997 GT3.mk1 PASM re-valve begins
08-11-2011, 07:31 PM
#76
Drifting
Thread Starter
mini update
The TRG piece won't work as a replacement for the Bilstein B16 Damptronic hat.
TRG can put together a Monoball solution for anyone that wants it:
- Rear Monoball + 2.25" Spring Hat + 2.25" Lower Spring Perch + 2.25" Main and Tender Springs
- This is a 'race' setup being monball so it will introduce added noise into the cabin
- it seems most raceshops deal in 2.25" versus 60mm (close but different)
- it is no big deal as the only part that would have to be purchased for this solution vs the 60mm solution is a lower 2.25 Spring Perch to replace the factory 60mm part - a $50 part.
So, for anyone wanting a Monoball solution, the parts are easily available and the approximate cost would be:
- $500 (2x Monoball Rear Strut Tops)
- $100 (2 x Spring Hats)
- $100 (2 x Lower Spring Perch)
- $200 (2x 8' Main Springs)
=$900
You can add to this if you want to do Mains + Helper Spring
$150 (2 x Help Springs + 2 x Spring Couplers)
Now, there really isn't any reason to have to do a Monoball solution if the correct Upper Hat was available (like the B16 Damptronic piece) + if you keep things 60mm and not 2.25, then it again means less parts. So, $900 really becomes $400 or round up to $500 if 'someone' makes available a correct 60mm Spring Hat. So, $500 + labor would allow any interested party to up the rear spring rate to say #700-#750 on the stock valving to better match Re-valved fronts.
I will have more updates when I get info on the coming availability of a Rear Spring Hat similar to the B16 piece - this will take a bit of time, but as mk1 gt3 come off warranty I suspect I few people will give this a try.
I have also learned about the possibility of a KW Suspension 997 Turbo Variant 3 upper rear hat that 'may' work. KW uses there own design 61mm springs (why not be different) and if you look at the rear upper hat it looks like it could work. I placed a call into KW to get a part number and a price for this part. I don't know if it will work, but it sure seems possible.
(see picture on page 11)
http://docs.kwsuspension.de/eah68671023.pdf
The TRG piece won't work as a replacement for the Bilstein B16 Damptronic hat.
TRG can put together a Monoball solution for anyone that wants it:
- Rear Monoball + 2.25" Spring Hat + 2.25" Lower Spring Perch + 2.25" Main and Tender Springs
- This is a 'race' setup being monball so it will introduce added noise into the cabin
- it seems most raceshops deal in 2.25" versus 60mm (close but different)
- it is no big deal as the only part that would have to be purchased for this solution vs the 60mm solution is a lower 2.25 Spring Perch to replace the factory 60mm part - a $50 part.
So, for anyone wanting a Monoball solution, the parts are easily available and the approximate cost would be:
- $500 (2x Monoball Rear Strut Tops)
- $100 (2 x Spring Hats)
- $100 (2 x Lower Spring Perch)
- $200 (2x 8' Main Springs)
=$900
You can add to this if you want to do Mains + Helper Spring
$150 (2 x Help Springs + 2 x Spring Couplers)
Now, there really isn't any reason to have to do a Monoball solution if the correct Upper Hat was available (like the B16 Damptronic piece) + if you keep things 60mm and not 2.25, then it again means less parts. So, $900 really becomes $400 or round up to $500 if 'someone' makes available a correct 60mm Spring Hat. So, $500 + labor would allow any interested party to up the rear spring rate to say #700-#750 on the stock valving to better match Re-valved fronts.
I will have more updates when I get info on the coming availability of a Rear Spring Hat similar to the B16 piece - this will take a bit of time, but as mk1 gt3 come off warranty I suspect I few people will give this a try.
I have also learned about the possibility of a KW Suspension 997 Turbo Variant 3 upper rear hat that 'may' work. KW uses there own design 61mm springs (why not be different) and if you look at the rear upper hat it looks like it could work. I placed a call into KW to get a part number and a price for this part. I don't know if it will work, but it sure seems possible.
(see picture on page 11)
http://docs.kwsuspension.de/eah68671023.pdf
08-11-2011, 07:47 PM
#77
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The rear upper strut mount (monoball) doesn't add noise. I ran them in the 996 GT3 (full monoball everywhere) and the 997 GT3 RS (partial monoball conversion). Quiet cars both of them.
Given the large availability of 2.5" and 2.25" ID Springs, changing just the lower spring perches and running a rear Tarett Eng upper strut momoball mount (that doesn't need an upper spring hat), opens the possibility of many springs.
I would not run a main Swift spring longer than 6", and I would use a 4" zero rate Hyperco tender with a Genesis isolator. This setup in my Fiat is lighter than the stock Titanium almost 10" long main spring, and much lighter than anything Porsche has used in the GT2/GT3 so far (including GT2RS and 4.0RS).
Less unsprung weight, consistent spring rates, linear spring rates, and no noises compared to the noisy stock springs (especially when lowering the GT3/GT2 10mm or more on the stock struts).
Given the large availability of 2.5" and 2.25" ID Springs, changing just the lower spring perches and running a rear Tarett Eng upper strut momoball mount (that doesn't need an upper spring hat), opens the possibility of many springs.
I would not run a main Swift spring longer than 6", and I would use a 4" zero rate Hyperco tender with a Genesis isolator. This setup in my Fiat is lighter than the stock Titanium almost 10" long main spring, and much lighter than anything Porsche has used in the GT2/GT3 so far (including GT2RS and 4.0RS).
Less unsprung weight, consistent spring rates, linear spring rates, and no noises compared to the noisy stock springs (especially when lowering the GT3/GT2 10mm or more on the stock struts).
08-11-2011, 08:52 PM
#78
Drifting
Thread Starter
Rad,
I ordered the Swift 6" and their Helper Springs - I also ordered the Genesis Isolator you posted about earlier I have the Swift Isolator that comes with the Helpers if the Genesis doesn't fit the Swift Springs.
The reason I keep searching for a Spring Hat solution is that it wasn't clear from Ira (and I did speak with him) that you could, or was it wise, to put the main spring, as I think you are suggesting, directly against his Monoball.
Are you saying you did this?
I passed on the noise issue as this is what TRG said about their own product.
It is Ira that is going to research doing this custom part to fit the OE spring perch - he said he will order the parts to see if he can come up with a good solution.
Paul
I ordered the Swift 6" and their Helper Springs - I also ordered the Genesis Isolator you posted about earlier I have the Swift Isolator that comes with the Helpers if the Genesis doesn't fit the Swift Springs.
The reason I keep searching for a Spring Hat solution is that it wasn't clear from Ira (and I did speak with him) that you could, or was it wise, to put the main spring, as I think you are suggesting, directly against his Monoball.
Are you saying you did this?
I passed on the noise issue as this is what TRG said about their own product.
It is Ira that is going to research doing this custom part to fit the OE spring perch - he said he will order the parts to see if he can come up with a good solution.
Paul
The rear upper strut mount (monoball) doesn't add noise. I ran them in the 996 GT3 (full monoball everywhere) and the 997 GT3 RS (partial monoball conversion). Quiet cars both of them.
Given the large availability of 2.5" and 2.25" ID Springs, changing just the lower spring perches and running a rear Tarett Eng upper strut momoball mount (that doesn't need an upper spring hat), opens the possibility of many springs.
I would not run a main Swift spring longer than 6", and I would use a 4" zero rate Hyperco tender with a Genesis isolator. This setup in my Fiat is lighter than the stock Titanium almost 10" long main spring, and much lighter than anything Porsche has used in the GT2/GT3 so far (including GT2RS and 4.0RS).
Less unsprung weight, consistent spring rates, linear spring rates, and no noises compared to the noisy stock springs (especially when lowering the GT3/GT2 10mm or more on the stock struts).
Given the large availability of 2.5" and 2.25" ID Springs, changing just the lower spring perches and running a rear Tarett Eng upper strut momoball mount (that doesn't need an upper spring hat), opens the possibility of many springs.
I would not run a main Swift spring longer than 6", and I would use a 4" zero rate Hyperco tender with a Genesis isolator. This setup in my Fiat is lighter than the stock Titanium almost 10" long main spring, and much lighter than anything Porsche has used in the GT2/GT3 so far (including GT2RS and 4.0RS).
Less unsprung weight, consistent spring rates, linear spring rates, and no noises compared to the noisy stock springs (especially when lowering the GT3/GT2 10mm or more on the stock struts).
08-11-2011, 09:00 PM
#79
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I will post a picture later (when my time allows) with a spring and the Tarett strut mount. I have all these left over parts here, but I keep them as a reminder to get rid off the Cayman and get a real Porsche in a not so distant future. Strut top and springs is what I used and keep using.
I just have to wait for Porsche to produce a real Porsche that has the the proper value/performance. Actually, they just did, it is the 2010 GT3 RS 3.8.
I just have to wait for Porsche to produce a real Porsche that has the the proper value/performance. Actually, they just did, it is the 2010 GT3 RS 3.8.
08-11-2011, 09:10 PM
#80
Drifting
Thread Starter
Thanks Rad
Another question, do you think a 19x9.5 ET 38-40 with a rotated front strut will fit? To me it looks like it will and I was think of using this rim to mount the 265/19 R6 front
I didn't think a rim this big would work until I rotated the front struts and then moved the rear 5mm spacer to the front and there is still about 13mm from my ET 51 19x8.5 rim?
Thanks
Paul
Another question, do you think a 19x9.5 ET 38-40 with a rotated front strut will fit? To me it looks like it will and I was think of using this rim to mount the 265/19 R6 front
I didn't think a rim this big would work until I rotated the front struts and then moved the rear 5mm spacer to the front and there is still about 13mm from my ET 51 19x8.5 rim?
Thanks
Paul
08-11-2011, 11:04 PM
#81
Rennlist Member
The softer the rate, the longer the spring you want to avoid coil bind.
Running a rear 9" linear race spring is still going to be lighter than the stock spring, because it removes all the progressive coils. Sure, it's not as light as running a 6-7" main spring, but even Bilstein runs 7" main with a helper spring.
If the compressed length of the stock rear spring is 8", then doing the math, you just need a 9" rear spring, if you go with a 600-700# rate. Your compression assuming about 1100# of rear weight on each wheel, will be between 1.4 and 1.7 inches, which effectively makes your compressed height of about 7.5", which is good because it allows you to raise the car giving increasing shock travel.
I'm still using Swift springs front and rear, with a machined rear hat. Easily the most cost effective option IMO. It's not full race, but alot better than stock, and will allow you to get alot more out of a set of aftermarket sway bars.
Running a rear 9" linear race spring is still going to be lighter than the stock spring, because it removes all the progressive coils. Sure, it's not as light as running a 6-7" main spring, but even Bilstein runs 7" main with a helper spring.
If the compressed length of the stock rear spring is 8", then doing the math, you just need a 9" rear spring, if you go with a 600-700# rate. Your compression assuming about 1100# of rear weight on each wheel, will be between 1.4 and 1.7 inches, which effectively makes your compressed height of about 7.5", which is good because it allows you to raise the car giving increasing shock travel.
I'm still using Swift springs front and rear, with a machined rear hat. Easily the most cost effective option IMO. It's not full race, but alot better than stock, and will allow you to get alot more out of a set of aftermarket sway bars.
08-12-2011, 04:41 AM
#82
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The softer the rate, the longer the spring you want to avoid coil bind.
Running a rear 9" linear race spring is still going to be lighter than the stock spring, because it removes all the progressive coils. Sure, it's not as light as running a 6-7" main spring, but even Bilstein runs 7" main with a helper spring.
If the compressed length of the stock rear spring is 8", then doing the math, you just need a 9" rear spring, if you go with a 600-700# rate. Your compression assuming about 1100# of rear weight on each wheel, will be between 1.4 and 1.7 inches, which effectively makes your compressed height of about 7.5", which is good because it allows you to raise the car giving increasing shock travel.
I'm still using Swift springs front and rear, with a machined rear hat. Easily the most cost effective option IMO. It's not full race, but alot better than stock, and will allow you to get alot more out of a set of aftermarket sway bars.
Running a rear 9" linear race spring is still going to be lighter than the stock spring, because it removes all the progressive coils. Sure, it's not as light as running a 6-7" main spring, but even Bilstein runs 7" main with a helper spring.
If the compressed length of the stock rear spring is 8", then doing the math, you just need a 9" rear spring, if you go with a 600-700# rate. Your compression assuming about 1100# of rear weight on each wheel, will be between 1.4 and 1.7 inches, which effectively makes your compressed height of about 7.5", which is good because it allows you to raise the car giving increasing shock travel.
I'm still using Swift springs front and rear, with a machined rear hat. Easily the most cost effective option IMO. It's not full race, but alot better than stock, and will allow you to get alot more out of a set of aftermarket sway bars.
The available suspension travel your stock GT3 shocks allow you with the car at rest. Get underneath your GT3 and measure this length before bump stops at stock ride height, and you will find that even a 6" spring is too long for a GT3. On a GT3 you will hit the bump stops before you can experience coil bind, with the stock suspension and stock spring rates (low 200s front springs and mid 500s rear springs).
Moreover, the rear setup is a multi-link with a 0.64 motion ratio in the 996 GT3, and something very similar on the 997 GT3 (never measured it). This means that you can't use a 1:1 ratio to calculate suspension travel, much less wheel rate (the effective spring rates at the wheels).
Then, you need to remove the unsprung weight from the corner weight, wheels, tires, hubs, calipers, rotors, brake pads, they add up to somewhere in the 100+ lbs range for these cars with PCCB and 110+ lbs for cars with conventional rotors.
Coil binding is a Miata, S2000, Corolla problem. Not a GT3 problem, and much less with Swift springs.
08-12-2011, 09:13 AM
#83
Rennlist Member
I agree, but there is more:
The available suspension travel your stock GT3 shocks allow you with the car at rest. Get underneath your GT3 and measure this length before bump stops at stock ride height, and you will find that even a 6" spring is too long for a GT3. On a GT3 you will hit the bump stops before you can experience coil bind, with the stock suspension and stock spring rates (low 200s front springs and mid 500s rear springs).
Moreover, the rear setup is a multi-link with a 0.64 motion ratio in the 996 GT3, and something very similar on the 997 GT3 (never measured it). This means that you can't use a 1:1 ratio to calculate suspension travel, much less wheel rate (the effective spring rates at the wheels).
Then, you need to remove the unsprung weight from the corner weight, wheels, tires, hubs, calipers, rotors, brake pads, they add up to somewhere in the 100+ lbs range for these cars with PCCB and 110+ lbs for cars with conventional rotors.
Coil binding is a Miata, S2000, Corolla problem. Not a GT3 problem, and much less with Swift springs.
The available suspension travel your stock GT3 shocks allow you with the car at rest. Get underneath your GT3 and measure this length before bump stops at stock ride height, and you will find that even a 6" spring is too long for a GT3. On a GT3 you will hit the bump stops before you can experience coil bind, with the stock suspension and stock spring rates (low 200s front springs and mid 500s rear springs).
Moreover, the rear setup is a multi-link with a 0.64 motion ratio in the 996 GT3, and something very similar on the 997 GT3 (never measured it). This means that you can't use a 1:1 ratio to calculate suspension travel, much less wheel rate (the effective spring rates at the wheels).
Then, you need to remove the unsprung weight from the corner weight, wheels, tires, hubs, calipers, rotors, brake pads, they add up to somewhere in the 100+ lbs range for these cars with PCCB and 110+ lbs for cars with conventional rotors.
Coil binding is a Miata, S2000, Corolla problem. Not a GT3 problem, and much less with Swift springs.
08-13-2011, 10:51 AM
#84
Drifting
Thread Starter
Mini update
Was able to buy from a fellow rennlister a set of rear OE Bilstein Damptronics - they should arrive Tuesday at Bilstein in Poway CA for their re-valve. I'm going to go with a revalve to 800#s - this will allow me to experiment with spring rates from 750-900 - the rear range that I think is optimal for my desire for the car to be a street / track setup.
It is going to take a few weeks to have this all done, and I haven't made a final decision whether I want to keep 2 sets of rear OE shocks, but if anyone is interested in buying my rear shocks to have them sent to Bilstein for a revalve when I get them off the car, PM me and I will reply when ready to make that decision - I paid $600 + shipping for what I just bought and that is what I will ask if/when I sell them (new from the dealer they are $950 each but you can deal and get them for $900 each)
Interesting note about the rear OE shocks is that there are none in the US - but there are 4 in German. The interesting part is that the rear shocks have the same part number for all gt3s, gt3rs, gt2s from 2007-2011. Thus, even though the 2011 RS uses a 115N/mm spring versus the 2007 GT3 that uses a 105N/mm rear spring, the rear shock is the same. This reinforces what Bilstein told me that the shocks can easily handle 15% more spring without any noticeable effect. This also opens an interesting question about the PASM computer module - ie, if you order the most resent iteration of this module (let's say from the GT2/RS or let's say RS 4.0) is it a nice and cheap way to upgrade your operating system so to speak - or would it not work because the newer car's have SC and somehow the newer and older computers won't like each other - thoughts?
Was able to buy from a fellow rennlister a set of rear OE Bilstein Damptronics - they should arrive Tuesday at Bilstein in Poway CA for their re-valve. I'm going to go with a revalve to 800#s - this will allow me to experiment with spring rates from 750-900 - the rear range that I think is optimal for my desire for the car to be a street / track setup.
It is going to take a few weeks to have this all done, and I haven't made a final decision whether I want to keep 2 sets of rear OE shocks, but if anyone is interested in buying my rear shocks to have them sent to Bilstein for a revalve when I get them off the car, PM me and I will reply when ready to make that decision - I paid $600 + shipping for what I just bought and that is what I will ask if/when I sell them (new from the dealer they are $950 each but you can deal and get them for $900 each)
Interesting note about the rear OE shocks is that there are none in the US - but there are 4 in German. The interesting part is that the rear shocks have the same part number for all gt3s, gt3rs, gt2s from 2007-2011. Thus, even though the 2011 RS uses a 115N/mm spring versus the 2007 GT3 that uses a 105N/mm rear spring, the rear shock is the same. This reinforces what Bilstein told me that the shocks can easily handle 15% more spring without any noticeable effect. This also opens an interesting question about the PASM computer module - ie, if you order the most resent iteration of this module (let's say from the GT2/RS or let's say RS 4.0) is it a nice and cheap way to upgrade your operating system so to speak - or would it not work because the newer car's have SC and somehow the newer and older computers won't like each other - thoughts?
08-14-2011, 11:54 PM
#85
Rennlist Member
Mini update
Was able to buy from a fellow rennlister a set of rear OE Bilstein Damptronics - they should arrive Tuesday at Bilstein in Poway CA for their re-valve. I'm going to go with a revalve to 800#s - this will allow me to experiment with spring rates from 750-900 - the rear range that I think is optimal for my desire for the car to be a street / track setup.
It is going to take a few weeks to have this all done, and I haven't made a final decision whether I want to keep 2 sets of rear OE shocks, but if anyone is interested in buying my rear shocks to have them sent to Bilstein for a revalve when I get them off the car, PM me and I will reply when ready to make that decision - I paid $600 + shipping for what I just bought and that is what I will ask if/when I sell them (new from the dealer they are $950 each but you can deal and get them for $900 each)
Interesting note about the rear OE shocks is that there are none in the US - but there are 4 in German. The interesting part is that the rear shocks have the same part number for all gt3s, gt3rs, gt2s from 2007-2011. Thus, even though the 2011 RS uses a 115N/mm spring versus the 2007 GT3 that uses a 105N/mm rear spring, the rear shock is the same. This reinforces what Bilstein told me that the shocks can easily handle 15% more spring without any noticeable effect. This also opens an interesting question about the PASM computer module - ie, if you order the most resent iteration of this module (let's say from the GT2/RS or let's say RS 4.0) is it a nice and cheap way to upgrade your operating system so to speak - or would it not work because the newer car's have SC and somehow the newer and older computers won't like each other - thoughts?
Was able to buy from a fellow rennlister a set of rear OE Bilstein Damptronics - they should arrive Tuesday at Bilstein in Poway CA for their re-valve. I'm going to go with a revalve to 800#s - this will allow me to experiment with spring rates from 750-900 - the rear range that I think is optimal for my desire for the car to be a street / track setup.
It is going to take a few weeks to have this all done, and I haven't made a final decision whether I want to keep 2 sets of rear OE shocks, but if anyone is interested in buying my rear shocks to have them sent to Bilstein for a revalve when I get them off the car, PM me and I will reply when ready to make that decision - I paid $600 + shipping for what I just bought and that is what I will ask if/when I sell them (new from the dealer they are $950 each but you can deal and get them for $900 each)
Interesting note about the rear OE shocks is that there are none in the US - but there are 4 in German. The interesting part is that the rear shocks have the same part number for all gt3s, gt3rs, gt2s from 2007-2011. Thus, even though the 2011 RS uses a 115N/mm spring versus the 2007 GT3 that uses a 105N/mm rear spring, the rear shock is the same. This reinforces what Bilstein told me that the shocks can easily handle 15% more spring without any noticeable effect. This also opens an interesting question about the PASM computer module - ie, if you order the most resent iteration of this module (let's say from the GT2/RS or let's say RS 4.0) is it a nice and cheap way to upgrade your operating system so to speak - or would it not work because the newer car's have SC and somehow the newer and older computers won't like each other - thoughts?
08-15-2011, 12:36 PM
#86
Rennlist Member
Mini update
Was able to buy from a fellow rennlister a set of rear OE Bilstein Damptronics - they should arrive Tuesday at Bilstein in Poway CA for their re-valve. I'm going to go with a revalve to 800#s - this will allow me to experiment with spring rates from 750-900 - the rear range that I think is optimal for my desire for the car to be a street / track setup.
It is going to take a few weeks to have this all done, and I haven't made a final decision whether I want to keep 2 sets of rear OE shocks, but if anyone is interested in buying my rear shocks to have them sent to Bilstein for a revalve when I get them off the car, PM me and I will reply when ready to make that decision - I paid $600 + shipping for what I just bought and that is what I will ask if/when I sell them (new from the dealer they are $950 each but you can deal and get them for $900 each)
Interesting note about the rear OE shocks is that there are none in the US - but there are 4 in German. The interesting part is that the rear shocks have the same part number for all gt3s, gt3rs, gt2s from 2007-2011. Thus, even though the 2011 RS uses a 115N/mm spring versus the 2007 GT3 that uses a 105N/mm rear spring, the rear shock is the same. This reinforces what Bilstein told me that the shocks can easily handle 15% more spring without any noticeable effect. This also opens an interesting question about the PASM computer module - ie, if you order the most resent iteration of this module (let's say from the GT2/RS or let's say RS 4.0) is it a nice and cheap way to upgrade your operating system so to speak - or would it not work because the newer car's have SC and somehow the newer and older computers won't like each other - thoughts?
Was able to buy from a fellow rennlister a set of rear OE Bilstein Damptronics - they should arrive Tuesday at Bilstein in Poway CA for their re-valve. I'm going to go with a revalve to 800#s - this will allow me to experiment with spring rates from 750-900 - the rear range that I think is optimal for my desire for the car to be a street / track setup.
It is going to take a few weeks to have this all done, and I haven't made a final decision whether I want to keep 2 sets of rear OE shocks, but if anyone is interested in buying my rear shocks to have them sent to Bilstein for a revalve when I get them off the car, PM me and I will reply when ready to make that decision - I paid $600 + shipping for what I just bought and that is what I will ask if/when I sell them (new from the dealer they are $950 each but you can deal and get them for $900 each)
Interesting note about the rear OE shocks is that there are none in the US - but there are 4 in German. The interesting part is that the rear shocks have the same part number for all gt3s, gt3rs, gt2s from 2007-2011. Thus, even though the 2011 RS uses a 115N/mm spring versus the 2007 GT3 that uses a 105N/mm rear spring, the rear shock is the same. This reinforces what Bilstein told me that the shocks can easily handle 15% more spring without any noticeable effect. This also opens an interesting question about the PASM computer module - ie, if you order the most resent iteration of this module (let's say from the GT2/RS or let's say RS 4.0) is it a nice and cheap way to upgrade your operating system so to speak - or would it not work because the newer car's have SC and somehow the newer and older computers won't like each other - thoughts?
I would expect them to be electrically compatible, i.e same wiring harness etc the question is are they s/w compatible? That's a 50/50 question, depending upon the level of communication that occurs between the PASM module and the rest of the car ... the level of knowledge required to answer that with any
confidence, requires that you wear a Porsche badge and probably work in
Zuffenhausen ...
you could probably try it, worst thing that could happen is that it will throw a fault code and go into limp mode ...
Do the various PASM modules for 3.6, 3.8, 3.8RS, 4.0, and 2RS have different part #?
08-15-2011, 03:28 PM
#87
Drifting
Thread Starter
Some details on the PASM modules
2007-2008 GT3 and RS
997.618.105.91
2008 GT2
997.618.105.92 and .94
2010-2011 GT3 and RS
997.618.105.96
2011 GT2/RS
997.618.105.96
2011 RS 4.0
997.618.105.96
So basically, it looks like they upgraded PASM (if that is the correct word, if may not be, it may be a computer thing / wire harness thing / or an actual upgrade) for the 2008/2009 GT2 ( the .94 part) and then they did the same thing again with the .96 part for all 2010 GT car's afterwards.
For any of the shops out there or owners that own both an 07/08 as well as any newer 2010+, if would be neat to know if the modules are compatible?
Since we know the shocks are the same part numbers (well the rears anyways at least), if the control units are compatible then it might be worth a try for someone.
Paul
2007-2008 GT3 and RS
997.618.105.91
2008 GT2
997.618.105.92 and .94
2010-2011 GT3 and RS
997.618.105.96
2011 GT2/RS
997.618.105.96
2011 RS 4.0
997.618.105.96
So basically, it looks like they upgraded PASM (if that is the correct word, if may not be, it may be a computer thing / wire harness thing / or an actual upgrade) for the 2008/2009 GT2 ( the .94 part) and then they did the same thing again with the .96 part for all 2010 GT car's afterwards.
For any of the shops out there or owners that own both an 07/08 as well as any newer 2010+, if would be neat to know if the modules are compatible?
Since we know the shocks are the same part numbers (well the rears anyways at least), if the control units are compatible then it might be worth a try for someone.
Paul
Last edited by 997gt3north; 08-15-2011 at 04:18 PM.
08-15-2011, 03:43 PM
#88
Rennlist Member
Some details on the PASM modules
2007-2008 GT3 and RS
997.618.105.91
2008 GT2
997.618.105.92 and .94
2010-2011 GT3 and RS
997.618.105.96
2011 GT2/RS
997.618.105.96
2011 RS 4.0
997.618.105.96
So basically, it looks like the upgraded PASM (if that is the correct word, if may not be, it may be a computer thing / wire harness thing / or an actual upgrade) for the 2008/2009 GT2 ( the .94 part) and then they did the same thing again with the .96 part for all 2010 GT car's afterwards.
For any of the shops out there or owners that own both an 07/08 as well as a any never 2010+, if would be neat to know if the modules are compatible?
Since we know the shocks are the same part numbers (well the rears anyways at least), if the control untis are compatible then it might be worth a try for someone.
Paul
2007-2008 GT3 and RS
997.618.105.91
2008 GT2
997.618.105.92 and .94
2010-2011 GT3 and RS
997.618.105.96
2011 GT2/RS
997.618.105.96
2011 RS 4.0
997.618.105.96
So basically, it looks like the upgraded PASM (if that is the correct word, if may not be, it may be a computer thing / wire harness thing / or an actual upgrade) for the 2008/2009 GT2 ( the .94 part) and then they did the same thing again with the .96 part for all 2010 GT car's afterwards.
For any of the shops out there or owners that own both an 07/08 as well as a any never 2010+, if would be neat to know if the modules are compatible?
Since we know the shocks are the same part numbers (well the rears anyways at least), if the control untis are compatible then it might be worth a try for someone.
Paul
you are a bad man ... because now I am looking at "damptronic" upgrade!
08-15-2011, 04:29 PM
#89
Drifting
Thread Starter
Paul
08-16-2011, 09:47 PM
#90
Drifting
Thread Starter
Mini update
My newly purchased 'used' rear OE shocks began their revalve / rebuild at Bilstein today in Poway California (never heard of this place until a few weeks ago) - being very close to Mexico, it couldn't get much farther from from me in Toronto and still be in America.
Since I had to pick a number to revalve to, I have decided to go with 800#s as this will allow me a 15% range around 800#s to experiment with different rear spring rates - ie, 700-900 being my likely final range for a combo street / track setup.
I have all my Swift Springs (linear and Helpers) and my Swift Spring Seperators as well as the Genesis ones that were mentioned in this thread earlier. If anyone cares, I went with the 60mm in height 168# Helper Springs - the fully compressed height iwith spring spacer is about 1 inch. There were Helpers with lower rates, about 50#s and Helpers with higher rates - I have seen many kits use rates around 150#s so I chose the rate as close to this as Swift produced. I have stacked everything together with their included metal shims that reduce friction when the springs compress on my dinning room table and everything is almost ready to go - I'm still waiting for my Tarret Monoballs and in the mail to see how it will fit together.
My newly purchased 'used' rear OE shocks began their revalve / rebuild at Bilstein today in Poway California (never heard of this place until a few weeks ago) - being very close to Mexico, it couldn't get much farther from from me in Toronto and still be in America.
Since I had to pick a number to revalve to, I have decided to go with 800#s as this will allow me a 15% range around 800#s to experiment with different rear spring rates - ie, 700-900 being my likely final range for a combo street / track setup.
I have all my Swift Springs (linear and Helpers) and my Swift Spring Seperators as well as the Genesis ones that were mentioned in this thread earlier. If anyone cares, I went with the 60mm in height 168# Helper Springs - the fully compressed height iwith spring spacer is about 1 inch. There were Helpers with lower rates, about 50#s and Helpers with higher rates - I have seen many kits use rates around 150#s so I chose the rate as close to this as Swift produced. I have stacked everything together with their included metal shims that reduce friction when the springs compress on my dinning room table and everything is almost ready to go - I'm still waiting for my Tarret Monoballs and in the mail to see how it will fit together.