i agree, they have marketed this solution as factory ride and functionality with adjustable ride height.

 

Since the title of this thread is PASM vs SPASM I'll contribute my opinion as the owner of a 992 S Cab equipped with regular non-sport PASM. Before I do I'll state that I'm 41 yrs old, don't have back problems, live in SoCal with decent roads, and bought a 911 for its sports car prowess. With that being said SPASM, in my humble opinion is absolutely required in a sports car of this caliber. The regular non-sport PASM makes the 911 feel more Lexus than Porsche. That 10mm ride height difference doesn't sound like much, but its noticeable and unsightly. Yes, it absorbs every damn bump and expansion joint with ease...BUT...it detracts from the sports car ethos of the 911. I want a ride that is firm and connected not plush and isolated. Did I mention the ungodly wheel gap!? My old C7 with its notorious 4x4 stance had comparable wheel gap to my new PASM 911...down right embarrassing. If you need a luxo-barge ride in your 911, want to traverse small streams with sufficient ground clearance, and want to feel as isolated as possible from the road you are driving on then do not check the SPASM box. Just my .02

 

A couple of you PMd asking about this so I figured a picture is worth a 1000 words for those of you on the fence about SPASM vs PASM. YES that is a stack of business cards comfortably fitting in the tire gap! And before you ask YES the axle lift is down. Needless to say, KW height adjustable springs have been ordered!

Who finds this acceptable for a modern $165K sports car??

 

The better question surely is "what do you find unacceptable about this?"

 

Welp...to restate the obvious...I find it unacceptable that my PASM 992 has crossover like ride height and wheel gap.

 

Might as well add a lift & rally it...

 

Yeah, that doesn't look good.

Actually I'd prefer SPASM was even lower than it is. Another 5-10mm would be on point. Take what you can get.

 

The look is certainly exaggerated when a picture is taken from floor height. Could be that some people just don't like their cars slammed.

 

Correct. Each to their own.

 

Fingers crossed, I am expecting to receive/install the new Bilstein EVO SE coilovers around the same time my car is delivered late Feb.

Assuming no manufacturer delays, will post a review for anyone interested in early March.

 

What Rennlist vendor can I talk to about ordering these for my C2S?

 

Im still open to options, but my tentative plan is as follows...

I contacted the manufacturer direct in both US and Germany and confirmed they’ll be available in the EU in Feb, “maybe” in the US as well.

My local installer will procure if they are available in the US. If not, I will just import from one of the EU vendors listed on the Bilstein website.

As an aside, I ordered my car with FAL, so the correct part number is 49-300581. Non-FAL cars get 49-303940.

 

I'M sorry but my PASM equipped C2S looks just fine as is, is only just OK for my rear end on Southern California concrete highways on the Normal setting and is absolutely thrilling to drive. So yes, each to his own...

 

[QUOTE=MBonaventura;17149670]
might wanna start here:
https://rennlist.com/forums/rennlist...-permitted-75/

 

I'm having a real difficult time reading his business card.
.