jonxlh99

Ok so this sums up all the talk about which rear springs are correct. All I read is how the car sits to high now after new springs and all this crap back and forth about 5665 vs. cc635 vs. whatever. I have an 89 formula 5.7 TPI WS6. The car had the original springs and shocks/struts. 144,000 miles and still rode decent. Put cc635 springs and monroe shocks in the rear today and it's like a different car! Rides great. Got KYB's for the front and doin that tomorrow. The rear ride height is maybe an eighth to a quarter inch at max higher. I can hardly even notice and I have been looking at the car for 20 years! Wanna do the front springs to but a real pain in the *** so gonna just put the struts in and call it a day. Moral of the story is if you have a formula/iroc the cc635 rears work perfect.

punkdude908

i have the same rear springs in my Bird. i noticed a huge difference too. even better after i added a 24mm rear sway bar and poly bushings. they were pretty cheap too...around $50 if i remember correctly. the car has a nice stance being that i used the 4th gen rear spring isolators.

RED_DRAGON_85

its a firebird formula he is talking about

cprmn14

iTrader: (3)

i know man. I have a 91 rs and i just put Moog springs in the back, and KYBs all around. Definatly rides like a new car.