performance springs below:
0905101419-00.jpg
 
dustbull said:
Before was ~2yrs ago in another A-body but yes, i could fit the stock snubber on with stock slant 6 springs...with that being said i have bent/broken several pinion snubbers when the car would squat down and accelerate before I sufficiently reinforcing a snubber to work.
My previous springs were Mopar Performance springs, they were stiff enough and the car washigh enough up that i had no issues with the snubber taking excessive forces.

The rear height is way too low, id like it to be up ~2" more which is what i think it would be if the springs were the proper rate. Im running 275/40/17's
Hotchkis leafs below:
Click to expand...

The rate of any spring is not the same as it's compressed height. A 12" tall 200 lbs/in coil spring will collapse to 11" when it has 200 lbs put on top of it. A 10" tall 200 lbs/in coil spring will collapse to 9" when it has a 200 lbs put on top of it.

Same idea for leaf springs.

Does your Dana 60 rear end have a truck center section or an original 66-72 Chrysler passenger car center?

The only factory A-bodies that got Dana rear ends were light 68 Super Stock cars that had Super Stock springs. The cars were sky high with the idea back then to get more rear weight transfer at the drag strip.

Those MP springs are all jacked up high. Not a handling deal. You have them up in that car because it's got a set of headers and oil that hang way below the chassis. So you have to jack up the front so it doesn't rip the oil pan and headers off.
 
autoxcuda said:
That's called a Mid Eye leaf springs. The feature is used to lower the car without loosing too much free arch. Used in many other performance leaf springs for years. Leaf springs are offered in Reverse Eye also.

This is the front leaf pack on a Hothckis handling leaf spring. They have two thick supporting leafs that go to the eye. Then there is a special leaf on top of the main leaf, that is to control axle hop under heavy braking. So they are special compared to a MP Super Stock drag race spring.
Click to expand...

Cool, thanks for the tip :)
 
I think i understand the spring rate issue, but im thinking my current hotchkis springs are more like 90lb/in where they are advertised as being 130lb/in.

I shouldve mentioned the dana 60 is a Strange Dana S60; im not sure what center section they use. I would like to be about where my old, weak slant 6 springs had me height wise. I didnt change the front height between the slant 6 and MP springs; the front is lower than stock despite the headers and oil pan (i think the k-member is ~6" off the ground, i know the oil pan is 3.5-4" off the ground).
 
I'm curious to know how much space you have between the diff and frame on the Green Demon. With that stance, seems it might be tight.
 
Only clearance issue below is the pinion area to the stock stop welded to the floor (~1-1.5" w/o snubber).

Im not blaming Hotchkis for incompatable hardware, even with the stock shackles ill still be resting on the subframe...my current shackles are close to the stock length..even if they were 1-2" off it wouldnt resolve this issue. It takes 150-200lbs of force to lift the shackles off the subframe, a simple shackle swap wont fix this, all the other hardware used came in the Hotchkis kit.
 
dustbull said:
Only clearance issue below is the pinion area to the stock stop welded to the floor (~1-1.5" w/o snubber).

Im not blaming Hotchkis for incompatable hardware, even with the stock shackles ill still be resting on the subframe...my current shackles are close to the stock length..even if they were 1-2" off it wouldnt resolve this issue. It takes 150-200lbs of force to lift the shackles off the subframe, a simple shackle swap wont fix this, all the other hardware used came in the Hotchkis kit.
Click to expand...

The front hangers and rear shackles are all part of the Hotchkis kit?

That is a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top