Front Spring Rate 1961 RPO 687 - NCRS Discussion Boards

Front Spring Rate 1961 RPO 687

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Jerry G.
    Extremely Frequent Poster
    • April 1, 1985
    • 1022

    Front Spring Rate 1961 RPO 687

    Anyone know what the spring rate and wire diameter should be for this option?
  • Dennis C.
    NCRS Past Judging Chairman
    • January 1, 1984
    • 2409

    #2
    This doesn't answer your question, but...

    ...I believe they were identical to regular production. DC

    Comment

    • Joe L.
      Beyond Control Poster
      • February 1, 1988
      • 43203

      #3
      Re: This doesn't answer your question, but...

      Dennis and Jerry-----

      I agree. RPO 687 for 1960-62 utilized the same springs as all other 1960-62 Corvettes. This spring had a rate of 1235 lbs. and a free height of 13-3/4". I don't know the wire diameter.

      1957-59 with RPO 684 did use a different spring. That spring had a rate of 1145 lbs. and a free height of 11-1/8"
      In Appreciation of John Hinckley

      Comment

      • Roy B.
        Expired
        • February 1, 1975
        • 7044

        #4
        Re: Front Spring Rate 1961 RPO 687

        Original springs will have a flat area at the top and the part# in them.




        Comment

        • Jerry G.
          Extremely Frequent Poster
          • April 1, 1985
          • 1022

          #5
          Re: Starting to make sence

          I'm learning about the 61 cars. This one has the appropriate brake hardware but i expected to see the monster springs and sway bar. I was a little concerned for a while. it does have the 5 leaf rear spring with the longitudinal groves.

          Comment

          • Mike E.
            Extremely Frequent Poster
            • February 28, 1975
            • 5136

            #6
            Re: Starting to make sence

            Jerry--
            It shouldn't have 5-leaf rears. Should have 4-leaves, even for RPO687 usage. I'd guess that if you look carefully, one has been added. If not, check dates on the bottom leaf--it probably won't have a correct date for your 61.

            Comment

            Working...
            Searching...Please wait.
            An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

            Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
            An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

            Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
            An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
            There are no results that meet this criteria.
            Search Result for "|||"