Whitesands

Thanks for the explanation Dr Bob, going to do the job properly and drop the shocks.

siscogts

when I checked ride height on my gts I discovered 2 important things:
-shocks were replaced.
-who replaced shocks was stupid and lazy so he put together everything without thinking about ride height, so I was lucky to get 159-162 at the rear unlucky to get 129-132mm at the front....

After 6-7 attempts with alignment each time, I determined that 165 rear and 173-174 front was the best compromise. went up to nominal values , but drive quality are pratically unchanged, also alignment shown differences next to nihil.

Francesco

mark kibort

Bob, so now I recognize you are helping those with cars that are broken or worn, to survive more extreme driving surfaces. yes, in those cases, keep the ride height on the high side, as bump steer will be better, so when you hit a huge pot hole with your worn shocks and soft springs that the car wont dart as much to that tire's side direction. Look, im not talking about only my car.... im talking to anyone that has put on the next grade of shock and spring package vs stock. if you have stock stuff on the car, you don't really care that much about the performance driving, and that's fine too. But, if it is in functional shape, the car will drive fantastic at a slightly lower setting I would say from 150 to 170mm front front is a good range.
if all the components are old and worn (basically broken in my book) then yes, too low could cause some driving issues. but if it is in good shape, an " lower than stock, not only is better, but is how the euro cars are set up too. (for those playing at home,, 1" lower is 25.4mm, which takes the stock ride height from 180ish to 150ish.

Its not a big deal Bob, and things in the geometry do not change that drastically expecially with a street alignment.

another point is many of the "99%" of cars are aligned poorly which can make the cars handle strange... and stranger if lowered too, especially if not realigned after the lowering. simple checks for non -racers are easy and can confirm how the car is set up (toe and camber). and NO argument from me on ride height, if you have driveways to get up. that is a major nightmare for too low of a car, I know. no one on the street, except for me, would want to have their car as low as mine, I agree and deal with that sacrifice for track use. Others sacrifice for the lowered "look" when going down under the 150mm range.


between the both of us, we can help that 99% that we both seem to talk and reach here on the list. I understand the geometry dynamics as well. its effects on a worn 928 can be greater, but the benefits of a lower car for lowering the center of gravity and the look can offset any of the problems one might encounter. Like I said, I spent a lot of time setting up a street 6 liter with the basic upgraded suspension. it looks great and drives fantastic. It also does it at a ride height below 150mm and is by no means a racer. it is a street car, much softer than the current line of supercars from Porsche, aston martin, jaguar , and the American manufacturers. so, from that perspective, there is little downside for lowering the car except for the clearance issue of your driveway.

mark kibort

again, I wouldn't think the ride quality would change at all for that 1.5" higher ride high change. handling will go down actually for "performance mode" but as long as it looks ok to you, have fun. I don't think you want the front that low with the front that high. if it looks ok, keep it. good to hear that the alignment didn't change that much. again, I always think that the euro versions look a little better and they are generally about 1" lower from what ive seen. visually, no more than 2 fingers spacing from the top of the front tire to the fender.... more than that and it looks a little weird . IMHO