Notices
944 Turbo and Turbo-S Forum 1982-1991
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Clore Automotive

T-Bar Removal - Any Downsides?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-14-2012 | 01:36 PM
  #31  
Oddjob's Avatar
Oddjob
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,693
Received 78 Likes on 60 Posts
From: Midwest - US
Default

Originally Posted by pontifex4
Do camber plates not increase harshness appreciably? I've been running the rubber strut mounts, but would love to change.
Been a lot of years since I swapped out the stock mounts for aftermarket camber plates, but I do not remember that being a noticeable change in the ride quality. Later, changing the control arm front bushings and caster blocks, and the rear torsion bar carrier mounts and trailing arm bushings from stock rubber to solid/spherical, I felt was a dramatic difference.
Old 11-14-2012 | 05:50 PM
  #32  
mikey_audiogeek's Avatar
mikey_audiogeek
Three Wheelin'
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,547
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
From: Northland, New Zealand
Default

deleted
Old 11-14-2012 | 05:54 PM
  #33  
mikey_audiogeek's Avatar
mikey_audiogeek
Three Wheelin'
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,547
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
From: Northland, New Zealand
Default

Originally Posted by Oddjob
You two have a higher comfort threshold than I do. I have two cars with full solid suspension bushings/bearings, mostly RE stuff. They are dedicated track cars. Big improvement on feedback and response on the track. But I found that it noticeably stiffens up the car, and translates more noise and vibration. Feels actually harsh.

For me (personal taste), I would not install all solid mounts and bushings on a strictly street car due to the decrease in ride comfort, and the high cost of the parts (exceptions being camber plates, and the ER spring plate poly bronze bearings). For a dual use street/DE car, then its one of the many trade-offs to consider. For a track/race car, depending on the competition level, it becomes arguably necessary.
I should point out that I don't have the LCA inner sphericals or the spherical caster blocks. I intend to install the LCA inners but I want to retain some fore/aft compliance so the 968 rubber caster blocks will remain.

Cheers,
Mike
Old 11-16-2012 | 12:21 PM
  #34  
schip43's Avatar
schip43
Three Wheelin'
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,507
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
From: Carson City NV
Default

I have camber plates on my 951 and a 85.5 N/A and I never noticed any increase in NVH? I tend to think control arm bushings would have more of an impact on NVH on a street car?
Old 11-16-2012 | 03:28 PM
  #35  
dmcampbell's Avatar
dmcampbell
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 516
Received 12 Likes on 8 Posts
From: Central Florida
Default

I have raised RE camber plates up front on my '88 TS with 425# springs, 968 Castor Blocks, front Powerflex polyurethane bushings and Rennbay Sport ball joint kit all with no increase in NVH. Rear is stock except for 30mm solid TB's. I am planning to install the ER spring plate bushings, along with Powerflex polyurethane inner and TB carrier bushings. I drive my car weekly on the street and this year I drove 20+ track days at Sebring. I have thought about removing the TB's, but have concluded my current TB setup (w/ the additional rear bushing improvements) is the best street/track compromise for the way I use the car. Mike



Quick Reply: T-Bar Removal - Any Downsides?



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 07:57 AM.