kgorman

I am having the tech throw on new pss9's. After some careful consideration, I am going for them. I have heard comments both positive and negative, but I am pretty sure I want the pss9's.

My question is this, I am having a hard time deciding on ride height and camber. I was thinking RS settings. Any reason not to do this? This car is 80% track / 20% road. I just need to start somewhere, and then I can tune it from there. Does this require RS steering arms to do?

I have the data from Adrians book, just wondering if RS settings are a good starting point. This would mean a net 50mm drop F & R for USA cars. It also says that RS America ride height is the same as C2/C4's. That must be an error.

Thanks!

garrett376

If you're doing any track driving, and using the stock suspension pickup points and spring plates, you will need to dial in as much negative camber as possible. If you don't, you'll need to rotate your tires on the rims after a couple track weekends. Given I race in wheel to wheel events so I thrash the tires a bit more than usual in the heat of the battle - I ran 4 race weekends with the stock suspension settings, and wore out the outside of my tires - didn't even use the inner 1/3 of the tires!

If you do a search I posted something about increasing front and rear camber with stock components.

My recommendation: put the ride height at RS levels and dial in the MOST negative camber you can get. If you widen the track of the car (spacers and/or wider wheels) you get the same benefit as lowering the car without the drawbacks of decreasing air flow to the front brake scoops, and smashing the front end on dips or dead creatures in the middle of the road

Tom W

I'd lower it to RS height and dial as much negative camber as possible (I'm guessing you'll get to about -1.5ish, but every car is different).

My 993 is RS height and has no issues at all with clearance. Since it's street only now, I just have RS alignment and get nice even wear.

My 964 is lower than RS and will scrape if I'm not careful on the street. The JIC suspension allows me to have -3.4/-3.2 (or something like that) for camber settings (I could go more if the tires would take it). I get pretty even track wear there. I've not had issues with bump steer previously, but I just had it lowered a bit more and more camber added. We'll see how it does at the next event.

Jasko

Kgorman,

I was able to get -3 camber on front and rear with the H&R coilovers. I also wore the outside off the front tires on a stock setup at the track. With MPSC on the car, in a stock setup with limited camber, I could see light under the inside 1/2 of the tires while parked.

As for height, I know the measuring points, but I can't seem to clearly access to the rears to get an accurate measurement with the car down, so I have gone by fender height (inaccurate I know), distance to jacking points (easier to get to), and appearance. If you go by fender height, Bruce Anderson gives a generic recommended height of 25 1/2" f, and 25" r IIRC, which will give you a 1 deg rake. I don't kow what this equates to in terms of RS height. I think the Carrera Cups were about 24 1/2" f & r(on someone elses previous post). Mine is somewhere in between this.

My mechanic says, "put it where it looks good!"

Tom-
Are you measuring from the "book" reference points or elsewhere. I remember you talked about measuring from the jacking points in a previous post. What are your fender measurements on your 964?

Dave
89 C4

kgorman

Dave, what exact setup are you running?

After speaking with my tech, and calling Bilstein, I confirmed that they do not make PSS9's for the '89/90 964. I can to the 'hack' in the DIY section, but I am not feeling like I want to do that.

I guess it's back to the drawing board. Called Leda this AM, and they look like a pretty nice alternative for a reasonable price. 4-6 weeks for delivery, custom built. ~$2500.

I will also be calling Cross today. I guess I have not ruled out simply going Bilstein HD/H&R as long as I can get the camber/ride height I am looking for. My mech is checking into that option as well. Patience, patience.

Tom W

Dave: The Porsche points to the bolts. I'll get both sets of numbers tonight and post (unless, of course, I forget - we old farts do that on occasion )

burgass

You can use the PSS-9 for the 92 model. I use them without any problem. Check the DIY section for how to fit them and do a search for the details. I have my car lower than the RS wit 2.5/2.35 camber but it is not enough. I am wearing out the outside of the tyres faster so I would suggest more camber also. Lsst but not least - IMO the PSS-9 is a bit soft for 80% track. A cheap way to get it stiffer is to change the springs only I suppose....

Pingo

Check this info. out. I have been in contact with various sources to get hold of the PSS9 kit for my 1990 C2 and it has been confirmed that two versions of the PSS9 kit exists.

1: http://www.carparts-cat.com/pkw/part...VID=1710028913

2: http://www.carparts-cat.com/pkw/part...VID=1710020193

viperbob

For 80% track, JIC woould be a much better solution. They come with the monoball mounts F&R and multiple spring rates that can be ordered. I installed them on the "Turtle". aka Tom W's car, and a host of other 993/964/965s with good results. They are stiff, but do well at the track.

Jasko

Kgorman,

I have the H&R coilovers. I have to admit that I was not very scientific about my selection process. I bought them from a friend for a good price - that was the process. This was after my first DE where I realized that my original setup with 115K miles was more or less shot. So far I have only had them on the street, and they are fantastic there. I have a 3 day track event this weekend, so I will let you know how they feel on the track. From what others have posted here, I think that they may be a little soft if the majority of your driving is on the track (progressive 260-275f, 275-290r or so). I'm happy with them at this point, but I'll let you know after this weekend. I was able to get -3 f/r camber with the H&R coilovers (using the Smart Camber device).

As I get more into track I am afraid that I may have to upgrade again, but for now I am happy.

FVD has a set of PSS9 on their website for the 89-90 priced at $4000. From the picture, it looks like the rears have the hats, etc for the 89-90 rear mounts. That price seems like a high premium for that set-up.

Tom - thanks for checking the heights. I'll email you about the cat bypass/ chip.

Dave
89 C4

Tom W

My fender heights are 24 1/4 and 24 1/2 in front and 24 1/4 a 24 5/8 in back.

My alignment says:
4 2/16 and 4 3/16 front 8 1/2 and 8 1/2 rear (rake 1.0)
my alignment is -3.4/-3.0 with 0 toe in front and 1/8" in the rear
The embarassing part is the weight at 2817 lbs without me and with 1/8 tank of gas.

RS heights are 124 mm (4.92 ") and 223 mm (8.78") so I'm a bit below RS heights. Normal USA C2 heights are 175 and 268 mm (6.89" and 10.55"). I'm waaay below them.

kgorman

Thx Tom! Where did you get your JIC's installed? I am looking for a good shop to do my work. Still undecided on JIC/LEDA/PSS9/HD's&HR's tho.

viperbob

I installed Tom's JICs when I was still in the Bay Area...

BGLeduc

I may be wrong, but I thought the oft quoted suggested ride height from Anderson (25 1/2, 25) was referenced to the Euro RS, not the RSA. I thought the RSA ride height was the same as the stock US 964.

Brian

Tom W

According to the manual, RSA and stock USA ride height are the same (about the same as an SUV).

As he said, Bob did my JIC's - there is a post way back in the archives with him laying under the car working on it showing the JICs and the big reds. Since he's now in FL and you are in the east bay, I'd suggest you talk to Roger Krause in San Leandro. I like them for suspension/alignment/tires.