63 rear spring problem

[John D.]

Hello DB members. I know of a little white 63 with a 9 leaf spring that has too many spring liners. Meaning it has a liner for every ply. When CC and his judging team looked at this car they said not correct. Went ding ding.
Jorjorian says the only way to correct the situation is to remove the spring, put it in a vise, remove the bolt, etc. Yea we know any dummy can do dat. But can anyone think of a way to cheat so the spring still stays in the car aand the two top rubber liners are somehow removed??? Thanks, Michael

[Jim L.]

Re: 63 rear spring problem

John, not possable because of the center bolt going in top to bottom through the liners. If you could cut a grove in the liner to allow it to pass the bolt, then there is a slim chance. To remove the spring assembly out is a very easy task on a four post lift. I removed mine four times to change the ride height to within specs. That's my 2 cents worth.
Jim

[John D.]

Re: 63 rear spring problem

Jim, I think that you and Jorjoian are in co-hoots. Yea I guess you guys are correct. I don't have a lift at home and was hoping there was an easier way than removing the spring. But I guess there isn't although I bet someone out there might have encountered this before and removed the liners thru some shoemaker brainstorm. Thanks for the reply. At least I didn't have to hear an echo from Jorjorian. Happy New Year, John

[Patrick H.]

Re: 63 rear spring problem

John,

I've removed and replaced the spring in my 72 in about half an hour, with the car on the floor and held only by 2 jackstands. With the use of a floor jack I compressed the end of the spring (after loosening the 4 center bolts) and disconnected each end link. The spring then comes right out. Very easy job. You might have to remove a rear tire to make removal easier.

It wasn't worth driving the car over to Dad's to use the lifts.

Patrick

[John D.]

Re: 63 rear spring problem

Patrick, Ok I give up. So the spring has to come out. Was worried about scrathing stuff up for show though. My rear spring is bare steel with the Quanta Lube stuff on it. I didn't get any deducts for the bare spring. Just for the extra liners. So I think we will do it on a lift this spring or summer and get it over with. I am not much for laying on the floor working on a Corvette. That's too much like work. Thanks, John

[Mike M.]

Re: 63 rear spring problem

burn the lips of the liner off with an oxy/act torch. peckerhead will never catch the remnants. while on the subject of the peckerhead, we all need to realize he puts in a good deal of time, effort and love of the first c-2's without much thanks from the rest of us when he poops in our wheaties during the judging of our cars or declines some input for the JG. a sometimes thankless job he takes seriously. the info that is delved out by 63/4 owners/experts regarding 63/4 vettes on this TDB,while sincere from the poster, carlton has always demanded real, reproducable documentation of the issue at hand.i respect his demands the info is real. all of us, cc, jd and the rest are good friends on an individual basis. hope 2007 will see the friendship be interminged amonst all the frequent 63/4 tdb posters.happy new year to all. mikie

[John D.]

Re: 63 rear spring problem

Dr Mike, The torch is a good idea for sure. The spring is not that close to the gas tank. Maybe 2 inches or so. Car used to be a big tank but we put in a little tank cause gas too much $$$$. Anyhow now is the time for us to see if you buddy CC is lookin in on the DB chatter since you call him peckerhead all the time. Clem says to clean up ur act and call him peckerhere instead. Shape up. A new year is a comin. I will email CC and forward ur nice answer to good question and see what our esteemed leader has to say. I am sure it will be complimentary as I never heard him swear at a show.
Now CC will be using a mag lite and a fake pad scope to check out my spring for sure. I'll tell em it was ur idea. Happy New Year as you are going to need it. John

[Robert Jorjorian]

Re: 63 rear spring problem

Mike
I spare us all another long rant BUT CC has had over 10 years to correct HIS mistakes and he has NOT. I also have to doubt he demands "REAL AND REPRODUCABLE DOCUMENTATION" because the his mistakes would not exist if that was the case. I'm 100% behind getting things right and feel 1963-64 NCRS members DESERVE a change after 10+ years under the current 63-64 team leader.
Have a happy New Year, Bob

[Patrick H.]

Bob for TL! *NM*

[Michael H.]

Re: 63 rear spring problem

Mike,

Not wanting to get into a shootin match on this but you mention carltons demands that people provide real, reproducible documentation on items submitted for correction. If a group of people disagree with an item in the JG, why can't they also demand the same real reproducible documentation from carlton? One little shread of evidence on the notched hardtop for late 63 and 64, for example, would certainly make a difference. Instead, a lot of valid documentation that was sent to carlton was ignored completely.

Some of the obvious errors have been in that manual for many many years. I don't see an effort to correct anything so I don't think I can go along with the amount of effort that's supposedly been put into this project.

[Robert Jorjorian]

Dumb but not STUPID is my campaign slogan:D *NM*

[John D.]

(Message Deleted by Poster)

Message Deleted by Poster

[Robert Jorjorian]

More a lazy owner problem than spring problem! *NM*

[John D.]

Re: More a lazy owner problem than spring problem!

Hey Robert, Happy New Year. John

[Loren L.]

My response to the 63-4 JG in 1993

went directly to Carlton AND the lead that had done it. It covered 7 pages, wihtout direct access to my two cars (garaged in Dick Daleiden's barn across town); THIRTEEN years later, I have yet to even have my letter acknowledged by either of these two "gentlemen". The even more scary part is that I have been informed that the gentleman who actually DID that revision received a "Member of the Year" award because of his efforts. It would appear that once the errors have been done, the effort to keep them secret is QUADRUPLED. Interesting attitude for an organization that
prides itself on "Judging the car as it was built".
Please, unless you have been a member of three National Judging Manual Teams, don't bother to hit the keyboard and tell me that I'm wrong.
The simple fact is that there have been more original 1963 Corvettes modified to "match the manual" than in any other class.