When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I'm going to W codes. The pair is about $35 less than a set of X codes, but I only need to compensate for my bumper/winch combination. With the V codes, I originally had 1.75" of lift which gave good clearance for the bumpstops. Now, however, I find the sag of age and the extra weight of the bumper has dropped it to just under 1". I figure I'll gain about 1-1/2" over that using W codes. Besides, I want to keep the ride less stiff. This will leave me with a 1.5" high rear, which is right in line with the rake I want. (I have over 2.5" of rake now.) The bumper has added about 375 lbs to the front. and the W codes are right in line with the extra spring rate and load rating over the V codes to handle it.
Now that the background is out of the way, I was just wondering if anyone has tried them and any negative or positive feedback.
Bion, I do remember a few guys around here that have gone with the Ws and seemed pretty happy with them, unfortunately I don't recall exactly who they were. I do agree with you on them being a good match to your wants and needs. Good luck!
I don’t have all the codes memorized and I don’t hear of W’s often, what is the spring rate of the W ?
The info I have shows the W codes at 5600lbs (for the pair), 450lbs/inch, 5.34" of travel and +2.52" of ride height over stock on a V-10 EX.
I show them as the factory springs for F-450 trucks.
I've found some references that they were also used for f250/350 2WD monobeam leaf spring suspension. I would say that that is probably for a 2WD snow package.
The info I have shows the W codes at 5600lbs (for the pair), 450lbs/inch, 5.34" of travel and +2.52" of ride height over stock on a V-10 EX.
I show them as the factory springs for F-450 trucks.
cool thanks.
fwiw .... at I glance I see 6.2” if travel with those springs. If the rating is 2800 lbs per spring and the rate is 450lbs/in then
450lbs per inch is a linear measurement of the springs rate at a certain point in travel. No spring is linear in the actual rate. The more they bend, the higher the rate. Straight division can get you a ballpark figure, but the real rate is more involved to describe.
I'm going to W codes. The pair is about $35 less than a set of X codes, but I only need to compensate for my bumper/winch combination. With the V codes, I originally had 1.75" of lift which gave good clearance for the bumpstops. Now, however, I find the sag of age and the extra weight of the bumper has dropped it to just under 1". I figure I'll gain about 1-1/2" over that using W codes. Besides, I want to keep the ride less stiff. This will leave me with a 1.5" high rear, which is right in line with the rake I want. (I have over 2.5" of rake now.) The bumper has added about 375 lbs to the front. and the W codes are right in line with the extra spring rate and load rating over the V codes to handle it.
Now that the background is out of the way, I was just wondering if anyone has tried them and any negative or positive feedback.
am I reading correctly that your rear is 2.5” higher then the front ?
if so is this on purpose ? What setup do you have in the rear ?
Well, before the bumper it was only 1.75" higher in the rear. It gave it a slightly bigger rake that settled to dead level after the travel trailer was hooked up. The bumper has dropped the nose, and increased the rake. Going to W codes to bring it back somewhat to what it was.
I installed a modified B code back in 2007. 2 leaves from the original pack and a cut off antiwrap section installed in the pack, and the original blocks.. It gave a good 2.5" of lift when originally installed. Even with towing and all the years gone by, the rear has not sagged at all. A little stiff when unloaded, but tames out like a luxury car with the trailer. The truck is not a daily driver. It is almost exclusively for towing and camping/sightseeing.
450lbs per inch is a linear measurement of the springs rate at a certain point in travel. No spring is linear in the actual rate. The more they bend, the higher the rate. Straight division can get you a ballpark figure, but the real rate is more involved to describe.
450 lbs/in is the spring will compress 1 inch when you apply 450 pounds to it. 2" would require 900 pounds. these leaf springs are not progressive rate.
this is exactly how the entire engineering and suspension community describes springs not me making stuff up.
Here is the actual graph from Fords Blue prints on the Excursions rear leaf springs that show that the rate is indeed linear for the entire travel, this graph is not a calculation but actual test results in a spring test jig.
Just for you, I dug up a couple of threads from beyond the grave over at The Dieselstop, where I (and others like Stewart) used to hang out since that was the hot spot for Excursion suspension mods. First thread thinking about the rear spring design, Second thread reaction after install V's and B's. We were all experimenting then.
I am happy to say that the rears have always performed exactly as I wanted. a softer rate for unloaded times, and when loaded,The soft section sags out (the rake ), the overload bed leaf comes into play, and the rate starts to skyrocket in relation to the load. Sagging from weight is greatly controlled. The front end can still go high without a WD hitch, but no danger of the rear springs bottoming out.
Well, pirate, if that is the case, then they are putting a lot more design work into them than I gave them credit for. I stand corrected about truck springs rates.
Although all the springs I made as a gunsmith never had linear rates no matter what tapers I put on them.
Edit: Ahh, yes. I should have thought about that. spring pack vs single springs. Pack is progressive to keep rate even. I would bet the fronts with only 2 leaves are not as linear.
and for comparison, Here is the F250 dual rate rear spring, pretty obvious where the "progressive" part comes into play as the graph is no longer linear.
again, taken directly from Fords blue prints showing actual test results not my calculations
Edit: Ahh, yes. I should have thought about that. spring pack vs single springs. Pack is progressive to keep rate even. I would bet the fronts with only 2 leaves are not as linear.
Nope, the fronts are Linear I just don't have the graph to show you.
to make a leaf spring have progressive rate you need to have a separate engagement of a secondary spring during its travel like the stock rear f250 over load.
as you described in your post on diesel stop and as the graph shows . the 350 lbs in rate is linear on these until they compress enough to engage the 670 lbs in bottom leaf.
you can see it clearly on the graph.
what confuses many people and is really a disservice to the entire aftermarket is leaf springs are marketed as "progressive" when in fact the spring rate is Linear.
what is "progressive" about these springs is the individual spring lengths as you can see.
what has happened as a result is many people confuse "progressive length" to mean the same as "progressive rate"
I 100% guarantee this spring has a linear spring rate but you can clearly see the pack is made from progressively different length leafs.
