'95 993--Evil at the limit?
Now on another 993 suspension note : My front lower control arm bushings on my TT turned out to be ground meat and the car did all sorts of weird stuff out at the Glen. I believe on person who drove the car's reactions when taking turn 2 in 5th gear was " WHAT THE F*CK WAS THAT !!!" So take a look at yours and see if there is a lot of play. I replaced with ERP monoballs. I dorve the car all season that way by the way. Just thought it was understeer. Not So. It was "No Steer"

Is it correct to say that at some point in the travel, under very high cornering loads, the stock suspension allows some toe-out when fully compressed?
And that is does this regardless of the static toe and the KT setting, no matter how conservative?
If this is true, how could it be anything other than a rubber/bushing problem?
I searched the PCA tech articles and found the part number list, but I would like to get an estimate of the cost to do the update. I have a 95, with PSS-9s and have not noticed any handling issues at the limit(my limit is low, however). Nevertheless, this is an interesting issue and I might need to get this done.
Normally a 993 without kinematics (according to Porsche) would tend to go towards toe-out on the outside rear wheel in a corner, which makes it go loose, and also goes towards toe-in on the other rear wheel. So the passive steering does the opposite. It tries to make the outside rear wheel toe in, and the inside rear wheel to go toe out. That is a good idea, and it works.
The issue is that it can get irritated, and start to rapidly swing from out to in and back again repeatedly. That is what catches most of us out. If you're a rally driver you may be able to shrug it off. Rumor is if you let go of the steering wheel it may fix itself. Or not. YMMV.
Good point. They may have also changed the formulation of the rubber and not said anything about it. All I could find in print was that they made "minor suspension geometry changes".
I searched the PCA tech articles and found the part number list, but I would like to get an estimate of the cost to do the update. I have a 95, with PSS-9s and have not noticed any handling issues at the limit(my limit is low, however). Nevertheless, this is an interesting issue and I might need to get this done.
The rubber bushings on these parts are a wear item, and so are the ball joints. For awhile we thought about getting used parts to contain the cost, but it is really better to use new parts unless you can get some unusually fresh used ones. Also Porsche says to use new bolts and nuts for a lot of these. I sometimes don't, but you are supposed to.
What I am surprised at is that no one has yet tried to do this change by doing one pair of arms at a time. It may be that less parts would do the job. I haven't tried that.
Here are the part numbers and list prices.
1- 993.331.041.02 A-arm L $552
1- 993.331.042.02 A-arm R $552
2- 993.331.045.03 Kinematic link L&R, $214 each
2- 993.331.047.03 Camber link L&R, $227 each
List price $1986 total before any discounts, not including replacing any nuts or bolts.
Also check the toe links. I have seen some that were starting to get loose & sloppy at only 45k miles. If they are worn out, then replace them.
Last edited by jmreiser; Mar 5, 2007 at 12:22 PM.
The Best Porsche Posts for Porsche Enthusiasts
Joel, I have never felt the back and forth that you describe with my Moton-equipped, late model build '95 (or even with my old PSS-9's but I was a slower driver two years ago). When I'm really pushing it at high speeds, the back end may come out, but it comes out in a fairly benign manner that can be easily checked with a bit of opposite lock. I'm not saying it doesn't exist in other '95's; I simply haven't felt it in my car and wonder if it can be attributed to updated pieces? I'm an okay driver who is working hard at taking my driving to the next level so I can run with the class-dominating 964 cups.
1. What was PAG's intent when they redesigned the parts? Joel says it was due to instability, and that may be true, but has it been confirmed? Did PAG issue any TSBs or other explanatory info? If it's really THAT serious, wouldn't we hear something from PAG?
2. Which arms were lengthened/shortened? All of them?
3. What's the general effect of the geometry change? For example, to cause more kinematic toe effect. Or whatever. Does it even affect KT behavior?
4. Can we mimic the update without replacing all the parts? For example, just replace one or two arms. Or different alignment specs.
5. How can we conclude that it's ok to change all the parts EXCEPT the subframe? Did PAG say it's ok? To play devil's advocate, I'll argue that by implementing half the fix, you make the handling worse. Prove me wrong... please.
On a side note- Joel, thanks for getting involved in the discussion. Many of us are very interested in the topic.
TIA
-Jim
Oh, in my last post I added that I never felt the issue with my PSS-9's and RS ride height, but I was a slower driver back then. If there was a problem at high speeds with the Bilsteins, it was due to too much rear bar causing an inability to apply the power at high speeds, in addition to a driver/reaction issues.
Our time with Chris was just incredible. What a great coach and incisive mechanic...



........Even so i am suprised having never heard about problems on '95 C2 cars before this thread.