Ride Height, how low can I go in the front?
11-05-2005, 02:49 PM
#18
Drifting
After fitting my newish Bilsteins my front must be about 200+, I've just ordered a Hook Wrench to adjust it back to spec. I made sure it was high because when I previously fitted Koni's it ended up around 140 - 150, and was bottoming out continously on London's speed bump and pot-holed roads, that was scary.
11-06-2005, 08:31 PM
#20
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Berkshire. 'Old' England. U.K.
Posts: 465
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by UKKid35
................I've just ordered a Hook Wrench to adjust it back to spec.
....................... when I previously fitted Koni's it ended up around 140 - 150, and was bottoming out continously on London's speed bump and pot-holed roads, that was scary.
....................... when I previously fitted Koni's it ended up around 140 - 150, and was bottoming out continously on London's speed bump and pot-holed roads, that was scary.
Yerrr.. wimp Paul
, mines 125 mm all round & has negotiated London's roads on loads of occasions, even with 2 passengers, remember 
11-06-2005, 08:36 PM
#21
Rennlist Member
I'm at about 165 front; 160 rear w/Bilstein/Eibachs now, and I'll never go back.
I was lower all the way around.....too low. Somewhere under 150 in the front. I had a good alignment done after the lowboy ride height, and didn't get any weird handling or uneven tire wear. It looked good, but it was no fun to drive. I had to slow to a crawl for speed bumps, dips in the road, and aprons were a real bitch. I had to approach them at an angle. Every trip added a new scrape to my airdam and/or bellypan. I found myself driving around like it was an old Packard or something.
What really made it bad was the roads that should be the most fun (twisties) usually have some unpredictable dips in them. Sitting too low at a good rate of speed, one of those dips would take out the a/c or worse.
The mechanical risk and the lack of improved handling far outweighs the look of a low car, IMO.
And come to think of it, it looks much better than I expected sitting 15mm higher.
I was lower all the way around.....too low. Somewhere under 150 in the front. I had a good alignment done after the lowboy ride height, and didn't get any weird handling or uneven tire wear. It looked good, but it was no fun to drive. I had to slow to a crawl for speed bumps, dips in the road, and aprons were a real bitch. I had to approach them at an angle. Every trip added a new scrape to my airdam and/or bellypan. I found myself driving around like it was an old Packard or something.
What really made it bad was the roads that should be the most fun (twisties) usually have some unpredictable dips in them. Sitting too low at a good rate of speed, one of those dips would take out the a/c or worse.
The mechanical risk and the lack of improved handling far outweighs the look of a low car, IMO.
And come to think of it, it looks much better than I expected sitting 15mm higher.
11-06-2005, 08:37 PM
#22
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Berkshire. 'Old' England. U.K.
Posts: 465
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BIMMERMIKE
Thanks, are cd WSM good? I see ebay has for $24.99
I'm sure sombody here on the forum will be able to help you out , J M you out there ???
11-06-2005, 08:42 PM
#23
Rennlist Member
Martin, really 125mm all the way around?!
11-06-2005, 08:46 PM
#24
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
JP nice bike, I had the 250. Tach it out too many times on the semi-knobbies.
y 928 became unstable at 90 mph with the front end at 148mm. Re-adjusted to 170 mm. Nice and calm now but hate the look of tall fender. Think the winter project will be installing the Eibach springs.
y 928 became unstable at 90 mph with the front end at 148mm. Re-adjusted to 170 mm. Nice and calm now but hate the look of tall fender. Think the winter project will be installing the Eibach springs.
11-06-2005, 08:59 PM
#25
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Berkshire. 'Old' England. U.K.
Posts: 465
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JPTL
Martin, really 125mm all the way around?!
IIRC lowering a car by 1" is equal to increasing the track by 2" s, anybody comment on that ?
11-06-2005, 09:14 PM
#26
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by martin D
Some are crap, the good one is a must have.
I'm sure sombody here on the forum will be able to help you out , J M you out
there ???
I'm sure sombody here on the forum will be able to help you out , J M you out
there ???
I want to get familiar with my car other than standing in front of my engine bay or laying on my back studying the underside. The winter is coming here in the Toronto area, lots of downtime to play in the garage.
Thanks
86.5 A/T meteor mettalic/blk 180k km
11-06-2005, 09:34 PM
#27
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Berkshire. 'Old' England. U.K.
Posts: 465
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BIMMERMIKE
Martin, who is J M ? ...............
I really prefer a paper WSM but a good printer can solve that issue.
..................
I really prefer a paper WSM but a good printer can solve that issue.
..................
$250 for the 9 volume paper WSM's from the forum sponsors
11-07-2005, 05:59 PM
#28
Advanced
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lyle-Land, Wa. (65mi. East of Portland, Or.)
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rrally low and bump steer is an issue. I followed Mark Anderson's advice and adapted some 911 bump steer kits for use on my racer, which I run at about 115 f and 120 in back. Noticable, especially with the rather large slicks I run all around..(12.5" x 18"). Just a quick look at the front suspension and steering will show you that when the car gets set up real low, suspension movement with the altered angles on the steering arms/tie rods, etc, changes where the wheels point(without any steering wheel movement) better with that corrected, when the car is really low......This happens to some extent with a stock car also, but to a much lesser degree.
Don Hanson
Don Hanson
12-13-2005, 03:22 PM
#29
Drifting
so 120mm in front can negotiate londons cart tracks (apparently) but what is the optimum difference front to rear for high speed autobahn type driving? im guessing that raising the rear will result in more downforce over the front axle as it allows the air to flow faster under the car, but by how much do you want the rear to be higher?
12-13-2005, 05:21 PM
#30
Drifting
Originally Posted by mark kibort
geeeezz.. we all know how low my car is 113mm front, and 135mm rear.
Nick's car is pretty low (though not as low as Mark's) and you can hear it fouling the bodywork when turning in on a minor gradient, it's great on the track though.
Martin - Guess what? I've now got both parts I need, arrived this morning, yet to check it out though...