+ THIS IS A COPY OF THE FORUM PAGE
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Moog CC655 springs in the Febuary 2011 Co Operator question.....

  1. #1
    Senior Member silverhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Posts
    2,905

    Moog CC655 springs in the Febuary 2011 Co Operator question.....

    Hey guys,

    So, I ordered the front springs listed by Jim Pepper in the 2011 Febuary Co Operator. I went and looked at them, and woa! Has anyone else done this? They look drastically different, like I am almost wondering if they are the wrong ones. Anyone else experience this? Anyone have pictures?
    Dylan Wills
    Everett, Wa.
    18 y/o Studebaker addict

    1961 Lark 4 door wagon. V8/stick= not super fast, but a lot of fun!
    1957 Packard Clipper (Project. Have thought about parting, but it is one of my dream cars )
    1952 Commander 4 door sedan ('50s custom in progress)

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Brownsburg, IN, USA.(NW suburban Indianapolis)
    Posts
    7,965
    Dylan: Here is what Jim Pepper said in another piece of correspondence I have in the Co-Operator file. From this, I wonder if the springs you received had been mis-marked along the way. (That's why I went back and pulled up the material on this when I saw your post.) BP

    The front springs mentioned are aftermarket cargo coils for the rear of 86 – 88 Buick LeSabre. It is Moog part # CC655. The tightly wound coils go on the top.

    The close wound coils go to the top. I use a standard Studebaker insulator on top. They install like any other Studebaker spring. If I did not tell you they were meant for a Buick, you would think they were Studebaker replacements. They will settle slightly like any new spring but it will be very slight. Ride height will be about the same as the HD Studebaker coils. JP

  3. #3
    Senior Member silverhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Posts
    2,905
    That is what I was afraid of. This definately do NOT look like Studebaker coils. They look like something designed for struts, maybe they got confused with the front springs on the same car? The parts order does have the correct part number though. I think tomorrow morning I'm going to bring in a extra spring with me, and show the problem! Thanks much Mr.Palma!!
    Dylan Wills
    Everett, Wa.
    18 y/o Studebaker addict

    1961 Lark 4 door wagon. V8/stick= not super fast, but a lot of fun!
    1957 Packard Clipper (Project. Have thought about parting, but it is one of my dream cars )
    1952 Commander 4 door sedan ('50s custom in progress)

  4. #4
    Senior Member silverhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Posts
    2,905
    Hey Mr.Palma, one more question, if you see this again. This is the specs and ad for the CC655 springs, and it says the free height of the springs is 13.63 inches. I got a 6 cylinder spring here, and it is 18 inches tall standing on my floor. Are the H.D Stude coils shorter than the 6 cylinder springs? After this first mix up, I'm nervous about running into it again (I'm dying to have those new coils in my car, for it doesn't feel like the car is "falling over" in the corners so to speak)
    Dylan Wills
    Everett, Wa.
    18 y/o Studebaker addict

    1961 Lark 4 door wagon. V8/stick= not super fast, but a lot of fun!
    1957 Packard Clipper (Project. Have thought about parting, but it is one of my dream cars )
    1952 Commander 4 door sedan ('50s custom in progress)

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Brownsburg, IN, USA.(NW suburban Indianapolis)
    Posts
    7,965
    Dylan: I've never seen these MOOG springs myself. So I am copying this link and sending it to Jim Pepper for comment. If Jim doesn't post, I'll report what he has to say. I just checked all our previous correspondence, and we do have the correct part number. BP

  6. #6
    Senior Member silverhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Posts
    2,905
    Ok, that works for me. I'm just second guessing myself, afraid of another mix up, because I personally don't know what is what with springs....
    Dylan Wills
    Everett, Wa.
    18 y/o Studebaker addict

    1961 Lark 4 door wagon. V8/stick= not super fast, but a lot of fun!
    1957 Packard Clipper (Project. Have thought about parting, but it is one of my dream cars )
    1952 Commander 4 door sedan ('50s custom in progress)

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ, USA.
    Posts
    491
    4 years ago I installed a set of moog CC653 (not sure how these compare with the CC655 these are hand written notes I suppose its possible I have the wrong part #)springs on the front of an avantiII. These springs were supplied by the customer is has owned multiple avanti's and used them more then once. Here are the measurments I took for my reference.
    Resting height "13.75 inch
    OD 5.50 inch
    ID 4 5/16inch
    coil wire size .645.
    Springs removed from 77 AVANTI II
    resting height 13.5
    OD 5.5
    ID 4.25
    coil wire size .622
    I was told the application was for rear of front wheel drive buick. thats all the reference I have.
    spec below from moog website

    RCC 653 Coil Spring Dimensions
    End 1 Type End 2 Type Inside Diameter Bar Diameter Install Height Load Spring Rate Free Height
    Square Square 4.250 0.640 10.00 1230 357 13.44

    CC 655 Coil Spring Dimensions
    End 1 Type End 2 Type Inside Diameter Bar Diameter Install Height Load Spring Rate Free Height
    Square Square 4.187 0.656 11.00 827 355 13.63
    uss


    Quote Originally Posted by silverhawk View Post
    Hey Mr.Palma, one more question, if you see this again. This is the specs and ad for the CC655 springs, and it says the free height of the springs is 13.63 inches. I got a 6 cylinder spring here, and it is 18 inches tall standing on my floor. Are the H.D Stude coils shorter than the 6 cylinder springs? After this first mix up, I'm nervous about running into it again (I'm dying to have those new coils in my car, for it doesn't feel like the car is "falling over" in the corners so to speak)
    Last edited by rusty nut garage; 06-14-2011 at 12:58 PM. Reason: add specs

    Russ Shop Foreman \"Rusty Nut Garage\"
    53 2R6 289 5SpdOD (driver)
    57 SH (project)
    60 Lark VIII 2dr sd (driver)

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    waukesha, wisconsin, USA.
    Posts
    13
    Yes you do have the right part #. CC 653 is a similar spring for the same platform. It is for the Roadmaster and Park Avenue. It also applies to equivalent Olds cars. Because these models are a little heavier than the LeSabre and Olds 88, the rate is a little higher. The spring diameter and the wire diameter is close on both but the CC653 has less active coils so it has a higher rate. I have used a few sets of these but prefer the CC655. Studebaker did use progressive front springs in the late 50's. If you compare these to the specifications of the Studebaker HD 526122 to the CC655 you will find a similar rate, wire diameter, active coils, and free height. The progressive spring works better because as it is compressed, the rate increases and as it expands, the rate drops off. Harshness is reduced as well as body lean.
    A typical spring for a 6 cylinder has a very low rate but many more active coils. That is why its free height is much taller. To support a similar weight load it must be compressed further. This is why 6 cylinder springs work so well in a drag car. They have all this stored energy due to compression. As torque and inertia from the rear wheels attempt to lift the front end on acceleration, the stored energy in the spring help with the lift. Once underway the front settles down back to the normal ride height. A HD coil or worse yet a progressive HD coil is the worst front spring to use for drag racing. They are great on the street. Remember, that rate is the amount of force it takes to compress a spring a fixed distance. It is usually expressed in pounds per inch. The 526122 spring is a 300 pound per inch spring. This means that for every additional 300 pounds applied to it, it will compress one inch. CC655 varies from about 275 LBS/IN to about 340 LBS/IN. Use these springs in normal V-8 applications. I have never tried them in a 6 cylinder car but I think they would be a little stiff and the front end would sit high. It would depend on equipment and overall weight.

    I hope this helps clarify things. I will bring a set next week for the co-operator seminar and then put them in the auction.

    Jim
    james r pepper

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Brownsburg, IN, USA.(NW suburban Indianapolis)
    Posts
    7,965
    Excellent.

    Thanks for the clarification and additional information, Jim.

    See everyone in Springfield! BP

  10. #10
    Senior Member silverhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Posts
    2,905
    Supurb! Thank you Mr.Palma, Mr.Pepper, and Rusty Nut Garage!!! I got it all sorted out today, and will HOPEFULLY have the correct springs on Friday

    Have fun in Springfield ya'll!!
    Dylan Wills
    Everett, Wa.
    18 y/o Studebaker addict

    1961 Lark 4 door wagon. V8/stick= not super fast, but a lot of fun!
    1957 Packard Clipper (Project. Have thought about parting, but it is one of my dream cars )
    1952 Commander 4 door sedan ('50s custom in progress)

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Brownsburg, IN, USA.(NW suburban Indianapolis)
    Posts
    7,965
    Quote Originally Posted by silverhawk View Post
    Supurb! Thank you Mr.Palma, Mr.Pepper, and Rusty Nut Garage!!! I got it all sorted out today, and will HOPEFULLY have the correct springs on Friday Have fun in Springfield ya'll!!
    You're welcome, Dylan; 'glad we could get it straightened out.

    I think of you when I consider my writing Studebaker with various questions when I was your age...and the guy answering from Studebaker was probably 65 years old, too! <GGG> BP



  12. #12
    Senior Member silverhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Posts
    2,905
    Hahaha, that's awesome! Guess there's hope for me yet on learning this stuff
    Dylan Wills
    Everett, Wa.
    18 y/o Studebaker addict

    1961 Lark 4 door wagon. V8/stick= not super fast, but a lot of fun!
    1957 Packard Clipper (Project. Have thought about parting, but it is one of my dream cars )
    1952 Commander 4 door sedan ('50s custom in progress)

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Southern IL, USA.
    Posts
    416
    What applications are you fellows intending to use these springs on.....lark, hawk, avanti....truck???
    thanks,
    Mike Sal

  14. #14
    Senior Member silverhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Posts
    2,905
    I'm intending to use them in my '61 Lark station wagon, along with 6 leaf springs in the rear.
    Dylan Wills
    Everett, Wa.
    18 y/o Studebaker addict

    1961 Lark 4 door wagon. V8/stick= not super fast, but a lot of fun!
    1957 Packard Clipper (Project. Have thought about parting, but it is one of my dream cars )
    1952 Commander 4 door sedan ('50s custom in progress)

  15. #15
    Member Harv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canton, Michigan, USA.
    Posts
    77
    Gents,

    SDC Member Richard Gillis of Battle Creek, MI has installed the Moog CC655 Coil Springs in several of his cars. The rose mist colored '63 GT Hawk that he often brings to the Ypsilanti Orphan Car Show and most recently to the Crossroads Zone Meet/Swap Meet in South Bend in early May has them installed. He states that he is very satisfied with them. He mentioned to me that he got that Moog part number a while ago from Ted Harbit.
    I ordered a set of Moog CC655s from my local Autozone store. I plan to install them soon onto my '64 GT Hawk. That's my 2-cents on this subject.

    Regards, Harv
    StudeBakerHarv
    * 1950 Champion Starlight Coupe (Cathcart Stg 4 Engine)
    * 1964 GT hawk (R1 Powershift, Full Package)

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Brownsburg, IN, USA.(NW suburban Indianapolis)
    Posts
    7,965
    Thanks for the input / feedback, Harv. Much appreciated; definitely more than 2 cents worth! <GGG> BP

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Glendora, California, USA.
    Posts
    108
    I purchased a set two days before the article appeared in the co-operator and was pleased that my search and calculations worked out the same as others. I have had them installed and was over the moon at the ride. I was having problems with new and different engines and tire rub at the front that I did not have with the original engine and my wider tires. Now it's better than original. It's about the same softness when going in a straight line and no big bumps or dips. Now turning into driveways and going through dips in a turn are not a grit my teeth and get pissed when I get home and look at the chunks taken out from the inner lip of the front fender. Now it all rides like I want.

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Brownsburg, IN, USA.(NW suburban Indianapolis)
    Posts
    7,965
    Thanks for your additional confirmation, too, Skybolt. Good use of the forum; reporting real-world experiences. BP

  19. #19
    Member Harv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canton, Michigan, USA.
    Posts
    77
    Thanks Bob, Thanks Skybolt ...... Looking forward to a better ride. And, thanks to Silverhawk for originating this thread. .... Harv
    StudeBakerHarv
    * 1950 Champion Starlight Coupe (Cathcart Stg 4 Engine)
    * 1964 GT hawk (R1 Powershift, Full Package)

  20. #20
    Senior Member mbstude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hazlehurst, Georgia
    Posts
    8,797
    By far one of the best threads on this forum I've seen in a long time.

  21. #21
    Senior Member silverhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA.
    Posts
    2,905
    Glad it all worked out for everyone, I know I sure learned quite abit through this. But, my impatient mind wants to know; how did the cars handle afterwards in the corners? Did you still have a fair bit of body sway compared to before? I got other plans for the suspension besides the built up springs in the rear, these up front, ect; but I'm curious on what to expect. My wagon is the only V8 powered Stude I've driven on the street before, (I've ridden in others), so I don't know how they are supposed to handle to begin with.
    Dylan Wills
    Everett, Wa.
    18 y/o Studebaker addict

    1961 Lark 4 door wagon. V8/stick= not super fast, but a lot of fun!
    1957 Packard Clipper (Project. Have thought about parting, but it is one of my dream cars )
    1952 Commander 4 door sedan ('50s custom in progress)

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ, USA.
    Posts
    491
    Do you have a front sway bar installed. the v-8 cars should have. I test drove my 60 v8 without the sway bar and it makes a significant amount of difference to the body lean during turns.
    Quote Originally Posted by silverhawk View Post
    Glad it all worked out for everyone, I know I sure learned quite abit through this. But, my impatient mind wants to know; how did the cars handle afterwards in the corners? Did you still have a fair bit of body sway compared to before? I got other plans for the suspension besides the built up springs in the rear, these up front, ect; but I'm curious on what to expect. My wagon is the only V8 powered Stude I've driven on the street before, (I've ridden in others), so I don't know how they are supposed to handle to begin with.

    Russ Shop Foreman \"Rusty Nut Garage\"
    53 2R6 289 5SpdOD (driver)
    57 SH (project)
    60 Lark VIII 2dr sd (driver)

+ THIS IS A COPY OF THE FORUM PAGE

Quick Reply Quick Reply

  • Decrease Size
    Increase Size
    Switch Editor Mode
  • Remove Text Formatting
  • Insert Link Insert Image Insert Video
  • Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may post attachments
  • You may edit your posts