850 Spider stance problem

Arachnd

Daily Driver
Hi all,

My '72 is angled up at the front - or presumably it's sagging at the back. I think the body sills should be parallel to the ground, judging by early images and more recent photos. (Sorry to post things that I'm sure you've seen, but just wanted to gather things in one place.)

In my car, the rear end of the sill is closer to the ground than the front. And the rear camber seems way too negative. If I jack up the body from the rear, I can find a height where the sills are parallel to the ground. Then it seems like just the right amount of tire is showing,. And at that point, the rear wheels are essentially vertical, which seems right.

This said to me that the rear springs have gotten squashed over 40+ years and aren't holding the body high enough. So I bought another pair of springs, which were stated to be new. The replacement was done in a shop, and I had no way to compare the uncompressed length of the springs. But I was greatly disappointed to end up with exactly the same stance I had before.

So now I'd like to take the original springs and just stretch them out, and hopefully get a few years of riding at the correct height. Does this seem like a plan? Is there a way to know what the uncompressed length was when these springs were new?

Thanks very much for your thoughts..

Kelly
 

Attachments

  • Fiat_850_Spider_09.jpg
    Fiat_850_Spider_09.jpg
    246 KB · Views: 102
  • factory2.jpg
    factory2.jpg
    96.4 KB · Views: 101
  • fiat-850-sport-spider-1968–72.jpg
    fiat-850-sport-spider-1968–72.jpg
    123.1 KB · Views: 106
  • right-springs-board.jpg
    right-springs-board.jpg
    528.5 KB · Views: 100
  • right-raised-board.jpg
    right-raised-board.jpg
    538 KB · Views: 91
  • LR-raised.jpg
    LR-raised.jpg
    366.9 KB · Views: 97
Last edited:
I'd actually like to return the car to factory height and level-ness, and camber. Did lowering the front bring the rear camber back to normal for you?
 
I agree that 850s look 'wrong' when they sit nose high. On my 850 coupe, I wanted it to have the body sills parallel to the ground plane or one or 2 degrees lower in the front. I also wanted to improve road holding. I tried the Abarth front lowering block and that was too low. I had a spring specialist make a reversed eye front spring and that got the front ride height and camber perfect. At the rear, I removed the upper spring cushions and that gave me the 2 or 3 degrees negative camber I was looking for. The car had the right stance and the road holding (with Michelin ZX 155R13 was outstanding. The easy way to do the front spring is to get a good used one and take that to the spring shop. After it is all installed, have the front and rear Toe-In set to the minimum spec WITH YOU IN THE CAR.
 
Mine has the front upright bolt on (welded in this case) extensions. The tires are slightly oversized and hit the fenders on near lock turns.
I like the stance but need to put the stock uprights back on or change tires. I might leave that for the next owner...
20211027_153538.jpg
 
I agree that 850s look 'wrong' when they sit nose high. On my 850 coupe, I wanted it to have the body sills parallel to the ground plane or one or 2 degrees lower in the front. I also wanted to improve road holding. I tried the Abarth front lowering block and that was too low. I had a spring specialist make a reversed eye front spring and that got the front ride height and camber perfect. At the rear, I removed the upper spring cushions and that gave me the 2 or 3 degrees negative camber I was looking for. The car had the right stance and the road holding (with Michelin ZX 155R13 was outstanding. The easy way to do the front spring i

Hi all,

My '72 is angled up at the front - or presumably it's sagging at the back. I think the body sills should be parallel to the ground, judging by early images and more recent photos. (Sorry to post things that I'm sure you've seen, but just wanted to gather things in one place.)

In my car, the rear end of the sill is closer to the ground than the front. And the rear camber seems way too negative. If I jack up the body from the rear, I can find a height where the sills are parallel to the ground. Then it seems like just the right amount of tire is showing,. And at that point, the rear wheels are essentially vertical, which seems right.

This said to me that the rear springs have gotten squashed over 40+ years and aren't holding the body high enough. So I bought another pair of springs, which were stated to be new. The replacement was done in a shop, and I had no way to compare the uncompressed length of the springs. But I was greatly disappointed to end up with exactly the same stance I had before.

So now I'd like to take the original springs and just stretch them out, and hopefully get a few years of riding at the correct height. Does this seem like a plan? Is there a way to know what the uncompressed length was when these springs were new?

Thanks very much for your thoughts..

Kelly
Hi all,

My '72 is angled up at the front - or presumably it's sagging at the back. I think the body sills should be parallel to the ground, judging by early images and more recent photos. (Sorry to post things that I'm sure you've seen, but just wanted to gather things in one place.)

In my car, the rear end of the sill is closer to the ground than the front. And the rear camber seems way too negative. If I jack up the body from the rear, I can find a height where the sills are parallel to the ground. Then it seems like just the right amount of tire is showing,. And at that point, the rear wheels are essentially vertical, which seems right.

This said to me that the rear springs have gotten squashed over 40+ years and aren't holding the body high enough. So I bought another pair of springs, which were stated to be new. The replacement was done in a shop, and I had no way to compare the uncompressed length of the springs. But I was greatly disappointed to end up with exactly the same stance I had before.

So now I'd like to take the original springs and just stretch them out, and hopefully get a few years of riding at the correct height. Does this seem like a plan? Is there a way to know what the uncompressed length was when these springs were new?

Thanks very much for your thoughts..

Kelly
Part of the "problem" started,long ago when the SCCA, and others were trying to reduce rhe tendency of swing axle cars to roll under hard cornering.The rules required more rear camber than stock to stop them from tucking under and flipping the car. Many 850s still keep this thinking
 
Part of the "problem" started,long ago when the SCCA, and others were trying to reduce rhe tendency of swing axle cars to roll under hard cornering.The rules required more rear camber than stock to stop them from tucking under and flipping the car. Many 850s still keep this thinking
What do you think about the effectiveness of limiting straps?
 
What do you think about the effectiveness of limiting straps?
I used to use small chains bolted to the chassis andto the swing arms.Thatworked pretty good and kept the swing arm in a safer place.Chains might work better on the track, a small bit of flexibility (strap) is probably better on the atreet.
 
Back
Top