Still looking for that elusive soft ride... [Archive]

TooManyFords

08-25-2003, 08:44 AM

I'm beginning to think that the soft ride is made of unobtanium (like the little black fender flags on the '64 MM)

I adjusted my ride height this morning and lowered the back a full inch and that didn't help. So, I suspect it is either the gas charged shocks or the air bladders are just too unforgiving. Air pressure in the tires all around is set to 28 psi.

My next plan of attack is to put the car up on my lift and air wrench the shocks loose to see if that's what is making the back so stiff.

The ride in the front is fine on the bumps. I just notice the jolts when the rears go over anything. How is a Grand Marquis different suspension wise in the rear?

GodOSpeed

08-25-2003, 08:57 AM

TooManyFords and not enough Lincolns eh? Face it you bought a sports car when you really wanted a Town Car. I love the ride of my dads supercharged Rivera but the suspension is so soft and mushy that it makes it spooky @ speed. Not ment to flame just my .02

TooManyFords

08-25-2003, 09:01 AM

None taken! I just want a -little- more cushion is all. Thought about loading the trunk up with 300lb of cat litter (unused of course!) and see how it rides. I can always use the kitty stuff with three cats roaming the range in the house! :)

Meow!

TAF

08-25-2003, 09:07 AM

TMF,

I might be wrong here (and if I am, I'm sure someone with more knowledge will correct it) but...I think you might be going the wrong way with the adjustment on the rear, air-suspension.

Taking air out, hence collapsing the bags, will give you more "road-feel"...I would adjust them up to try and get the result you're looking for.

Let's see the :flamer: boys if I just sent him down the wrong path...

Warpath

08-25-2003, 09:13 AM

You can always switch to 16" or 17" wheels with same OD tires. Ride would soften up some.

Todd can possibly be correct. Normally, if you let air out of the spring, the spring rate would go down and possibly improve ride. But, removing air lowers the vehicle. It is more likely that the vehicle hits the jounce bumpers more often and/or hits them harder which makes ride seem worse. Increasing air and air pressure may make ride worse too since the springs are stiffer.

TAF

08-25-2003, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by Warpath

Todd can possibly be correct.

A FIRST!!!:banana:

Albeit not officially confirmed yet...but I'll take "suspected" at this point.

jgc61sr2002

08-25-2003, 09:31 AM

TooManyFords - Only a GM with the handling package will have the rear air suspension. Stock GM's have springs.

TooManyFords

08-25-2003, 09:35 AM

Ride height did not change anything. I was able to verify that I could lower it 2 inches and split the difference for my first test. Even with it back at factory it rode just as stiff. Ergo, it wasn't hitting the snubbers in either case.

Like I said, I'm going to see if the gas charged shocks might be just too stiff and in need of a change to something like a Monroe SensaTrack. I put them on my 2-door '65 Galaxie and it rides really nice. That's the kind of ride I'm looking for. It's not sloppy by any means and it sits right up there. And with a 4.11 posi it acts like a sports car too! <bg>

TooManyFords

08-25-2003, 09:37 AM

Do the Eibach spring kits replace the air ride with springs as well?

TAF

08-25-2003, 11:24 AM

No...the Pro Kit from Eibach are front springs only.

Just a thought...trying to help you find the "float" you're looking for TMFs...
Don't our Marauders come with upgraded Tokico Shocks in the rear...I'm assuming these are "performance shocks" to fit the "intended nature" of the car...should TMF look at downgrading those? Experts?

TooManyFords

08-25-2003, 11:29 AM

That was my thought on this too. I've never had a car with air suspension before and I'm having a hard time believing they would be so "stiff" which is why I suspected the shocks.

If it turns out I need squishy shocks, I'll have a spare set of the factory ones for sale on here shortly!

TAF

08-25-2003, 11:34 AM

Originally posted by TooManyFords
If it turns out I need squishy shocks, I'll have a spare set of the factory ones for sale on here shortly!

And, of course...because I've tried to be helpful...I get first dibs and a great price, right?:D

Wait...maybe I don't want them...if your ride is that bad:rolleyes:

TooManyFords

08-25-2003, 12:19 PM

You bet TAF. You can have first dibs. I've never heard of shocks getting stiffer with use though. hehehe.

Ross

08-28-2003, 01:06 PM

I know what is involved when shocks or struts need to be replaced, but what about when the "air bags" need to be replaced? About how long should they last? How much is the cost for replacement as opposed to shocks or struts? Had these things on an old Cadillac, but never had them replaced.

TooManyFords

08-28-2003, 01:14 PM

I plan on doing that wrenching on the shocks tonight. I'll post later as to what I find.

mtnh

08-28-2003, 01:50 PM

The air springs last until they break open and leak. Until then they are a no-maintenance item. I've never seen one break, and had 120K on my '96 with no problems when I got the MM.

Mike

Petrograde

08-28-2003, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by TooManyFords Thought about loading the trunk up with 300lb of cat litter (unused of course!) [/B]

Thats a gotta be a big friggin cat!:D

jgc61sr2002

08-28-2003, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by mtnh
The air springs last until they break open and leak. Until then they are a no-maintenance item. I've never seen one break, and had 120K on my '96 with no problems when I got the MM.

Mike Mike - I haven't seen any broken on the GM or MM. I have seen numerous Town Cars with broken air bags. Many owners change to springs at that time as the replacement of the air bag system is expensive. IMHO.

cruzer

08-28-2003, 08:24 PM

Had to replace the rear air bags on my '92 GM at 150,000 miles due to puncture of left one by road debris---'95 has 110,000--still O K, '99 has 80,000--all O K. They seem to be pretty durable

SergntMac

08-28-2003, 08:41 PM

Just for the record...I have nothing to add to this discussion.

TooManyFords

08-30-2003, 01:04 PM

Yep, just as I suspected, it was the rear shocks! First, I need to say that Monroe doesn't make a replacement shock for the '03 GM or Marauder and the '02 shock does NOT fit. Been there, done that, didn't get the t-shirt. I replaced them minutes ago and here's how I did it:

1. Get a set of '65 Galaxie rear Monroe Sensa-trak shocks #5803.

2. Go to the hardware store and get 6" of blastic tube, 3/8" I.D. and 9/16" O.D. and cut to length to fit between the lower I.D. of the shock bracket.

3. Remove original shocks and keep the top rubber gromet assy. for use on the replacement shocks.

4. Assemble the 5803's with the same top pieces making sure you use the metal top from the new kit to before putting the lower bromet on the post. Tighten as usual.

5. Get a can of WD-40 or your favorite K-Y type lube and oil the long bolt and the inside of the plastic tube, it's a tight fit.

6. Insert the tube in the lower shock gromet and place in the bracket.

7. With a torque wrench, blast the bolt through the plastic tube which cinches up the whole assembly tight.

8. Torque the outside bolt back on through the wheel. I used a 12" 1/2 drive extension and it works great.

Test drove and all the harshness is now gone! It really does make a difference! I did just the rear and notice now that the front is more harsh and I need to put a set on the front too.

I haven't checked the books on the fronts yet, but that will be next weekends project.

In all, I give it a 2 out of 5 for difficulty, but I have a lift and air tools in the garage too.

Cheers!

SergntMac

08-31-2003, 02:57 AM

Originally posted by SergntMac
Just for the record...I have nothing to add to this discussion.

Wait a minute, I do have something to add...

Originally posted by TooManyFords
I'm beginning to think that the soft ride is made of unobtanium (like the little black fender flags on the '64 MM)

I have your fender badges right here, TMF.

A shade smaller now, with the Marauder plate attached. Here's a pic, if you like them, send me an e-mail with your order.

BTW...Those who have posted here, have been too "politically correct" to ask the obvious. I'm not PC...Sorry.

The MM was built to emmulate the ride of the '60s muscle cars, which was "crisp" and "firm" in comparasion to the production cars of that era. The MM ride is intentional, therefore...Why did you buy the MM in the first place?

This "ride" was delivered to us by LM, by installing all the suspension components from a Town Car stretch limo. Not supporting it customary 42" extensions, the suspension reproduces a remarkable firmness, one most of us have been begging for, for years now, so, WTF were you thinking during your tst drive?

Nevermind, even asking is pollotically uncorrect these days...Forget I asked, K?

I got badges...

TooManyFords

08-31-2003, 05:46 AM

Originally posted by SergntMac
Wait a minute, I do have something to add...

BTW...Those who have posted here, have been too "politically correct" to ask the obvious. I'm not PC...Sorry.

The MM was built to emmulate the ride of the '60s muscle cars, which was "crisp" and "firm" in comparasion to the production cars of that era. The MM ride is intentional, therefore...Why did you buy the MM in the first place?

I'll humor you on this one.

< SOAPBOX >
In the 60's, muscle cars were not a "package" until the very late 60's, early 70's. Most, and I mean 95%, were nothing more than bigger motors, beefier trannies stronger rear ends. We're not talking mustangs and camaroes here, that would be comparing apples to oranges. Take any big muscle car, heck, take the '64 Marauder or the 70 Marauder cause that really is apples to apples. They did NOT ride like lumber wagons. My '65 Galaxie 2-door is a muscle car and it rides like a big car should ride.

Want a stiff crappy ride, buy a ricer. :)
< /SOAPBOX >

I feel better!

PS: Don't take this personally, but I don't like your badges. MHO

TripleTransAm

08-31-2003, 07:55 AM

Gonna throw my 2 cents in here. I spent a lot of time behind the wheel of a large Pontiac sedan with a "sport suspension" option made in the mid 80s. From the day the car rolled out of the dealership for the first time, the general comments were "Gee this thing rides harsh" or " does this thing have springs under it?". I figured it might soften with break-in, but it didn't. I understand Pontiac was in the middle of its "euro" redefinition back then but surely they weren't about to try and paint their largest family barge with this brush?

My first Marauder road test was like stepping back in time. All the dynamics of that old Pontiac suspension with better post-Y2K handling to boot, all of it neatly packaged in this new car. So make that 2 large sedans with stiff rides that I've enjoyed thus far.

The MM certainly does not share the soft ride of its Panther siblings but I'd have to say that I believe it was not meant to either. I've driven many large domestics and can understand why a soft ride would be expected. The reality is that these big cars are heavy, and to get any sort of decent handling you have to keep that mass under control and not flopping around. And the only way to do that is with springs (or, in Pontiac's case, springs and good sway bars). And with heavy duty springs comes the need for greater shock damping, and it all comes together as a stiffer ride.

Nonetheless, I'm not saying your factory shocks were not faulty. I'm sorry I didn't have the opportunity to try your bounce test at home but the reality of changing roles within my place of employment placed a great deal of stress on my free time in recent days. I do recall having felt some suspension compliance in some occasions where I had to step into my trunk (no kinky sex jokes, please) but haven't tried the bounce test (which I do not trust on stiffly-sprung cars anyway... PM me if you're interested in an interesting story involving my GTA and the bounce test).

So, just keep on enjoying your Marauder as you like it, but do understand that you may have somewhat compromised one aspect of the Marauder package (the handling).

Speaking of job changes, I've actually gone back to doing what I was doing about a year ago and had thoroughly enjoyed doing for a decade. Along with the Marauder, just another example that sometimes you CAN go back...

SergntMac

08-31-2003, 11:10 AM

Originally posted by TooManyFords
I'll humor you on this one. Want a stiff crappy ride, buy a ricer.

I feel better!

Gee...I guess you told me! LOL!

Petrograde

08-31-2003, 12:33 PM

All things considered, I think Mercury did a good job with our suspension. I might be too rough to some and too soft to others, but it's a good starting point. I am happy with the ride of my MM.

I've had a few GM F-Bodies, now those are harsh! I feel a dime in the road, but I could also corner like hell. unfortunatly, we cant have both a soft ride and firm handling. If the ride really bothers you then change it!

I will prob'ly go with Eibach springs and the solid rear sway bar sometime in the future. Hey, everyone is different. If people want to trade snide comments about each others veiws about mods so be it. But, it defeats the purpose of this site.

just my 2 cents

TripleTransAm

08-31-2003, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by Petrograde
I've had a few GM F-Bodies, now those are harsh! I feel a dime in the road, but I could also corner like hell. unfortunatly, we cant have both a soft ride and firm handling.

Interesting to read this... my WS6 rides like a Cadillac in comparison to my GTA! LOL! I *just* got back from a business trip in Toronto and being just a 5.5 hour drive to where I was working, I took the WS6 (my econo car, LOL! 27.7 mpg on the way there and during the hotel-office commutes, 32 mpg on the way back all highway). Didn't beat me up at all... I could probably drive the whole round trip one more time without any more fatigue.

I've had this WS6 thing on the road course several times and the handling is phenomenal, even stock. Goes to show you what a good solid (well, more solid) chassis will do for handling. My GTA, on the other hand, has great handling (never tracked it so I can't compare) but rides like it's on metal stilts instead of springs. Great road feel, but at what price ... OUCH!

I won't exaggerate in saying I could ride over a dime and tell heads or tails, but I *can* drive over the digits on painted-on-asphalt speed limits with the GTA and count the difference in "thumps" between, say, the "5" and the "0" in a painted-on "50" kph speed limit indication. I cannot do this with my WS6.

Nonetheless, after my experience with the rental Town Car in San Diego last January, I can honestly say I'm not ready to give up the firm ride just yet.

SergntMac

08-31-2003, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by Petrograde
Hey, everyone is different. If people want to trade snide comments about each others veiws about mods so be it. But, it defeats the purpose of this site. just my 2 cents

I didn't post any "snide comments" here, Petro, a lot of people write like they talk. I am one of those people. If you and I were standing eye to eye, what you read here is what you will hear here.

Turning the "question at hand" into a philosphical discussion of how it was stated, is fool's play, a dodge from answering the chief question.

It's this simple, my friend, in my mind.

The gentleman purchased an MM, and he is apparently disappointed with the suspension. Apparently, he has spent a lot of time thinking about a repair, and to the point that he prepared a post detailing every step he took to address his problem. Bravo! I admire this man's effort, and his attention to detail. But, the more I read, the more I am compelled to ask the question I did ask, which is "why?"

Why did someone buy a car that boasts of a suspension system that replicates what many of us hold near and dear. It's not really all that "performance" grade in stock trim, by today's standard anyway. But, for many of us, it does refresh memories, and it provides a safe and responsive system, compliant with '03 technology. This "hint" of 1967-1970 "muscle car suspension" geomertery is alluring, it caused many of us to sign the dotted line. But, many of us already know, it's not real '03 performance stuff. It's an illusion, with some promise, at best. Look at it this way...

What draws almost all of us here to love this Marauder automobile, causes this one lone person to post his desire to change it all, so, my "why?" seems a reasonable question for me to post...Yes? The lone voice against so many positive views?

I am sure many others thought this, and wanted to post their questions too, but this fear of being cited, or singled out as "snide," or, "rude" surely chills their desire to ask, and they just moved on.

Was I being "snide?" I don't think so.

But, I have been no more snide or insulting than the original post has been snide and insulting to me, as an MM owner. I am a member here, and an owner too, of two MMs. Am I not allowed to post my reaction to a snide and insulting post?

I believe I am, and I did.

This car was designed, and built, with one intent in mind. When someone doesn't get that, and they set out to erase the canvass, they can do it elsewhere, so they too, do not "defeat the purpose of this site."

Yes. This is just my 2 cents...too!

gja

08-31-2003, 07:28 PM

A soft ride on a performance sedan, WTF?

Bigdogjim

08-31-2003, 07:48 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by TooManyFords
[B]I'll humor you on this one.

< SOAPBOX >
In the 60's, muscle cars were not a "package" until the very late 60's, early 70's. Most, and I mean 95%, were nothing more than bigger motors, beefier trannies stronger rear ends. We're not talking mustangs and camaroes here, that would be comparing apples to oranges. Take any big muscle car, heck, take the '64 Marauder or the 70 Marauder cause that really is apples to apples. They did NOT ride like lumber wagons. My '65 Galaxie 2-door is a muscle car and it rides like a big car should ride.

Here is rare one from the Big Dog!

What muscle cars did you drive in the '60s & '70S?????
I grew up in a L&M dealership and all the musscle cars we had rode like "rack wagons" to quote my dear old Dad.
All Marauder ads of the peroid speak of sport suspension! I have all of L&M ads of the era to prove it!!!

I just drove a '03 GM Saturday that I help friend get a price on and I almost fell a sleep after 10 miles! Talk about smooth ride!

And I had a '70 Marauder X-100 red/black 429. No way my Dad would take Mom out to dinner in that!!!

I real don't get into these pi** contest post but I agree with the thought's of where were you durning the test drive?

Like I said no disrespect intended or flame to you but, most of bought this car for ride,handleing,and preformance!(2 out 3 ain't bad)

Enjoy the 'mods' you have made and I real hope your happy with the ride.

in the end that is what it is all about! You and Your Marauder.
Enjoy. Happy motoring ;)

RCSignals

09-01-2003, 01:15 AM

Good post Big Dog.

I like that comment rode like "rack wagons"
That reminds me. I haven't ridden in many Corvettes, but the ones I have, (none of them this new generation) all rode that way. Worst and roughest ride I've ever experienced, and I've ridden in a few tracked vehicles. Yet people love their Corvettes. With performance comes a harder ride. The Marauder at least is supposed to give the feel of that. Personally I like the ride of my Marauder.

TripleTransAm

09-01-2003, 08:50 AM

Originally posted by RCSignals
That reminds me. I haven't ridden in many Corvettes, but the ones I have, (none of them this new generation) all rode that way. Worst and roughest ride I've ever experienced, and I've ridden in a few tracked vehicles.

If they were mid 80s units, I'm not going to blame you. Chevy went ape-***** with the suspensions on those early 4th gen Vettes. I've driven a few early ones and they ride so harsh (not stiff, HARSH!) that the car becomes a rattle trap in no time. I'm not sure what they did to the later C4s ('84-'96) but they ride much better than the early ones, and probably handle as well. I test drove a few when I was semi-seriously looking for a car in 1993 (which culminated in the surprise purchase of my GTA) and the difference was night and day.

Given the flexi-chassis of my '87 GTA, they had no choice there but to dial in the suspension stiffness for good handling. I like what Pontiac did on my GTA, but my pregnant wife did not appreciate it so much during that summer of 2001.

In contrast, the newer sports cars have better chassis designs and are stiffer by design, so the suspension seems to beat up the driver a lot less. I've been told that the day I weld in some subframe connectors on my GTA, my suspension will suddenly feel much smoother than ever. I suspect that's why the newer Vettes can outhandle the old ones with much less aggressive spring and shock tuning.

TooManyFords

09-01-2003, 10:44 AM

Hey, I'm not gonna bust on anyone. Not my style.

Many of you have asked if I was asleep during the test drive. All I can say is, "what test drive?" I went in, to buy the MM and I didn't need a test drive. I knew going in that I had two requirements in buying this car.

1. That is have 4 doors and haul ass.

2. That it ride decent.

I got #1 day one. #2 has been a work in progress and I now have the solution. Total cost for #2 was $40. In my book, that was almost the best $40 I've spent on the car. (the best $40 was the original '64 Marauder badges for the fenders, no offense mac and I'm sure none taken!)

We all buy cars for different reasons. Mine is just different from some of y'alls.

TMF really fits me, I've had 50+ cars in the last 20+ years and a lot of very collectable fords. My most recent restoration and sale was a '66 Comet Cyclone GT Convertible with the 390HP and 4 speed. A '67 R-code Fairlane (427), a '70 R-code SCJ Mustang, 2 '65 Galaxies, 390 GTE Cougar, and list goes on and on. I do not contribute a whole lot to this forum yet, but ask me about fast fords and I can build 'em, restore 'em and drive the wheels off 'em!

When I get ready to unveil my '03 MM, I will have lots of pictures and details on what I've done to it.

Cheers, and drive safe today!

TripleTransAm

09-01-2003, 10:54 AM

I just did the bounce test on my MM. With the trunk open, I could apply some of my weight on the trunk floor and get the car to move quite easily, as I bent over the rear bumper. But it certainly did not bounce, which is directly in line with the more aggressive damping of the shocks.

As I said before, maybe you got a set of bad shocks. No matter... if you got the car riding the way you like it, that's what counts. I think most people were taken off guard at comments like the way the car "should" ride... I guess the way my car rides is probably the way it was designed: nicely damped, a little stiff but not harsh unless it's on the worst pavement to be offered (and trust me, we can offer the worst in some places). I like it, but some might call it overly stiff. Different strokes...

Like I said, what matters is that you're happy with it, as we are happy with ours.

TooManyFords

09-01-2003, 10:56 AM

What you said! :D

AJAX

10-28-2004, 07:29 AM

I AM GOING TO TRY TO REPLACE MY SHOCKS THANKS FOR INFO MY CAR RIDES TO CHOPPY I FOLLOWED A CV INTERCEPTOR PLAIN WRAPPER AND IT WASNT CHOPPY AT ALL FROM WHAT I CAN TELL THE AIR BAG AIR POLICE SPEC I ALSO HAD A FRIEND TELL ME YOU CAN PUT THE CHROME COBRA R 17 WHEEL AND GET A SOFTER TIRE. I WANT TO SOFTEN UP A BIT. SORRY FOR THE CAPS GUYS.

Yep, just as I suspected, it was the rear shocks! First, I need to say that Monroe doesn't make a replacement shock for the '03 GM or Marauder and the '02 shock does NOT fit. Been there, done that, didn't get the t-shirt. I replaced them minutes ago and here's how I did it:

1. Get a set of '65 Galaxie rear Monroe Sensa-trak shocks #5803.

2. Go to the hardware store and get 6" of blastic tube, 3/8" I.D. and 9/16" O.D. and cut to length to fit between the lower I.D. of the shock bracket.

3. Remove original shocks and keep the top rubber gromet assy. for use on the replacement shocks.

4. Assemble the 5803's with the same top pieces making sure you use the metal top from the new kit to before putting the lower bromet on the post. Tighten as usual.

5. Get a can of WD-40 or your favorite K-Y type lube and oil the long bolt and the inside of the plastic tube, it's a tight fit.

6. Insert the tube in the lower shock gromet and place in the bracket.

7. With a torque wrench, blast the bolt through the plastic tube which cinches up the whole assembly tight.

8. Torque the outside bolt back on through the wheel. I used a 12" 1/2 drive extension and it works great.

Test drove and all the harshness is now gone! It really does make a difference! I did just the rear and notice now that the front is more harsh and I need to put a set on the front too.

I haven't checked the books on the fronts yet, but that will be next weekends project.

In all, I give it a 2 out of 5 for difficulty, but I have a lift and air tools in the garage too.

Cheers!

GordonB

10-28-2004, 07:46 AM

Ross,
Rear air springs: Had them on my Lincoln MK VII and they work great.
Downside is that they are around $200 each for the part replace plus about 1 hour labor each side. I got about 9 - 10 years out of the originals before I had to ahev the rears replaced.
Hope this helps.
GordonB

TooManyFords

02-28-2011, 06:32 PM

Here's a thread from the past! With the new Beater Marauder, I was just complaining how rough it rode and did a search for a solution. Turns out I solved this very problem 7+ years ago and completely forgot what I did to solve it!

LOL!

Good thing I posted good notes!

thathotrodlincn

02-28-2011, 06:59 PM

This is an opinion only and should be approached as an opinion. Air springs are quite non linear in spring rate, the more they are compressed, the higher the spring rate. The rate of increase is not linear, it is a geometric function. All that having been said, an ideal shock for an air spring is more on the order of 30/70 versis to the normal 50/50. Such shocks are availible (Air Ride Technology dual adjustable for example), but are hard to find and expensive. To get the ride you want, you may want to go to linear wound metal springs and low damping rate shocks. Ride would be softer, but handling????