SimonK

And this is by how much lowered mine is...

thingo

Yea I own both, the 951 is a lot faster, but my 968 (non M030) is way better balanced, much more responsive, my 951 has nearly all the 968 M030 suspension,I've driven a 968CS as well, the 968 just likes turns more than the 951.

I've got no idea how you could think it handles worse than the 951.

The body is the difference, and where it is made.

TheRealLefty

IMO, all performance cars are very sensitive to front/rear ride heights. Remember, all this talk about links and trailing arms and shock valving still comes down to a frighteningly simple fact...tires are the limiting factor in all handling issues.

Stated in it's simplest form, handling science has a goal of limiting the amount of force applied to any single wheel/tire. The closer you can get to equally spreading any given lateral force between all four tires, the faster your car can go in any given turn. Thus roll centers are hugely important in managing the tendency of the the car to transfer forces toward the outside front or outside rear tire. The lower the roll center the better the grip, generally.

If you have front coil overs, raise the nose half an inch and you'll be shocked how different the car handles in terms of front/back balance without a single change in spring rate, shock valving or sway bars! It will plow like a pig compared to before you raised the nose. Drop it half an inch below your current level and the tail will skate like Tanya Harding.

RKD in OKC

Lefty - yep, no matter what suspension you use, you got's to tune it right.

renvagn

I also agree with Robby. We are still talking about suspension design for an 89, 951, which is 17 years old. As good as the M030 is, it is still wishy washy on the track. If your still into the original set-up you can add the bigger bars with out compromising the street ride quality, but gain a significant improvement in rotation.
Also the original 951 design had a poor castor block support design compared to the bracing the M-3's have. You can sure this up with the Bray Krauss castor brace. And a little negative camber up front doesn't hurt either.

For those who are serious about 944, 951 and 968 set-up you really need to take advantage of Pete at the RS Barn.

SimonK

I know why you might have said this…

I see you have 89 952. If it is on standard components of M030 you are not getting the right picture at all…

After I had my front and rear KONIS refurbished by KONI UK, the rears were actually shot to pieces and were not refurbish-able - yes that bad after 10 years+ (had to buy new ones – luckily the rears are cheap) the car transformed - night & day. You have no idea how far off the original handling your 952 is if you are still on the old components.

So, IMHO stock for stock 968 I drove was not as good handling as my 951TS. Quite the opposite it was softer and less responsive to inputs – no go-cart handling there. However, could be because of my car being lowered as well?

However, I understand the 968CS is a different ball game all togehter.

Porschefile

Absolutely! Tires are probably the single biggest difference one can make. That's why I personally don't want to ever run less than a 245 in the front.

jturbo

With the updated suspension components of the CaymanS, how would you compare that car (obviously a newer Porsche than the 951) to the BMWs? Do you feel that the BMWs are even more superior than Porsches newest, possibly most balanced car, in their product line?

RolexNJ

SimonK: Big bump to what Lefty said. Him and I are totally on the same page!

nick_968

968 CS is not such a big difference. What makes the difference is the 17" wheels and the extra grip they generate. If you want to come for a ride in a KW 968 look me up. I have had KW on my 993 track car for ages and its the business. Hardly any stiffer on the road, nicer ride quality and build quality second to none. Just finished installing kit number 2 on the 968 and its just as good as it is on the 993. For fast road and track in my book there is no other choice.

azmi951

You forgot to mention that the tires need to be positioned correctly in referance to the ground, this is the number 2 job of suspension second to supporting the weight of the vehicle. That means the right static as well as dynamic camber settings. I think that job number three is providing as close to equal weights to each wheel under some driving conditions and transfering the right amount in other driving conditions.

You would be surprised at how much of a differnece the right alignment settings will effect the feel and ultimate grip.

In referance to lowering I have a sneeking suspision that you have too much static negative camber. Remeber, with street tires that are wide you will need less static negative camber.

Reviewing my Chassis book I see that when adding wider tires raises the roll center in McPherson strut suspensions. As does bringing the control arm lower than level (occurs when suspension is in droop/rebound).

Excessive front negative camber reduces the front kingpin offset which gives a reduced self centering steering effect and contributes to "darty" feel.

So you need to make the deterination of weather you want to get you front suspansion to be like stock geomitry by getting the extended pin ball joints (rennbay.com) thus gaining you camber adjustment back as well as your kingpin offset. Or of you want to try keeping the ball joints stock and having a lower roll center.

thingo

As I completely rebuilt the suspension in my car I think I might have some idea the difference between new and old.

Yes the stock 968 is softer, but as soon as you come to terms with that you will realise it is only the suspension that is softer, the car is more rigid so it more connected to the road.I'm sure your car is faster and stiffer riding, but the 968 got the complements when it was released for a reason

The first time I drive the 968CS it was obvious as soon as we left the driveway that it had qualities the 951 would never have, despite having the same components.Thats why I bought the 968.

Each to his own of course...

333pg333

Well Rod I would like to know if that is a quantifiable difference between the 968 and the 944 or just a perceived impression. Not arguing, but not knowing this to be true either.
Simon, the difference that you felt is obtainable with the KW's and as I seem to keep harping on about it is largely the contemporary technology in the valving. You can have a GREAT car for the track and spirited road driving that doesn't shake the ancestors out of your bones. IT IS POSSIBLE. I have it now on my car. I can hit the kerbs on our tracks and just ride over them without getting a whole lot of unwanted bump steer / skitter unbalance. On my old Mo30's not only couldn't I do that but the car was also really tail happy under certain circumstances and prone to wanting to spin. (Which is what Rod/thingo has experienced on his 951) The difference on the road is also much better. It rides over corrugations much more 'SUPPLY' (?) and I have lot's more uncompromising upgrades on my car as well. If you just get one of the Variant 3 packs and keep your stock bushings you will feel like your in one of those BM's.
As I said try one of the cars local to you and you will buy them. I bet!!!
Hey your car looks nice too but very low which will exacerbate the rough feeling you have with the Mo30s.

thingo

The kw is certainly an improvement over stock in all departments, though that is only my perceived impression ....

ENGINEERMAN

One of my best friends has a 2003 M3. In a straight line I keep up and maybe even pull a little on him to 120 (had to slow down at that point). On the track we were virtually head to head. Top speed was about 120.

That's my 2 cents worth.