1974 'cuda Leaf Spring ?

[c_u_d_a]

I'm trying to determine the larget wheel I can fit without rubbing, and while taking the measurements I discovered that the leaf springs are not parallel.

At the front eye, the center-center measurement is 44.75" and the center-center mesurement at the rear is 48". My question is why are the leaf springs not parallel? I also have 1973 Challenger that measures approximately the same. On my 1966 Charger, the leaf springs are parallel.

Thanks!
 

[Chryco Psycho]

well ask the engineeers , all E bodys are not parallel, nothing unusual 

[c_u_d_a]

I know manufacturing tolerance were not the best and the structure is not perfectly square under the best of circumstances, but when the leaf springs are splayed outward toward the rear by 1-5/8" this must be mostly by design. I just was curious as to why this would be done.

[360 'CUDA]

Right..  All A bodies Longitudinals (thats the sub frame rails) and springs are parallel as are B-bodies up to 1970.
The E-bodies have the longitudinals and springs closer together in the front and further away in the rear.

Interestingly the 1971 and up B-bodies have the logitudinals and springs more apart in the front and closer together in the rear!!! So I don't know what the advantage is either way.

Dont chalk it up to an assembly line mistake though. It's just the way it's designed like CP said

[ShelbyDogg]

It was designed for handling as stated in the Mopar performance manual.  For more spring clearance, I just welded my front hangers to another cut up set last night. I drilled a couple of holes so that 2 of the bolts go through both layers of the new front hanger.  I also welded up a set of the 1" offset rear hangers to move my springs in and put in an early B-body rear end.  This should allow a deeper dish look and additional spring clearance.

[Ravage]

Perhaps the springs were less prone to wrapping under heavy torque with the splay thereby reducing wheel hop?