When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Background:
As some of you know, I had a set of KW V3 coilovers for a standard 993 application but decided to swap them out for KW's 993 RS kit. Some of you asked for pics and information on how these differ from the standard kit and why you would want to run them, so I've taken a bunch of pics for the benefit of others in the future.
First, details on the kit and information from KW: PN: 35271020 on their Euro site. [Link] [also linkto instructions] <-- these are not listed on the US KW site since the the 993 RS was never sold here (IMHO this is short-sighted as there's a number of reasons that non-RS owners would want these)
These are made to order (they do not maintain stock) and are an 8 week lead time.
Overview of differences shared by KW: 1) The shock bodies are shorter (due to lower ride height) 2) The internal piston rods (shafts) are shorter (makes sense as the bodies are shorter) 3) Different "travel way" (meaning the +/- articulation of the suspension travel; no context as far as numbers were provided, just that it is "different") 4) Different valves (piston valve & compression/foot valve) 5) Oil weight is the same (it is the same for all single tube KW cartridges) 6) Additional threaded length on top of piston shaft (due to larger bearings on monoball top mounts; more exposed thread for nut engagement) 7) Drop link mounts on the rear shocks are lower for RS droplinks/swaybar setup 8) "Other small differences in the bump stops and upper spring seat, etc" 9) Spring rates are identical (tuning is achieved via the internal valve differences) 10) Recommended base settings - Front: Rebound - 6 clicks open; Compression - 6 clicks open; Rear: Rebound - 8 clicks open; Compression - 3 clicks open
FYI, standard V3's for non-RS recommended base settings: Front Rebound - 9 clicks open; Compression - 9 clicks open; Rear: Rebound - 8 clicks open; Compression - 3 clicks open
Why run these on a non-RS vs the standard 993 application?:
1) If you're running monoball top mounts (ie, "camber plates") as the RS does, the shafts of the standard 993 kit do not extend far enough to be able to counter-hold the shaft in order to torque the top nut to spec. People get around this by using a "Tosi-nut" and just zapping it with an impact wrench and calling it a day. This reason alone is not enough of a concern for me to make the switch but when coupled with all the other reasons, it is a contributing decision point.
2) Also, when running monoball top mounts the rear upper spring perch is not compatible and you must source an aftermarket one (such as Rennline) and also, the front upper spring perch is a bit too tall, complicating issue #1 above, since it is designed to mate to the standard 993 (non-RS) upper strut bearings.
3) If you want to run your car low, close to or at RS ride height, you significantly reduce the amount of travel available. As you lower the spring, the piston shaft retracts further into the shock body, reducing the amount of available travel and increasing the chances of "bottoming out". Since I'm running RS wheel carriers and everything RS on my suspension setup, including RS ride height, this is another contributing factor in my decision.
4) On the KW's, the rear drop link point is fixed and not height adjustable. If you are running an RS rear sway bar and RS drop links, the location of the fixed drop-link mount point is not compatible (a work around is to fabricate a tab which attaches between the KW and the drop-link). The 993 RS kit has the mounts in the correct location
In summary, none of these things individually are a huge issue but for me it was the sum of all parts and wanting to do things "the right way". Issue #3 was the biggest concern with my setup, so when I added the other three issues into the equation, for me it was the right decision to go with the 993 RS specific kit.
OK, onto the pics (everyone loves pics!!):
Will post all the comparison pics in a few follow up posts below...
993 RS kit has "hex head" counter-holds on the top of the shafts vs two "flats"... (nice improvement)
Random observation, I noticed that the front shocks had the "Bump" (compression) setting incorrectly set to "7" instead of "6" as called for in the baseline specs...
A few pics illustrating problem #1 from the first post:
Here you can see the rear standard 993 coilover mounted through a Rennline RS-style monoball top mount: (shaft is too short)
As you can see, you cant hold the shaft to torque the nut to spec. The nut does, however, have almost double the thread engagement of the standard nyloc nut...
As you can see, the nut has plenty more thread engagement than the standard nyloc. So thread engagement isn't an issue, it's just the inability to hold the shaft in order to torque to spec for peace of mind...
Now, with the 993 RS shaft (longer) you can see that the shaft extends sufficiently past the nut in order to hold the shaft and torque to specs...
A few pics illustrating problem #1 from the first post:
Here you can see the rear standard 993 coilover mounted through a Rennline RS-style monoball top mount: (shaft is too short)
As you can see, you cant hold the shaft to torque the nut to spec. The nut does, however, have almost double the thread engagement of the standard nyloc nut...
As you can see, the nut has plenty more thread engagement than the standard nyloc. So thread engagement isn't an issue, it's just the inability to hold the shaft in order to torque to spec for peace of mind...
Now, with the 993 RS shaft (longer) you can see that the shaft extends sufficiently past the nut in order to hold the shaft and torque to specs...
You might want to monitor the clearance between the locknut and the mount wall, w/ a largish nut like the KW uses there can be contact at the nut corner and wall
here's what Bilstein Cup looks like, you do need a pass through socket to tighten these
Good call out for folks. That gold nut is actually from Rennline. It comes with those rear upper mounts. The KW nut is the nyloc one which is substantially smaller.
To you point though, I have checked that clearance in the past by articulating the monoball fully. I believe the rears don't articulate as much as the fronts. The vital thing to check is clearance between the upper spring perch and bottom of the top mount at full articulation. Ive seen a few posts in the past of some carnage as a result of not having an adequate spacer in between the two.
Clubsports are only for standard 993 application (non-RS) being the rear drop-link mounting point is not the correct location for RS rear sway bar.
That said, Clubsports differ from standard V3's in the following ways, since they are "track focused" not "performance street".
1) The Clubsports have monoball top mounts. These are their own proprietary design with a smaller bearing (judging by pictures) and not modeled after the RS. Most aftermarket top mounts (camber plates) for our cars are RS clones.
2) The Clubsports have stiffer spring rates. 50Nm vs 30Nm up front and 150Nm vs 90Nm in the rear.
[Link] to Clubsport instructions. Here's some drawings from their instructions which show the clubsport upper mounts...
07-29-2024, 09:09 PM
KW V3 coilovers for 993 RS application
