ca993twin

Martin's logic stream is what caused old Mr. Cheapo to go straight to the PSS-9 setup. And I *already* had the ROW springs. It still made little sense to try to save a few bucks, and not do it right the first time. Like Martin, I have made that mistake way too many times before in other cars. PSS-9s.

Edward

Whether it's the HDs with good springs or PSS9s, or whatever quality modification, likewise, I believe in doing it right ONCE. It's not just cheaper in the long run, it saves time, and the end result is far more satisfying.

Edward

Deano

Well, it looks like I am convinced (affected by the "mod-bug"). I will do it right the first time (advocate)! I'm leaning toward the pss9 now, with turbo sways. I may have to budget for some time (maybe not). I guess the question at this point becomes... what is the deal with availability? Seems like it is hard to get the pss9 components??? Anyway, I want to thank everyone for their help. I will re-post upon decision & or completion.
Sincerely, Deano

stedge

They were recently on sale at AJUSA...

No affiliation (and was that posted earlier?)....

os993

I had ViberBob install PSS-9 and TRG bars 3mnths ago. Performance has been excellent and I've had no noise from the bars, whatsoever (daily driving around town and aggressive sprints as well).

There has been no "clunking" or anything else others have mentioned should happen with TRG bars. I have the "new" bushings.

Originally, I wanted RS bars, but the price was ridiculous (IMHO). With TRG bars, I got thicker bars, excellent quality and fit, adjustability and at a MUCH lower price.

So far, I'm very satisfied with my upgrade. True test will be my next track day, but around town this setup is noise-free, tight and a pure pleasure to drive. Bty, still using original drop-links.

Nol, 95 993 C4

Deano,

A year ago I went through all the threads on the suspension issue, posted a few myself and when Gert had a sale I got PSS-9's with Turbo rear bar. My car is a ROW 95 C4 (already has the ROW front bar), is 99% street and I really like the way it handles. I recommend you try a car with them on to see if you like the high spring rates, it is quite a change from stock.

The key attraction for me was adjustable shocks. The range of settings to choose from so you can find what you like best. And then you can soften it at will or firm it up for the track.

Apart from the high cost of RS bars, I decided that introducing 2 more variables to tweak would be OTT for my application. As it is, I hardly touch the PSS-9 dials. I did explore the range of settings to find the best feel for the daily driver. And for the occasional track event I will firm up the settings and add a stagger front to back for that. And that is about it for using the adjustability.

Enjoy, this is THE improvement/mod on the car to do.

Nol

Greg H.

I'd just like to add that you should get a ride in a Pss9 equipped car before you buy it. I just installed the system in my car and IMHO, on its softest setting, the Pss9 provides a stiffer ride than my 44k mile stock suspension. I'll get used to it, but was a bit disappointed when I first got it. Keep in mind that everyone's idea of a stiff or plush ride is different.

Greg H.

Ben in Plano, TX

I concur with Greg.

I've had the PSS-9 for a couple of years now and while I don't mind it at all the suspension is fairly stiff even at its softest setting.

Further - for best 'ride quality' I set the shocks to 6 (stiffer than full soft at 9) because the car is to bouncy for the spring rates with the shocks set full soft. The front end will porpoise on some surfaces with it set at 9.

Definitely get a ride to see if its your cup of tea.

Ben

Martin S.

I third the motion...the PSS9s on the mid-range setting were as stiff as my M030 RoW set up. I drove my neighbors PSS9, RS Sway Bar, TRG monoball equipped car. He drove mine...this is our collective conclusion.

On Carrera 4S cars, you alread have the 22mm front bar...just add the RoW Turbo 21mm rear bar. You can drill an extra drop link mounting hole on the rear bar if you want to stiffen up the rear...this is a trick that was done for me by Pete Wetzel and Kevin Kelly while they were both still at ANDIAL. We miss those guys!!!!

Greg H.

Martin -

Not to disagree, but I think you are only partially right about the 22mm front bar. The following is from a post by The Man hisself (Viken):

USA STD C4S:
20 mm F / 17 mm R

USA M030 C4S:
22 mm F / 18 mm R

ROW STD C4S:
20 mm F / 18 mm R

ROW M030 C4S:
22 mm F / 20 mm R


Greg H.

Edward

Quote:

Further - for best 'ride quality' I set the shocks to 6 (stiffer than full soft at 9) because the car is to bouncy for the spring rates with the shocks set full soft. The front end will porpoise on some surfaces with it set at 9.

Ben,

I'm glad I'm not the only one who felt this way. I thought I was just hallucinating but at setting 9, the car definitely felt underdamped, and thus bouncy. Now at 7F/6R and while the car feels a bit "firmer" overall, it actually feels more controlled (and again a thanks to Steve W. for answering my e-mail query).

And yes, I too advocate getting a ride in someone's PSS9-equipped car first!!! Not only is ride feel/comfort level too subjective for description, a suspension change is too expensive a modification to regret or do again later, at least for those of us with limited budgets

Edward

Dr. No

At the risk of asking a stupid question, does anyone think there a PSS-9 setting that equates to HD's plus M030 or H&R springs? Or are they apples and oranges ride-wise?

Edward

This is hard to tell when they're not side-by-side comparisons. But to me, I think the PSS9 at "full soft" (which again, I didn't like at that setting) is a more firm ride than the M030. Keep in mind though that this is just from memory, AND that the M030 I rode in was with the RoW M030 strut, so perhaps not entirely apples to apples with the Bilstein HD. Still, if you look at the spring rates between the Pss9 and Row M030, I think this corroborates my "seat memory." And as I recall, the H&R spring is softer than the RoW M030 (?)

Edward

Martin S.

Greg H writes, "Not to disagree, but I think you are only partially right about the 22mm front bar. The following is from a post by The Man hisself (Viken):

USA STD C4S:
20 mm F / 17 mm R

USA M030 C4S:
22 mm F / 18 mm R

ROW STD C4S:
20 mm F / 18 mm R

ROW M030 C4S:
22 mm F / 20 mm R


I am partially wrong...see Greg's Note above. Now that I recall, the 22MM is the M030 set up. Thanks Greg.

os993

For comparison, I have my PSS-9's set at 4 in the front, 3 in the rear. TRG bars are set at middle setting. Ride height set at 25" Rear, 25 3/8" Front. Previous suspension was ROW M030.

Verdict: New setup passes the ever-critical "keep-wife-happy" litmus test! Yes, if she's happy with it after a long road-trip, then system ain't too stiff! Note, she's very particular about stuff like this, and I'm happy she's ok with it - no fun having a 993 if the chick doesn't dig it....

She really can't tell too much difference between current setup and ROW M030 (it's a bit stiffer, but still very acceptable - it's a very nice sporty setup).

Just thought I'd pass along some feedback from an enthusiast (me) and an honest opinionated outsider (my wife). Trust me, if she wasn't comfy, I'd be hearing about it...