Okay, first of all, I already know that staggered shocks are supposed to reduce wheel hop, however I'd really like to know why Mavericks from '71-'77 had them but none of the Mustangs did. In fact I haven't seen them on any other Ford except for the pickup trucks (I see them on Dodge & Chevy trucks too, but no other cars). I would think that since Mustangs were optioned more for performance (like GTs, Shelbys, etc.), the need to reduce wheel hop would be present on them as well. What am I missing here? I'm really annoyed that ever since I put 1-1/2" lowering blocks on my car, the Addco rear sway-bar won't clear the passenger side shock because it's in front of the axle housing. I made some custom 1-1/2" spacers which fixed the problem on that side but then the spacer on the other side hit that shock. Can't win with this.
im not sure what the logic of ford was on what got staggered shocks and didnt, but i had the same issue with lowering blocks. i put spacers the same thickness of my lowering blocks on the sway bar diff mounts. i had to really trim the edge of the spacer block and the mounting plate thing that goes around the bushing to keep it from touching my shocks.
Not 100% sure but I believe starting 1969, all performance 4-speed models got staggered shocks, this would include Cobra Jet & Boss cars(my Cobra Fairlane has them)... Excepting for Torino Talladega, automatics did not have the feature, could not even be ordered... No doesn't answer the how come for Mav/Comet...
I asked the caltrac folks about this because I was debating relocating the shocks. They said Ford originally installed staggered shocks to prevent nose dive when braking . They recommended for a street car to leave them staggered.
So how does staggered shocks reduce nose dive?? Never seen any difference better or worse in the 42 years I've owned the Cobra Jet... Callin' Caltrac BS on that one... Most of the braking is done by front which will compress the front springs, thus causing dive... Only way I know to reduce it on a conventional braking system is with additional rear bias, which increases chance of locking rear brakes... Stiffer springs up front would help but that's no doubt unacceptable for most drivers... For Mav/Comet, I suspect it was a power to weight, plus smallish, hopping tires issue... Ford developed bolt in mounts, so unlike Mustang/Torino wasn't a major issue... Those had to be cut with torch on the assembly line to install the upper bracket... I can't really agree with the statement in the Boss 302 link, makes it sound as if the other models mentioned "borrowed" the configuration when in fact the 302 Boss cars were built after Cobra Jet models that already used it... Also states were used n 428 Drag Pack cars which is only partially true, was a 428 automatic vs 4-speed usage only... I've owned four '69 Torino/Fairlanes with 428 & 4-Speed(two std CJ & two Super CJ Drag Pack) all had the staggered shocks... Excepting for Talladega, no 428 Torino or Mustang I've seen with automatic had staggered shocks, with or without Drag Pack...
71-73 Mustangs could be ordered with staggered shocks with the competition suspension. Didn't matter whether it was 4 spd or automatic and 4V or 2V Cleveland. We've had a 2 Q code autos with them and a Sprint with 351 2v auto with competition suspension. -Matt
According to the Ford Literature I have on 1977 Models: "Staggered shock absorbers (right shock is mounted forward of rear axle, left shock behind axle) help counteract wheel hop and increase traction during acceleration and braking." This was taken from literature that was sent to me back in 1993, directly from Ford of Canada in response to a letter I sent them asking for information and resources for Maverick parts/clubs. As far as "Why Mavericks/Comets", I have no clue...
