Self Gratification with Pictures - Outlaw 993 - Updated with Dec 2010 Mods!
04-12-2011, 08:20 AM
#196
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Hi Camlob.
I understood the Aasco retainers should match the springs as well. They sure should if they are sold as a set. Goes to show until you do these jobs you never know for sure...However I think for the DC24 cam you definately made the right choice in springs. They have much more lift than the DC21 and youll need those tougher hi lift springs especially if you regualrly track the car.
Sorry to hear about your wiring loom and ECU. On the positive side this would be a great excuse to go MOTEC :-).
Im really looking forward to your the dyno and feedback when you have finished. Be sure to post the results and configuration so others may learn from what you have done. You have defiantely gone further faster than most on the board and Im sure it will make a spectacular result.
Its a slippery slope for sure. I dont recall not wanting to install a cam. Infact I think it was your mention of John Ds cams that got me rearching this further...Im not sure yet if a cam was a good investment - but I have only around 2500 usd invested in it so if it gives a good result it will have been a (relatively) cost effective improvement. I was planning an LSD and new beru leads and plugs so with engine and gearbox dropped and after some research it seemed like an economical desision at the time. Having said that the car was running very sweet and at phase 4 of a 5 phase project Im concious Im starting to push the boat out a bit. Weve already faced a few challenges and Im just hoping that the engine character and extra power and torque are worth the effort we have made and the extra long term maintenance (manual timing etc). It has been a good excercise to confirm the engine is in excellent health (what has been seen at least) so there is some peace of mind that if it all comes together well it will provide another decade of reliable motoring....heck Im keeping it for life anyhow - jabe to to amortise what been tipped into it LOL!
As we spoke originally I still think the cam is somewhat limited by the inlet valve side of the NVR 993. Unfortunately my budget was not as generous as some others so I have elected to keep the top end in place and the factory valves stay as does the factory header due to the need for heat.
I guess we wont know until its all bolted up but so far its going well. I took the opportunity to strip of some small brightwear from the engine and have re plated. Ive had the rear wheel offsets machined to give 3-4mm offset in favour of dropping teh car further to exact RS height as Id like to ensure no issues when the JICs arrive (Phase 5). There are also a few other tricks for Phase 5 just to set the whole project off... Wet weight of 1300kg still remains ellusive (but very close) so I have set that goal aside but having shed 70kg+ does seem to have made a positive difference....
Look foward to learning about your engine modifications and work when you have an opportunity to share....best of luck with that....
Cheers
M
I understood the Aasco retainers should match the springs as well. They sure should if they are sold as a set. Goes to show until you do these jobs you never know for sure...However I think for the DC24 cam you definately made the right choice in springs. They have much more lift than the DC21 and youll need those tougher hi lift springs especially if you regualrly track the car.
Sorry to hear about your wiring loom and ECU. On the positive side this would be a great excuse to go MOTEC :-).
Im really looking forward to your the dyno and feedback when you have finished. Be sure to post the results and configuration so others may learn from what you have done. You have defiantely gone further faster than most on the board and Im sure it will make a spectacular result.
Its a slippery slope for sure. I dont recall not wanting to install a cam. Infact I think it was your mention of John Ds cams that got me rearching this further...Im not sure yet if a cam was a good investment - but I have only around 2500 usd invested in it so if it gives a good result it will have been a (relatively) cost effective improvement. I was planning an LSD and new beru leads and plugs so with engine and gearbox dropped and after some research it seemed like an economical desision at the time. Having said that the car was running very sweet and at phase 4 of a 5 phase project Im concious Im starting to push the boat out a bit. Weve already faced a few challenges and Im just hoping that the engine character and extra power and torque are worth the effort we have made and the extra long term maintenance (manual timing etc). It has been a good excercise to confirm the engine is in excellent health (what has been seen at least) so there is some peace of mind that if it all comes together well it will provide another decade of reliable motoring....heck Im keeping it for life anyhow - jabe to to amortise what been tipped into it LOL!
As we spoke originally I still think the cam is somewhat limited by the inlet valve side of the NVR 993. Unfortunately my budget was not as generous as some others so I have elected to keep the top end in place and the factory valves stay as does the factory header due to the need for heat.
I guess we wont know until its all bolted up but so far its going well. I took the opportunity to strip of some small brightwear from the engine and have re plated. Ive had the rear wheel offsets machined to give 3-4mm offset in favour of dropping teh car further to exact RS height as Id like to ensure no issues when the JICs arrive (Phase 5). There are also a few other tricks for Phase 5 just to set the whole project off... Wet weight of 1300kg still remains ellusive (but very close) so I have set that goal aside but having shed 70kg+ does seem to have made a positive difference....
Look foward to learning about your engine modifications and work when you have an opportunity to share....best of luck with that....
Cheers
M
04-13-2011, 05:48 AM
#199
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Hi Maxii. Thanks kindly....
The aluminium rings can be bough seperately. There are many vendors. I cant recall who I used but a search on Rennlist will no doubt reveal all...
Cheers
M
The aluminium rings can be bough seperately. There are many vendors. I cant recall who I used but a search on Rennlist will no doubt reveal all...
Cheers
M
04-13-2011, 06:46 AM
#200
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Camblob. $1000 bucks. That would be cheap! :-)
Its the inlet valves that I believe make the most difference generally speaking when going to a higher lift configuration. The DC 24 is much higher lift (2.4-2.6mm?) than the RS cams so would probably benefit by the fitment of RS inlet valves to really give it its head. Combined with ITBs and good porgramming, DC24 with solids and your headers youll have yourself a pukka 325-345 bhp track weapon!
Colins inlet valves as quoted to me were 50mm. Factory NVR = 49mm. Early X51 3.8 upgrades were I think were 50mm. Im sure this is only part of the equation. The cam, lightweight rockers and his own rocker shafts keep the valve train weight down. Live Motronic mapping will be a big factor and obviously compression and head flow is important with 9ms solution too.
Imagine an engine that could rev like the GT3 tho. 8500. Nice! Problem is to build on from a 993 unit making the power and driveability, revability and durability of a 3.8 GT3RS unit wouldd likely cost as much as a 3.6 997.1 GT3 the way prices seem to be falling!
Cheers
M
Its the inlet valves that I believe make the most difference generally speaking when going to a higher lift configuration. The DC 24 is much higher lift (2.4-2.6mm?) than the RS cams so would probably benefit by the fitment of RS inlet valves to really give it its head. Combined with ITBs and good porgramming, DC24 with solids and your headers youll have yourself a pukka 325-345 bhp track weapon!
Colins inlet valves as quoted to me were 50mm. Factory NVR = 49mm. Early X51 3.8 upgrades were I think were 50mm. Im sure this is only part of the equation. The cam, lightweight rockers and his own rocker shafts keep the valve train weight down. Live Motronic mapping will be a big factor and obviously compression and head flow is important with 9ms solution too.
Imagine an engine that could rev like the GT3 tho. 8500. Nice! Problem is to build on from a 993 unit making the power and driveability, revability and durability of a 3.8 GT3RS unit wouldd likely cost as much as a 3.6 997.1 GT3 the way prices seem to be falling!
Cheers
M
04-13-2011, 08:19 PM
#201
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Ok. For those still tracking this thread, here are the final pictures before everything gets bolted back up today. There will be a few days of fettling and waiting for some parts to come back from outsource and then next week we hope to run an initial dyno to get some traces for the new custom chip....of course the LSD means there will be gobs of understeer so when the new suspension is installed well play with the adjustable bars to try and compensate for that...
Picks below include John Doughertys machined rockers in place, backdated 964 sproket with locking pin in pace (my 993 already had the backdated sprockets), cam gears and engine waiting for a home.....
M
Picks below include John Doughertys machined rockers in place, backdated 964 sproket with locking pin in pace (my 993 already had the backdated sprockets), cam gears and engine waiting for a home.....
M
04-14-2011, 09:33 PM
#203
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Ok. More workshop ****. Again excuse the quality of the images. I will of course take some pictures on the DSLR later but for now...
You will see in the pictures the CF fuse box cover in place. Bling I know but it does save maybe 200 gram LOL! It ties in well with the heater pipe.
Also CF diagnostics port cover. Probably only goo for the ROW OBD1 croud - but its cheap enough and helps finish the interior. Porsche placed this on the passenger outside foot well so its very rarely seen. A much better poistion IMHO to the later rectanglular cover placed on the transmission tunnel in view to all and sundry (unless you have black carpet of course!).
Here is a selection of "brightware" we had replated. Just a small "while your in there" request. It wasnt a diifcilt or expensive job to have these acide washed and replated and they make the engine bay seem just that little bit better.
My 1993 build car has a rare 3rd brake light cover factory frm Porsche. Its a nice svelte unit - much less obvious IMHO than the later unit. NZ was one of the few markets equiring these by law in late 1993 and Porsche made these using the rare "rear rood spoiler option" mated to a Bosch/Hella light strip. Unfortunately over the years weve had to repair it many times as it lifts off over time. Its now beyond serviceable repaire so i had to fork for the later version. I bought the whol kit including a new light strip. It wasnt a cheap excercise! In the photos you can see them side by side. In the background is a 1988 Porsche 959 with 150,000 km. Yes you read that right!
The new Beru leads went on easy enough - as you would expect and hope. They arent cheap afterall! New plugs underneath. The originals have some life left in them but after 17 years a refresh seemed sensible....
Rear wheel inside hubs were professionally shaved on a lathe to reduce offset 3.5mm. This was the maximum that could be achieved without creating brake caliper clearance issues or comprimising the wheels strength integrity. Kerschers original offset for these was ET54 for 10.5". It was a very aggressive fitment and given we are intending to lower the car another 10mm shortly it seemed sensible to buy some extra clearance so fenders do not require further rolling. Hopefully the new 10.5 x ET 57.5 should do the trick....
A few extra pictures for interests sake :-)
Now we just have to start her up and see if she runs :-)!
You will see in the pictures the CF fuse box cover in place. Bling I know but it does save maybe 200 gram LOL! It ties in well with the heater pipe.
Also CF diagnostics port cover. Probably only goo for the ROW OBD1 croud - but its cheap enough and helps finish the interior. Porsche placed this on the passenger outside foot well so its very rarely seen. A much better poistion IMHO to the later rectanglular cover placed on the transmission tunnel in view to all and sundry (unless you have black carpet of course!).
Here is a selection of "brightware" we had replated. Just a small "while your in there" request. It wasnt a diifcilt or expensive job to have these acide washed and replated and they make the engine bay seem just that little bit better.
My 1993 build car has a rare 3rd brake light cover factory frm Porsche. Its a nice svelte unit - much less obvious IMHO than the later unit. NZ was one of the few markets equiring these by law in late 1993 and Porsche made these using the rare "rear rood spoiler option" mated to a Bosch/Hella light strip. Unfortunately over the years weve had to repair it many times as it lifts off over time. Its now beyond serviceable repaire so i had to fork for the later version. I bought the whol kit including a new light strip. It wasnt a cheap excercise! In the photos you can see them side by side. In the background is a 1988 Porsche 959 with 150,000 km. Yes you read that right!
The new Beru leads went on easy enough - as you would expect and hope. They arent cheap afterall! New plugs underneath. The originals have some life left in them but after 17 years a refresh seemed sensible....
Rear wheel inside hubs were professionally shaved on a lathe to reduce offset 3.5mm. This was the maximum that could be achieved without creating brake caliper clearance issues or comprimising the wheels strength integrity. Kerschers original offset for these was ET54 for 10.5". It was a very aggressive fitment and given we are intending to lower the car another 10mm shortly it seemed sensible to buy some extra clearance so fenders do not require further rolling. Hopefully the new 10.5 x ET 57.5 should do the trick....
A few extra pictures for interests sake :-)
Now we just have to start her up and see if she runs :-)!
04-14-2011, 11:24 PM
#204
Pro
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Macca,
Your shop looks tidy! Ill post some pics soon. John hasnt gotten back to me, but my mechanic needs to know on whether you blocked off the oil feed holes for the hydraulic lifters. Also, did you use the old bolts from the old lifters? Thanks would appreciate a response since we are also assembling.
Paul
Your shop looks tidy! Ill post some pics soon. John hasnt gotten back to me, but my mechanic needs to know on whether you blocked off the oil feed holes for the hydraulic lifters. Also, did you use the old bolts from the old lifters? Thanks would appreciate a response since we are also assembling.
Paul
04-15-2011, 12:44 AM
#205
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Hi all. Comment from my mechanic below just this minute. He drives the car often enough to know the before and after. Brief but positive given mechanics rarely gush by nature! No stalling - which is a relief as we have been lucky in this regard given its an early 993 and it looks like our luck is holding...Yet to dyno and have custom chip built so more later....
It is alive !!!!
We have her up and running again. Have just taken it for a drive and it seams really good, my first impressions are that it has a definite pull once you hit 4000rpm, quite a noticeable surge in power. Seams to run good and idle good, it is much the same as before as it will drop down low and then pick up again, it didn't stall while I was driving it.
M
It is alive !!!!
We have her up and running again. Have just taken it for a drive and it seams really good, my first impressions are that it has a definite pull once you hit 4000rpm, quite a noticeable surge in power. Seams to run good and idle good, it is much the same as before as it will drop down low and then pick up again, it didn't stall while I was driving it.
M
04-15-2011, 01:01 AM
#206
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Hi Paul.
We went through this (well I think its the same as not exactly sure we are talking the same thing) earlier in the week. Luckily managed to get Johns response and all was good. No need to block the oil holes in the solid rockers. The rockers are sleeved with a steel bushing. As long as they have the oil grooves they are good. John builds them for 993 with the groove. The bushing sleeve blocks off the oler style oil hole....
Im not 100% sure on your next question but we used the factory rocker shafts and bolts under Johns instructions. I also verified this further with others that had done similar conversions. For the rockers we used "elephants foot" adjusters which came with the rockers from John already in place.
Hope this helps....looks like you are getting close!
Yes - My shop is the cleanest here I would think. Its an official Porsche Dealership flagship workshop (the biggest in the country). They have looked after this car since it was sold new in 1994. Dean (Service Manager) and Rob (Tech) have always been brilliant to deal with. The car has some good company with 959, 356 carrera 4s, GT3 and 964/993RS and Carrera GTs usually next door to her!
Cheers
M
We went through this (well I think its the same as not exactly sure we are talking the same thing) earlier in the week. Luckily managed to get Johns response and all was good. No need to block the oil holes in the solid rockers. The rockers are sleeved with a steel bushing. As long as they have the oil grooves they are good. John builds them for 993 with the groove. The bushing sleeve blocks off the oler style oil hole....
Im not 100% sure on your next question but we used the factory rocker shafts and bolts under Johns instructions. I also verified this further with others that had done similar conversions. For the rockers we used "elephants foot" adjusters which came with the rockers from John already in place.
Hope this helps....looks like you are getting close!
Yes - My shop is the cleanest here I would think. Its an official Porsche Dealership flagship workshop (the biggest in the country). They have looked after this car since it was sold new in 1994. Dean (Service Manager) and Rob (Tech) have always been brilliant to deal with. The car has some good company with 959, 356 carrera 4s, GT3 and 964/993RS and Carrera GTs usually next door to her!
Cheers
M
04-15-2011, 06:15 PM
#208
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
No prob camlob. Good lcuk with your project and post details when you can.
I spoke to my mechanic last night. He said there is a noticeable increase in pull/power from low revs then at 4000 there is extra urgency to just over 6000 rpm. He thinks there is a noticeable difference over before and infact was a bit suprised. Lets hope the dyno figures reflect an increase. Apparently all other chracteristics of the engine were as before which is great! So far no compromise.
The LSD wasnt able to be tested as it was a short run in the dry but the 40/65 should help on decel braking stability as well as getting it down on corners.
Engine bay is now super clean and tidy. Not much left to be done there in Phase 5. Picture attached is pretty poor unfortunately...
Im looking forward to getting those JICs onboard, lowered and properly set up next. Jon at JIC is still waiting for the first pre production sets to arrive. Hopefully they will be in production in late May. They do sound really sweet. I may do th monoball toe links same time if mine are worn...
M
I spoke to my mechanic last night. He said there is a noticeable increase in pull/power from low revs then at 4000 there is extra urgency to just over 6000 rpm. He thinks there is a noticeable difference over before and infact was a bit suprised. Lets hope the dyno figures reflect an increase. Apparently all other chracteristics of the engine were as before which is great! So far no compromise.
The LSD wasnt able to be tested as it was a short run in the dry but the 40/65 should help on decel braking stability as well as getting it down on corners.
Engine bay is now super clean and tidy. Not much left to be done there in Phase 5. Picture attached is pretty poor unfortunately...
Im looking forward to getting those JICs onboard, lowered and properly set up next. Jon at JIC is still waiting for the first pre production sets to arrive. Hopefully they will be in production in late May. They do sound really sweet. I may do th monoball toe links same time if mine are worn...
M
04-16-2011, 08:45 PM
#209
No prob camlob. Good lcuk with your project and post details when you can.
I spoke to my mechanic last night. He said there is a noticeable increase in pull/power from low revs then at 4000 there is extra urgency to just over 6000 rpm. He thinks there is a noticeable difference over before and infact was a bit suprised. Lets hope the dyno figures reflect an increase. Apparently all other chracteristics of the engine were as before which is great! So far no compromise.
The LSD wasnt able to be tested as it was a short run in the dry but the 40/65 should help on decel braking stability as well as getting it down on corners.
Engine bay is now super clean and tidy. Not much left to be done there in Phase 5. Picture attached is pretty poor unfortunately...
Im looking forward to getting those JICs onboard, lowered and properly set up next. Jon at JIC is still waiting for the first pre production sets to arrive. Hopefully they will be in production in late May. They do sound really sweet. I may do th monoball toe links same time if mine are worn...
M
I spoke to my mechanic last night. He said there is a noticeable increase in pull/power from low revs then at 4000 there is extra urgency to just over 6000 rpm. He thinks there is a noticeable difference over before and infact was a bit suprised. Lets hope the dyno figures reflect an increase. Apparently all other chracteristics of the engine were as before which is great! So far no compromise.
The LSD wasnt able to be tested as it was a short run in the dry but the 40/65 should help on decel braking stability as well as getting it down on corners.
Engine bay is now super clean and tidy. Not much left to be done there in Phase 5. Picture attached is pretty poor unfortunately...
Im looking forward to getting those JICs onboard, lowered and properly set up next. Jon at JIC is still waiting for the first pre production sets to arrive. Hopefully they will be in production in late May. They do sound really sweet. I may do th monoball toe links same time if mine are worn...
M
Now I know why there are so many lightly used JIC suspensions on the market.
04-17-2011, 12:55 AM
#210
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Blackbear.
Im interested in your story. Ive done a tonne of research on PSS9/10 and also on JIC Cross shocks for the 993. Unfortunately there are fewer data points for JIC. Everything helps. I dont want to do this twice either. Ive heard good stories and bad. One of the strongest advocates for them for me on this board is Bill V who I respect and says good things about these. Jon at JIC majic is a 993 (GT2 spec) race car owner. These may be made in Japan but he has alot of experience with them on Porsche and has had a big hand in developing the next (shortly to be released) generation to mee the needs of global Porsche 911/993 owners....remeber the gearbox in the 996 is Japanese - it doesnt mean bad quality....
Im not necessarily committed to JICs. Infact Im very torn to be done with it and go PSS10 as may others on this board. If im convinced JIC wont meeet my needs for a 90% streetcar Ill go PSS10 for sure...
JIC have recently discontinued their olderstyle JIC coilover adjustable shocks for the 993 and are working on a new product about to be launched. It has some subtl improvements icluding the diameter of teh shock tubes, the materials they are made of and extra adjustability (15 way). I believe they will keeep the same spring sets to work with these as they have in the past:
< Spring rate Conversion table >
kg/mm lbs/inch kg/mm lbs/inch kg/mm lbs/inch
4 225 9 506 16 899
5 281 10 564 18 1012
6 337 11 620 20 1124
7 393 12 674 22 1238
8 450 14 787 24 1348
My reasoning behind JICs new to be released product and the PSS10 alternative to date has hinged on these advantages of JIC system:
1). The shocks seem very well built quality units, and an exceptionally high specification and amount of adjustablility for the price (Mono ball rears, front adjustable camber plates, adjusters with a good notchy click for adjustment by feel.
2). Height adjustablility while on the car - convienience! Im really tired of paying my suspension guy to rip everything out each time Id like to increase or decrease the height of the front and rear shocks. the labour component over time adds up to te price of teh shocks. If I could have got the height I wanted first tie that would be great but i find it takes time and useage of teh vehicle to understand the compromises both pratical and performance of the shocks in different height settings. There is also the "stance" or asthetic Im looking for as this is largely a road car.
3). The ability to go lower than the current HD Bilstein Mo30 set up I have. I have run out of front shock thread. I have the shocks with the extra thread and I guess Im a tad above RS height. Id like to get 10mm more from the front and 5-6mm a the rear. Short of stripping the whole lot off and installing different springs (I do have a set of H&Rs already purchased - again these come with their own compromises) - I need a better solution. I can do that - spent another $800 usd setting it all up and then be unhappy with height (too low?) or spring rates or noisy springs etc and be back where I was! I want to pay install only once moving forward and then make changes at relatively lo labour/cost from that point on....
4). Spring rates. Having run a 993RS I understand that set up. With a modern coilover system it should be possible to better the ride quality (which on the 1996 RS Bilstein set up wasnt that flash for the roadI found). The thing that always gets me with the PSS9/10 on paper at least ishow soft the front spring rates are and how stiff the rear. If you compare this to the to the percentage split on te RS suspension you find you are operatig almost full hard on front and medium setting on rear to get the same rates as teh factory car. You have little further variance without changing the dynamics. I know in the real wok this differs. For examply teh factory race cars run very stiff rears and almost as stiff at the front. My feelings were that the PSS9/10 give you adjustablity outside the range ta is best suited for a fast road application. They seem well suited to a car that has LSD (oversteer) and runs on perfectly smooth roads or occassional track. Overall tehy are way too soft at the front for a race car, but then again they dont have much adjustability in real world terms for a road car. this is academic and from reading posts on this forum. I dot own them so I cannot really say. The JIC allow me to pick a spring set that gives a good/precise rate. In my case as the car is 90% street and 2900 lb with new motorsport 40/65 LSD ill probably ellect to go 5/8 or maybe 6/9 springs (someone challene me?). Thats 281/450 lb inch for 5/8. Effectively 12% stiffer tan 993RS at the front and 0% stiffer at the rear. I always felt the rear was plenty stiff but the front a little bit soft on the 993RS. I already have RS factory adjustable bars and drop links so I will soften the front off further using these to correct LSD understeer...
Factory Stock 143 fr 293 rr (esimate as not piblished)
M030 150-200 fr 225-275 rr
Eibach 7209 120 fr 200 rr
Weltmeister 180 fr 268 rr
H&R peformance 240-260 fr 280-310 rr
H&R coilovers 290-310 fr 350-370 rr
H&R supercup 310-350 fr 385-435 rr
BIlstein PSS-9 225-250 fr 400-685 rr
"Motorsport" 600 fr 800 rr"
RS is 246/457,
Im more than happy for someone to cnvince me Im absolutely wrong or will not gt satisfaction out of my JIC spring choices. Its really important to me I dont waste my money so I want anyone who has a experience either way to tell me if Im out of line?
Cheers
M
Im interested in your story. Ive done a tonne of research on PSS9/10 and also on JIC Cross shocks for the 993. Unfortunately there are fewer data points for JIC. Everything helps. I dont want to do this twice either. Ive heard good stories and bad. One of the strongest advocates for them for me on this board is Bill V who I respect and says good things about these. Jon at JIC majic is a 993 (GT2 spec) race car owner. These may be made in Japan but he has alot of experience with them on Porsche and has had a big hand in developing the next (shortly to be released) generation to mee the needs of global Porsche 911/993 owners....remeber the gearbox in the 996 is Japanese - it doesnt mean bad quality....
Im not necessarily committed to JICs. Infact Im very torn to be done with it and go PSS10 as may others on this board. If im convinced JIC wont meeet my needs for a 90% streetcar Ill go PSS10 for sure...
JIC have recently discontinued their olderstyle JIC coilover adjustable shocks for the 993 and are working on a new product about to be launched. It has some subtl improvements icluding the diameter of teh shock tubes, the materials they are made of and extra adjustability (15 way). I believe they will keeep the same spring sets to work with these as they have in the past:
< Spring rate Conversion table >
kg/mm lbs/inch kg/mm lbs/inch kg/mm lbs/inch
4 225 9 506 16 899
5 281 10 564 18 1012
6 337 11 620 20 1124
7 393 12 674 22 1238
8 450 14 787 24 1348
My reasoning behind JICs new to be released product and the PSS10 alternative to date has hinged on these advantages of JIC system:
1). The shocks seem very well built quality units, and an exceptionally high specification and amount of adjustablility for the price (Mono ball rears, front adjustable camber plates, adjusters with a good notchy click for adjustment by feel.
2). Height adjustablility while on the car - convienience! Im really tired of paying my suspension guy to rip everything out each time Id like to increase or decrease the height of the front and rear shocks. the labour component over time adds up to te price of teh shocks. If I could have got the height I wanted first tie that would be great but i find it takes time and useage of teh vehicle to understand the compromises both pratical and performance of the shocks in different height settings. There is also the "stance" or asthetic Im looking for as this is largely a road car.
3). The ability to go lower than the current HD Bilstein Mo30 set up I have. I have run out of front shock thread. I have the shocks with the extra thread and I guess Im a tad above RS height. Id like to get 10mm more from the front and 5-6mm a the rear. Short of stripping the whole lot off and installing different springs (I do have a set of H&Rs already purchased - again these come with their own compromises) - I need a better solution. I can do that - spent another $800 usd setting it all up and then be unhappy with height (too low?) or spring rates or noisy springs etc and be back where I was! I want to pay install only once moving forward and then make changes at relatively lo labour/cost from that point on....
4). Spring rates. Having run a 993RS I understand that set up. With a modern coilover system it should be possible to better the ride quality (which on the 1996 RS Bilstein set up wasnt that flash for the roadI found). The thing that always gets me with the PSS9/10 on paper at least ishow soft the front spring rates are and how stiff the rear. If you compare this to the to the percentage split on te RS suspension you find you are operatig almost full hard on front and medium setting on rear to get the same rates as teh factory car. You have little further variance without changing the dynamics. I know in the real wok this differs. For examply teh factory race cars run very stiff rears and almost as stiff at the front. My feelings were that the PSS9/10 give you adjustablity outside the range ta is best suited for a fast road application. They seem well suited to a car that has LSD (oversteer) and runs on perfectly smooth roads or occassional track. Overall tehy are way too soft at the front for a race car, but then again they dont have much adjustability in real world terms for a road car. this is academic and from reading posts on this forum. I dot own them so I cannot really say. The JIC allow me to pick a spring set that gives a good/precise rate. In my case as the car is 90% street and 2900 lb with new motorsport 40/65 LSD ill probably ellect to go 5/8 or maybe 6/9 springs (someone challene me?). Thats 281/450 lb inch for 5/8. Effectively 12% stiffer tan 993RS at the front and 0% stiffer at the rear. I always felt the rear was plenty stiff but the front a little bit soft on the 993RS. I already have RS factory adjustable bars and drop links so I will soften the front off further using these to correct LSD understeer...
Factory Stock 143 fr 293 rr (esimate as not piblished)
M030 150-200 fr 225-275 rr
Eibach 7209 120 fr 200 rr
Weltmeister 180 fr 268 rr
H&R peformance 240-260 fr 280-310 rr
H&R coilovers 290-310 fr 350-370 rr
H&R supercup 310-350 fr 385-435 rr
BIlstein PSS-9 225-250 fr 400-685 rr
"Motorsport" 600 fr 800 rr"
RS is 246/457,
Im more than happy for someone to cnvince me Im absolutely wrong or will not gt satisfaction out of my JIC spring choices. Its really important to me I dont waste my money so I want anyone who has a experience either way to tell me if Im out of line?
Cheers
M