Pros/Cons of Locking Out Kinematic Toe
#47
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Wow,
I am so glad I asked this question. The diagram in post 10 was what really got me thinking about this whole thing and what the effects of the KT is.
I am ***-uming that replacing any 8 of the rubber bushings with monoballs would essentially net you something like a double A-Arm suspension and that IF you replaced the final link with solid mounts you would get some binding... that's my guess anyways and would explain why they don't sell ALL of the joints as a kit.
Very interesting reading. I had no idea the KT gauge was simply a level like that. I did a bunch of research trying to find a "how-to" for KT settings and everyone said you needed the special Porsche tool. Obviously I missed some information . I thought they actually had to cycle the suspension and measure the toe change (like performing a castor sweep, but in the rear somehow...)
I posted on the PCA website that I was looking for someone with some scales that I could borrow or drive my car onto. I should have posted here as well. I am still interested to see where I am at. I am not looking for perfection, but I would like it to be as close as possible.
Thanks again for all the information!
I am so glad I asked this question. The diagram in post 10 was what really got me thinking about this whole thing and what the effects of the KT is.
I am ***-uming that replacing any 8 of the rubber bushings with monoballs would essentially net you something like a double A-Arm suspension and that IF you replaced the final link with solid mounts you would get some binding... that's my guess anyways and would explain why they don't sell ALL of the joints as a kit.
Very interesting reading. I had no idea the KT gauge was simply a level like that. I did a bunch of research trying to find a "how-to" for KT settings and everyone said you needed the special Porsche tool. Obviously I missed some information . I thought they actually had to cycle the suspension and measure the toe change (like performing a castor sweep, but in the rear somehow...)
I posted on the PCA website that I was looking for someone with some scales that I could borrow or drive my car onto. I should have posted here as well. I am still interested to see where I am at. I am not looking for perfection, but I would like it to be as close as possible.
Thanks again for all the information!
#48
Rennlist Member
chaoscreature. Did you weight the JIC shocks? If so would be interested as Im looking to order the new gen ones when they launch in June. Are they lighter than the factory ones or previous ones you had in the car do you think?
Cheers
M
Cheers
M
#49
Wow,
I am so glad I asked this question. The diagram in post 10 was what really got me thinking about this whole thing and what the effects of the KT is.
I am ***-uming that replacing any 8 of the rubber bushings with monoballs would essentially net you something like a double A-Arm suspension and that IF you replaced the final link with solid mounts you would get some binding... that's my guess anyways and would explain why they don't sell ALL of the joints as a kit.
Very interesting reading. I had no idea the KT gauge was simply a level like that. I did a bunch of research trying to find a "how-to" for KT settings and everyone said you needed the special Porsche tool. Obviously I missed some information . I thought they actually had to cycle the suspension and measure the toe change (like performing a castor sweep, but in the rear somehow...)
I posted on the PCA website that I was looking for someone with some scales that I could borrow or drive my car onto. I should have posted here as well. I am still interested to see where I am at. I am not looking for perfection, but I would like it to be as close as possible.
Thanks again for all the information!
I am so glad I asked this question. The diagram in post 10 was what really got me thinking about this whole thing and what the effects of the KT is.
I am ***-uming that replacing any 8 of the rubber bushings with monoballs would essentially net you something like a double A-Arm suspension and that IF you replaced the final link with solid mounts you would get some binding... that's my guess anyways and would explain why they don't sell ALL of the joints as a kit.
Very interesting reading. I had no idea the KT gauge was simply a level like that. I did a bunch of research trying to find a "how-to" for KT settings and everyone said you needed the special Porsche tool. Obviously I missed some information . I thought they actually had to cycle the suspension and measure the toe change (like performing a castor sweep, but in the rear somehow...)
I posted on the PCA website that I was looking for someone with some scales that I could borrow or drive my car onto. I should have posted here as well. I am still interested to see where I am at. I am not looking for perfection, but I would like it to be as close as possible.
Thanks again for all the information!
The thing is they went to a simpler 4 link setup for the 996/997
#50
Guru
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Rennlist Small
Business Sponsor
#53
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Macca,
They were a little bit lighter but it wasn't a large weight savings for the coilovers themselves. They basically have the same components as the factory ones, so without a major re-design or going to exotic metals I don't think you can really save a lot of weight replacing shocks/struts.
Chris,
That makes perfect sense in conjunction with the diagram fom post#10. According to that picture it's the trailing A-Arm that has the "give" in it. It's really a fascinating suspension system and an interesting concept. My car feels absolutely wonderful so Porsche definitely did something right there... it's just odd like Bill pointed out that they would develope something so complicated, use it for 5 years and then drop it.
If my graphics card didn't crap out on me I would try to model the suspension to see how it works. I have modeled a few differnt A-arm designs back when I had more energy and wanted to build a can-am style race/street car (Think 1963 Ford Falcon with mid-engine, tube frame and fiberglass panels).
They were a little bit lighter but it wasn't a large weight savings for the coilovers themselves. They basically have the same components as the factory ones, so without a major re-design or going to exotic metals I don't think you can really save a lot of weight replacing shocks/struts.
Chris,
That makes perfect sense in conjunction with the diagram fom post#10. According to that picture it's the trailing A-Arm that has the "give" in it. It's really a fascinating suspension system and an interesting concept. My car feels absolutely wonderful so Porsche definitely did something right there... it's just odd like Bill pointed out that they would develope something so complicated, use it for 5 years and then drop it.
If my graphics card didn't crap out on me I would try to model the suspension to see how it works. I have modeled a few differnt A-arm designs back when I had more energy and wanted to build a can-am style race/street car (Think 1963 Ford Falcon with mid-engine, tube frame and fiberglass panels).
#54
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: En La Boca Del Raton
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see that you guys are increasing front track by using wider rubber which it is ok, another way for increasing the track is by changing the front suspension pick-up points outward,there is provisions for it on the chassis itself.,(a la RSR's)cheers.
#55
Rennlist Member
#57
Rennlist Member
Thanks for the explanation and yes, this all seems to agree with Bill's post of the Porsche explanation of the suspension. So back to the original post, if the trailing arm bushing is replaced with a solid monoball, wouldn't you lose the kinematic toe? And as someone else posted, a problem with binding?
#58
Rennlist Member
subscribed to this. It would appear the factoru were very specific in the design of the 993 rear suspension components right down to what we have to presume was careful selection of rubber mount density and deflection.
So the question still stands and is a good one. Outside of race car application for 993 would changing just one item of the 5 to monoball affect the KT or how the suspnesion operates as a whole. Is infact it only adviseable to replace all three arms with monoball at the same time?
M
So the question still stands and is a good one. Outside of race car application for 993 would changing just one item of the 5 to monoball affect the KT or how the suspnesion operates as a whole. Is infact it only adviseable to replace all three arms with monoball at the same time?
M
#59
Race Car
Thanks for the explanation and yes, this all seems to agree with Bill's post of the Porsche explanation of the suspension. So back to the original post, if the trailing arm bushing is replaced with a solid monoball, wouldn't you lose the kinematic toe? And as someone else posted, a problem with binding?
ERP have been making the monoball replacement for the rear a-arm for a long time, I would suspect that if it was binding they wouldn't produce it.
Putting all of these components in the car reducing or eliminating the k-toe, i would think you would basically end up with a suspension that reacts more like the 996/997 suspension (that Porsche eliminated the k-toe in).
For racing / track cars where you are trying to remove variability (soft rubber) going to the monoball would ensure you knew what the suspension is doing at any particular time. With rubber you never quite know how much it is compressing, or that you are outside the operational specs of the suspension (due to other changes or geometry etrc)
#60
the 996/997 still has toe changes w/ suspension movement it's just not adjustable as on a 993