My 69 seems to slope down towards the rear of the car. A body shop owner said it was the way it should be and the springs and shocks were replaced shortly before I bought the car. What would be a good way to raise the rear of the car, I was thinking air shocks?

I would not use air shocks. The mounting points for our shocks are not built to have the load of the car on them. Either the leafs that were installed are to soft or maybe the front is to high. Any pictures?

Many here run air shocks without problems. Haven't heard any reports of shocks breaking off or punching thru the mounts...anyone? The mounts don't carry all the weight of the car, they just carry a portion of it. So it can work. If you have a solid unibody, I wouldn't fear trying it. But it is indeed a band-aid, and not the proper way to do it...same with ANY other simple solutions besides having correct springs on the car...air shocks, helper springs, longer shackles, shimming the front spring mount...All will raise the rear. And all are an incorrect compromise that MAY (or may not) cause other problems.

The BEST way is to replace with the proper springs. Or remove your current springs have have them re-arched or have a leaf or two changed out by a knowledgeable spring rebuilder.

Your problem is unique if indeed the springs were replaced as you state. Far more often, people here who replace springs on these cars achieve a rear stance that is too high...not too low as you report. And in today's world, everyone seems to want the ground-hugging stance anyway. Rather rare to find someone who wants to raise it like you do.

I agree pics are worth 1000 words, so others here can weigh in as to whether the car is "supposed to be" that way, as per your shop.

But even at that, realize that there was more than one spring option for this vehicle straight from the factory. For example sprints and HO cars got "heavy duty" springs as part of their package. I'm more familiar with 68 than 69. But for my year, many models could get "ride and handling package" which had different rated springs from normal-issue. So I'm fairly certain ride height varied on many models right off the showroom floor. Plus the aftermarket and repro market offers MANY different rear spring rates, allowing everyone to customize their ride heights and handling characteristics. So what is "right for the car?" Seems to me that "right" frankly it is, and always has been, whatever you want it to be, ever since day one when Pontiac allowed people to choose suspension options...

Pontiacs should sit low in the back. That was one of thier trademarks back in the day. I have been fighting with mine to get it to sit lower in the rear. LOL

I have Air shocks on my 68, in order to have the rear up where I want it I have to add a lot of air. This makes the ride very stiff and will hop over washboard while cornering or going up-hill. I'll be replacing mine with standard shocks when I get new springs, for a better ride and it's easier on the upper shock mount. Trouble is getting the spring you want, Eaton has five stock height springs for a 68 coupe and more for a vert, they also offer +/- 3"in height for each of those load and spring rate springs. It's a lot of work to replace the springs and then remove them again when you find the new springs don't give you the ride you want, I had my front coils in and out four times. A lot of others offer spring packages but as stated most are going for the low stance look and lowering springs are the norm now. I kind of like the classic muscle car look with the rear a little higher than the front with the rear tires a little wider than the front as well. Low riders with large diameter wheels and low profile tires not so much, unless it's a 63 Impala.
But that's just me, each to his/her own.

as Larry says , Birds are supposed to sit lower in rear , look like they go 'uphill'....personally I didnt like that stance ,so I changed mine , but rather than raising the rear (which many did in thelate 60s ,early 70s) I lowered my front...cut 1 full coi off the front springs, lowered it +- 1 inch...I get many compliments on the stance and I like it. see my pics

I agree with Bjorn, lower the front. I used the Hotchkis lowering spring. Its a bit stiffer since I have the same amount of weight up front, but less room for it to travel.

Nice looking car.
I tried lowering the front of mine but got tire rub [235/60 R15} so I raised the back.

For reference, here's the correct stance visually (with and without passengers): (Note where those rear tires sit relative to the well opening.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZUEod15NsE

The measurements are all in 3-7 to 3-9 of the Body by Fisher Manual

New springs (probably not the right specs for it after all) on mine put the rear much too high. It's taken a couple decades for it to settle down closer to where I want it.

I talked to a local custom spring shop and he suggested that I get the car sitting on a level surface and then measure how much each side needs to come down. Remove and mark the springs left and right. He will take some of the arch out of the springs so the car sits where I want and will be level side to side. I will do this this winter while I am installing the frame ties.

Yes, they actually did sit lower in back from the factory. The Pontiac Service Manual has the specs for correct rocker panel to ground measurements, and the Firebird (and GTO) sat lower in back. Just the style back then.

But I prefer a level look.

Anyway, here's a couple of original stance 69's.

I dont like the original stance for two reasons
1) it looks like its going uphill
2) it does help the car to 'catch air' at higher speeds = floats
but can be compensated with the "snowplow" up front...I prefer both lowered front AND snowplow for real stability

Air shocks are like riding a buckboard wagon.
Wouldnt heat'm to make'm sag either. Just seems wrong on high tenstil steel.
I cut a 1/4 to 1/2 "round" off the front coils to get mine level.

Buckboard, that's a good way to describe it. If the shock is holding up the car it's not doing the job a shock absorber is meant to do.

I read all of your responces and then I went and looked at my car in the garage. The springs were fairly new judging that by the lack of rust. After 15 mins I decided to put a 4 foot level on the body under the car. It pitches toward the rear on the outside line of the bubble. Can anyone compare that to your car? I like how Bjorns car sits, but lowering my front end is not an option due to the incline of my driveway. Maybe the rear spings are what I should be looking at.

Actually, I did not see the pics from stealthBird above. My car looks just like the firebird, same color even! I think I'll just drive it for now and think about.