no pics with the lower perch mod done?

 

Btw, not to hijack, however...

For those who do remove rear sprung weight just to lower the overall GVW could possibly experience more than just a visual change. If no other weight is subtracted elsewhere, this will result in a slight shift in weight distribution slightly towards the front, which may slightly hurt braking and handling. To what degree this is "detected" will depend on amount removed from a specific location on the vehicle.

FWIW, before Sam's spring were available, I did notice that spring rates near or similar to his (along with his early revision specific swaybars and my own custom shock valving combos) worked quite well with the general overall OEM weight distribution. When I did remove those usual "weight reduction" items from the rear, I did not appreciate the longer lap times accompanied by somewhat less consistent overall performance. I also wen't from ~1.3" lowered to somewhere near or at the "4x4" stock ride height appearance, whilst leaving the springs in. YMMV.

Again, not trying to take away from the post subject, but just offer some .02 of what I've observed and practised.

 

DeCarbon shocks are trash, I can't imagine anyone going thru the hassle of changing front springs out and leaving stock worn out shocks...

 

excellent post. This is A+ advise.

 

So for someone like me who is most likely going to get headers and light weight suspension components and probably race seats, will those springs pretty much not lower the car at all? Since they were designed for stock weight, will the handling now be affected?

 

If you're referring to my post, please note that I mentioned "removing rear sprung weight." It's important to be familiar with what type of weight/mass is removed or added. Also, here's what I mentioned previously:

How Sam Strano designed his springs are something that he knows about. What I noticed through my observation are merely based upon similarities of his specifications he's stated elsewhere.

If some of you notice, suspension components can be partially or completely unsprung weight. Since springs themselves control sprung weight as well as it's ride height, the subtraction of unsprung weight should have an optimal affect with handling, whilst not screwing up other aspects concerning the sprung weight. The concerns with removing unsprung weight will be mostly of structural purposes as well as proper dampening through the compression stroke of the shocks. It's very ideal to remove unsprung weight wherever it's practical and/or possible.

Sway bars and springs on this car are mostly unsprung weight. Sam's front sway bar is lighter than an equivalent 35mm solid, his rear is lighter than a stock 19mm, and his springs are lighter than stock springs, and since I mentioned that they're NOT sprung weight (for the most part), they themselves WON'T be the things responsible for the inconsistencies of ride height and handling. What the OP is mostly suffering from is a change in sprung weight. Some others would be the fitting of aftermarket axles with their lower spring mounts heights changed, and as discussed in earlier thread that too can affect ride heights.

AFA headers go, they attach to the engine as well as some of the chassis. Since the engine is pretty much attached to the chassis, which the chassis is mostly controlled by the springs, they're sprung weight. The engine and their components are sprung weight. If sprung weight is removed and it's not accounted for where it's being removed from, then this could result in what the OP mentioned as well as what I'm talking about in my previous post. AFA the weight difference with the headers themselves, sometimes long tubed headers can be heavier. Again, how much weight you're putting on any part of the car that's controlled by the springs is affecting it's sprung weight/mass.

AFA lightweight racing seats, notice that the seats are basically in the centre of the vehicle, thus making them mostly central mass? Also, notice that the seat is inside the chassis, which is once again, making the seats sprung mass. Replacing the seats with lighter ones will lower the central sprung mass of the vehicle, provided the driver's weight doesn't increase (because the driver isn't counted as kerb weight).

With all of this stated, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

 

Unfortunately I will be removing some sprung weight. Carbon fiber hood, k-member, headers(definitely lighter then iron manifolds, even longtubes), race seats. I'm looking at probably 100lbs off the front, which I've done before in my previous fbody. Handing/braking dramatically improved. Car sat higher unfortunately. Hopefully Sam's lowering springs will still keep the car lowered some and still work as intended.

 

I wouldn't consider what you mention above to be completely unfortunate, but rather fortunate. If you can safely and effectively remove 100 lbs. from the front end, then you're actually shifting weight bias from the front to the rear which I consider a good thing because these cars are pretty much front heavy from the factory. I've actually done something similar to what you've done and experienced the same thing.

AFA the higher stance, that's what comes with free spring length as well as spring height. If you remove the sprung weight from which the springs are designed to support, then that's the tradeoff.

With regards to Sam's springs, you should discuss this with him (provided you don't do too much tyre kicking). AFA direct replacement aftermarket springs, this task to correct could be limited by what is offered on the market.

BTW, my apologies to the post readers for the hijack.

 

Your car does look a little higher than mine, especially the front. I wouldn't want mine any lower though as a streetcar.