Looking for Fiat 128 SL front coil springs
- Thread starter Karfrik
- Start date
Too Few Coils?
Hi Albert, are you sure about only seven coils? I've seen 10-1/4 coils and 8-3/4 coils, but not seven on the front of a stock USA-spec 128. Perhaps someone in another country might have a set. If not, rear X1/9 springs have about seven coils, I have a stock set with 6-3/4 coils if you are interested.
Hi Albert, are you sure about only seven coils? I've seen 10-1/4 coils and 8-3/4 coils, but not seven on the front of a stock USA-spec 128. Perhaps someone in another country might have a set. If not, rear X1/9 springs have about seven coils, I have a stock set with 6-3/4 coils if you are interested.
Last edited:
Karfrik
Albert
Hi Dave,this is something weve been discussing in the 128 forum.And its about lowering a 128 sedan in the front.It was brought to my attention that 128 SL have shorter springs in the front but we are/were not clear if 128 SL US spec springs are the same like in AUS and or NZ.Heres the link and check the pics;
http://xwebforums.com/forum/index.php?threads/23307/
Will those X springs fit and lower a 1975 in the front with good road and handling characterisitics?.....or do you think its still better to just use early X19 rear struts?......
I consider you a 128 expert by all means so any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.Thanks Dave
Last edited by a moderator:
Jeff Stich
True Classic
If using the X1/9 rear springs on the 128 front struts, you'll need to use an additional (modified) pair of the coil spring plastic seats/spacers to keep each spring in place (otherwise the fit is too loose). With this setup, the car is drivable but you will bottom out the strut on hard bumps.
Using early X1/9 rear struts/springs with the 128 top hardware have been "the" way to lower the 128 front for decades here in the USA, because the parts were plentiful & there's no fabrication needed - it's just a matter of swapping bolt-on parts. Other folks have simply cut down the 128 springs to suit their taste & used them on the 128 front strut. Using the 128 front struts & 128 Coupe springs is not as common here (in the USA) simply because the parts (Coupe springs) are not as readily available for us as the X1/9 parts. Another alternative is to use Yugo springs on the 128 strut, which gives a ride height in between the stock USA 128 Sedan/Wagon & the 128 Coupe.
Karfrik
Albert
Thanks as always Jeff!!
Here's a photo of what came out of my 1975 coupe, and what went in:
Both springs have about 7 coils, but the new ones are so much stiffer it only dropped the front of my SL one inch. Great for autocrossing, pretty rough on Minnesota roads.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Both springs have about 7 coils, but the new ones are so much stiffer it only dropped the front of my SL one inch. Great for autocrossing, pretty rough on Minnesota roads.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Karfrik
Albert
Here's a photo of what came out of my 1975 coupe, and what went in:
Both springs have about 7 coils, but the new ones are so much stiffer it only dropped the front of my SL one inch. Great for autocrossing, pretty rough on Minnesota roads.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Ok im counting 8 coils on the old springs.Do these came out of a 75 128 SL then?
On the newer springs, are these original stock NOS 128 SL springs?...or aftermarket?...if so thats why they look thicker for sure thats why they didnt lower the car much......thanks for posting!!
My 1975 California spec 128 SL has 7.5 coils to be exact, I have been told that earlier cars with chrome bumpers (lighter weight) had 7 coils.
The replacement springs are aftermarket, actually from a different car altogether. My source hasn't told me what car, and may not even remember at this point. He did tell me they were about 2.5 times stiffer than stock and that his recollection was that the stock springs were about 85 lbs. per inch. That actually comes out about right when you compare the final ride height with the loose spring.
It may be rather hard finding SL springs in the US, I doubt there are many left and I'm keeping my originals.
The replacement springs are aftermarket, actually from a different car altogether. My source hasn't told me what car, and may not even remember at this point. He did tell me they were about 2.5 times stiffer than stock and that his recollection was that the stock springs were about 85 lbs. per inch. That actually comes out about right when you compare the final ride height with the loose spring.
It may be rather hard finding SL springs in the US, I doubt there are many left and I'm keeping my originals.
Jeff Stich
True Classic
Ariston?
Wow, I haven't seen Ariston struts for quite a while. I have a (used) pair I've been thinking of trying out on my car:
I've never known what car these were originally from/for, I figured either 128, X1/9 or maybe Strada/Ritmo, as the design is very similar to the stock struts for those cars. On your Ariston strut, what are the part numbers stamped vertically about 1.5"-2" down from the top of the strut tube?
Here's a photo of what came out of my 1975 coupe, and what went in:
Wow, I haven't seen Ariston struts for quite a while. I have a (used) pair I've been thinking of trying out on my car:
I've never known what car these were originally from/for, I figured either 128, X1/9 or maybe Strada/Ritmo, as the design is very similar to the stock struts for those cars. On your Ariston strut, what are the part numbers stamped vertically about 1.5"-2" down from the top of the strut tube?
I was told they were for the 128 but I can't check right now, the struts are on the car and it is in storage for the winter. Remind me next spring and I'll jack it up to see if I can see the numbers without taking them off. I currently have them set to 2/3 hard, this seems to match the 200 lb springs, maybe could be a bit stiffer.
By the way, the rear shocks I have are Boge Turbo TS, for a Ritmo. They are a heavy duty shock, and have the advantage of reducing the rear camber from -3 to 0. Helps a great deal in getting the car to rotate when autocrossing. Although it caused some wheel rubbing problems when I lowered the car, so I had to leave it at the raised height the three leaf spring caused for now.
Hi Albert, Sorry For The Late Relay...
First, thanks for the nice compliment, I've been playing with 128s for many years (I've owned six so far, more if I count cars bought just for parts), but I'm still learning more about them, as are others here on this forum. The earlier 128 sedans and wagons came with front coil springs that had 8-3/4 coils, while the later 128 sedans and wagons came with front coil springs that had 10-1/4 coils. Interestingly, the spring rates for these two different springs was roughly the same, as they used different diameter wire to fabricate the springs, although they did provide different ride heights.
I've dismantled two 128 SL models (one '74 and one '75) and both of these had front struts with the 8-3/4 coil springs, however I suppose that it is possible that both of these cars at some point had the front strut assemblies replaced with sedan or wagon assemblies, as parts swapping from salvage yard cars was quite common back in the day.
I'm almost certain that the later 128 3P models used the same 10-1/4 coil springs that the sedans and wagons used, but the earlier 128 SL models sold in the USA may in fact have been built with the 7-1/2 coil springs as Dwight and others have indicated, so I stand corrected on this point.
The most straightforward method for effectively lowering the front of a 128 sedan/wagon/SL/3P is to swap the entire stock front strut assemblies for those from the rear of a '74-'78 X1/9, changing only the top strut mount for compatiblity with the 128 unibody. This not only lowers the front to what most folks would consider to be the 'normal' height rather than a 'lowered' height, but it also stiffens the front suspension by a proportionate amount to prevent bottoming at the lower ride height. Road manners are excellent, even with oil cartridges.
In my opinion, installing rear X1/9 springs on the stock 128 struts is do-able, but you have to use the shorter X1/9 rear strut bump stops, and even then a significant bump will cause bottoming too early, and so it is best to use the complete rear X1/9 strut with the 128 top strut mount. I've been using this setup for years, sometimes with stock rear X1/9 springs, sometimes with custom springs to suit the character of the particular 128 that I have.
Early rear re-buildable X1/9 struts are getting a bit harder to find these days, so if your 128 struts are the re-buildable type (with spin off top collars) you might consider having them cut and shortened to replicate the height of the early rear X1/9 strut, so that you can load them with inserts made for the X1/9, afterwhich you can check and adjust the camber if necessary, typically the camber will need to be altered to the negative by a degree or two with this methods, while the stock early X1/9 rear strut camber is just about perfect for the front of a lowered 128.
First, thanks for the nice compliment, I've been playing with 128s for many years (I've owned six so far, more if I count cars bought just for parts), but I'm still learning more about them, as are others here on this forum. The earlier 128 sedans and wagons came with front coil springs that had 8-3/4 coils, while the later 128 sedans and wagons came with front coil springs that had 10-1/4 coils. Interestingly, the spring rates for these two different springs was roughly the same, as they used different diameter wire to fabricate the springs, although they did provide different ride heights.
I've dismantled two 128 SL models (one '74 and one '75) and both of these had front struts with the 8-3/4 coil springs, however I suppose that it is possible that both of these cars at some point had the front strut assemblies replaced with sedan or wagon assemblies, as parts swapping from salvage yard cars was quite common back in the day.
I'm almost certain that the later 128 3P models used the same 10-1/4 coil springs that the sedans and wagons used, but the earlier 128 SL models sold in the USA may in fact have been built with the 7-1/2 coil springs as Dwight and others have indicated, so I stand corrected on this point.
The most straightforward method for effectively lowering the front of a 128 sedan/wagon/SL/3P is to swap the entire stock front strut assemblies for those from the rear of a '74-'78 X1/9, changing only the top strut mount for compatiblity with the 128 unibody. This not only lowers the front to what most folks would consider to be the 'normal' height rather than a 'lowered' height, but it also stiffens the front suspension by a proportionate amount to prevent bottoming at the lower ride height. Road manners are excellent, even with oil cartridges.
In my opinion, installing rear X1/9 springs on the stock 128 struts is do-able, but you have to use the shorter X1/9 rear strut bump stops, and even then a significant bump will cause bottoming too early, and so it is best to use the complete rear X1/9 strut with the 128 top strut mount. I've been using this setup for years, sometimes with stock rear X1/9 springs, sometimes with custom springs to suit the character of the particular 128 that I have.
Early rear re-buildable X1/9 struts are getting a bit harder to find these days, so if your 128 struts are the re-buildable type (with spin off top collars) you might consider having them cut and shortened to replicate the height of the early rear X1/9 strut, so that you can load them with inserts made for the X1/9, afterwhich you can check and adjust the camber if necessary, typically the camber will need to be altered to the negative by a degree or two with this methods, while the stock early X1/9 rear strut camber is just about perfect for the front of a lowered 128.