OK, I know these questions come up all the time, but I was wondering about whether I should concider the Bilstein HD inserts for my car instead of the Koni yellows (Sport). Basically:

(1) Should I really give a sh*t about the adjustability on the Konis.

(2) How close are the damping rates on the HDs versus the Sports (at each extreme of adjustment for the Konis).

I daily drive the car right now and do not intend to track it for the time being. I am replacing a worn out set of Koni yellows and have a new-ish set of Koni yellows on the back.

Thanks

 

I like the Bilsteins on both the BM and now the 951 (if I ever get it to move again!). I had Koni yellows on my last 944 and I really didnt care for them. The adjustments were either too soft or too hard. I bet most people only adjust them once or twice anyways. Virtually no one messes with the rear since you have to compress them. You would have to probably call Skip to compare the two, though Paragon is NOT a Bilstein dist. They know their Koni stuff so well I am sure they know their competition. I have also found them to be less biased than some other vendors. BTW - www.eshocks.com or www.shox.com both offer the Bilsteins pretty cheap.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

We sell the Bilsteins as well - they're just not listed on the site. $143/ea for the front inserts if you're interested. If you've already got the rears, I'd stick with that - is a great match, and the front are easily adjustable and more important to the over all handling.

 

Skip - you guys only handle the inserts, correct? Otherwise, let me know about a price on the AK37354. I would also like to know what is included with that (collars, etc.)
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

Skip,

Are you saying stick with the Konis when you say "...stick with that". I think I am mostly interested in durability and damping quality. If you all think the adjustability if important I will have to consider that. I am afraid I will tend to fiddle around with it too much (the shocks that is) if I have adjustability. Also, I have seen where it is recommended to not use the HDs if you plan on lowering the car, is this true?

And one more thing; why is it that a Sport version of the Bilsteins appears to be available in Europe (for my car at least), but we only have the HDs here?

 

I dont know about the Porsches but for the BMW (5ers) the sport and the HD are the same valving but one is a hair shorter.

You have the AK1110/AK1111 or AK1120/1121 available in the US for the 944 as well, which is a coil over front (PN is valving IIRC). www.alleuro.com sells the stands Bilstein HS strut for 129 and change. I would say Skip is pretty darn close!
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

FWIW
I had bilsteins and addco sway bars on my 77 celica and the car handled great and was balanced. I loved the handling until i drove a brand new 83 RX7 that did everything the celica did plus straight out of the box, but thats another story.

when i was buying the konis for the S2 i spoke with a lot of serious drivers, and almost all preferred bilsteins over koni. i wanted to get bilsteins, but got the koni inserts because i couldnt get bilsteins for the S2.

the mullet mobile (93 Z28) has SLP sway bars which im told are made by addco, urethane bushings, etc. and bilsteins revalved to Doug Rippie (the great corvette genius) and the car is not balanced at all. too stiff in the rear on bumps to the extent that 5lbs difference in tire pressure doesnt do it. Doug should stick to corvettes

the konis were beautiful out of the box on the 944. i set the rears in the middle, and then played a little with the fronts to get it just right and was very happy. I may send the rear bilsteins back to bilstein to be re-valved for a mere $110 plus shipping and no shocks for a month but cant get a straight answer from the mullets on the camaro board

 

I have the bilsteins on my 911 and i am very pleased, that said I have the Koni's on the 951 and am also happy with them.

 

Matt,

I am not sure I can use the shocks you mention. I have a 924S which has the early steering knuckle. I am pretty sure the later shocks won't fit. True or false?

 

Manning - I really couldnt answer that. The standard struts show to be for 924/944 thru 1985.5. Again, Skip might have a definite. The other numbers I mentioned are coil overs and I dont know at all if they will fit.

Tom- I have never driven a Camaro that didnt feel the way you describe. Mostly a by-product of solid rear axle. I dont know that you will EVER get that feeling out of that car.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

not intending to hijack this post but matt knows more than the mullets on the mullet board.

Matt,
i was thinking of switching the rear bilsteins with the stock decarbons to see if it makes much of a difference. also, the car seems to drive better (havent tried it at an extreme) with the stock 16" rims than it did with the 17" rims. i didnt notice a difference when i went from 16 to 17 on the 944, but do with the camaro. what has your experience been with rims, and am i wasting my time switching shocks that would be better spent switching the rear tires to ones with a softer sidewall.

 

Matt, sent you email

Manning, I meant to stay with Konis in front to match the rear. Adjustability is not dangerous - just the opposite, and you really can't hurt anything - it allows your curiousity to be satisfied with regard to how damping works in the real world, and demostrates the importance of rebound damping (the power stroke... the more important of the two).

I can't say that I've heard anything negative about using Bilsteins when lowering - I can't see that it would be any more of a concern than with the Konis. Just be sure you have a good quality bump stop in there - like the Koni Competition units.

Also, the AK11xx are for late model cars only (87+ 944, 86+ 951) and will not fit the 924S *without modification*.

Tom, the suspension is a machine... all parts must function correctly. One of the biggest advances in tire technology has been the sidewall construction. While a stiffer sidewall does increase the road "feel", it also allows greater control over the bounce/jounce effects - often very uncontrolled is a tire because of its inherent progressive-spring trait. Never downgrade to a softer sidewall to improve handling response... only if you want the caddy to ride a bit softer

 

Tom - that car just has an inherent oversteer problem and solid axle. The stiffer sidewall of the 17's probably amplifies the problem. I agree with Skip, dont try to drop the stiffness of the sidewall. BTW- since no one measures this how were you trying to do what you proposed. The stock suspension is awful, I would stick with what you have and try to learn to live with it. The DeCarbons are decent but the car was really setup to go fast in a straight line. Loads of people take them on track though. What tires are on the 17" rims?
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

OK, cool.

So to hijack this thread myself, let's change gears and think about this. It is kind of along the lines of what Adrial's thread is about. And this is all just to think about, I'm not really sure I need/want to stiffen up my suspension much right now.

First, i realize we are talking about McPherson strut suspension on our cars, but the BRE racing Datsuns used fairly light springs and huge sway bars to balance the handling on those cars (and they hauled ***). Is there any sense in working from this angle to acheive handling balance on the car rather than right of the bat saying, hey I need stiff coils.

 

Manning - nice avatar.