Darwantae951

Yep

jss

Any idea who best to buy from price wise?

Lightningmcnulty

I'm just about to do this, When you delete the torsion bars is there no choice but to use different bushings

thanks

Kim

Darwantae951

I don't really see how there would be a requirement to change to different bushings. The weight of the car is on the spring plate regardless of wether or not a TB is installed. Hence why most of the time when you pull them, the bushing is deformed.

Lightningmcnulty

It looks like you can get polyurethane bushings for a more reasonable price so I might just do those "while i'm in there"

Darwantae951

Racers Edge also has Delrin bushings.

Oddjob

Lots of threads on this topic and you will find a huge range of recommended spring rates, different numbers used for motion ratios and effective rates, different theory on suspension design and setups, etc. often leading to some heated posts. As with a few other 944 hot topics, you won't find a general consensus on "best" spring rate. Too many variables.

I've used polygraphite and delrin bushings. I really didn't care for the poly and those are long gone. Fitment was too loose so more slop than the original rubber. But the fitment is likely a brand/mfr issue, so others may or may not have had that problem. Delrin is ok. If I had it to do over, I would have used the ER poly-bronze. These were all dedicated track car applications. Not sure its necessary to dump the rubber w/ t-bar delete on a street car.

Darwantae951

The main reason I went with aftermarket spring plate bushings was because the rubber was visibly compressed on the underside of the spring plate.

superloaf

Yeah, I don't get it either. I know there are variables and preferences and subjective matters and all that but there is no reasonable answer as to the variation of rates which come up. Other cars have variables and yet there are much clearer starting points especially when it comes to front/rear ratios.

It seems that a lot of confusion comes up as to the exact math to use for the rear. From what I have found, the correct ratio is .42 to determine the rear effective rate. Lots of people seem to think that .65 is correct but for the actual ratio, you must square .65 which then equals .42. Paragon even has the incorrect .65 on their site. And the difference in using these numbers results in quite a difference in spring rate.

So does anyone not agree that .42 is the correct ratio?

Front ratio tends to be around .92-.94 so that is close enough for our use.

And then there are quite a few variations in front to rear ratio which can be affected but tire stagger and other variables but basically a similar effective rate front to rear seems to be the consensus.

And finally, these cars handle pretty damn well with stiffer rates, so much so that I think a decent driver can put up with a less than perfect balance, more so on the street and up to point of course.

333pg333

Correct.