Originally Posted by GuySmily
....With a lowered car, we need less shock travel anyway, right?
Well, with shorter, stiffer springs you wouldn't need as much travel as stock and, in fact, less droop travel would be desirable, so the shorter spring doesn't come loose... Here's some specs for the Monroe 5752, which sort of works as a cheap replacement for the stockers, and these 'cab' shocks, 66152, I mentioned which might work:
5752: compressed length=8.625", extended length=12.75" (that's more than stock as I recall), travel=4.125"
66152: compressed length=7.875", extended length=11.25", travel=3.375"
The main thing's probably travel, and it's likely that your rear springs don't compress smaller than (7" minus 3.375" =) 3.625". Plus, you should be bottomed-out on the bump stops before the spring fully compresses, so you would need even less travel than that... But then, these are only a prospective rear shock option, probably better to get a matching set front and rear...
Ha, here's a link to the 66152 at Amazon - only $39:
Stock shock specs from http://www.insightcentral.net/forums/204729-post62.html
compressed length=8.86", extended length=11.8" (for comparison to specs for 5752 and 66152 you need to subtract 4cm from the 'extended' and 'compressed' figures noted on the pict at the above link).