steering and suspension Lowered suspension

[norda]

I used the ground control coil over kit with the adjustable rear perch. I'm very happy with it. It was easy to do. The only problem I have with the kit is the front coilover needs helper springs to keep the coils lined up whenever you lift the vehicle with a jack. Otherwise you get a violent noise when the spring seats itself.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited August 24, 2015 by norda

[AceAndrew]

Well ...... 

 

. The only problem I have with the kit is the front coilover needs helper springs to keep the coils lined up whenever you lift the vehicle with a jack. Otherwise you get a violent noise when the spring seats itself.

 

 

This is standard for many coilovers.  The helper spring is just taking up valuable shock travel.  If the trade off is worth it, that is your prerogative.  It's pretty easy to just remember to seats the springs as you're lowering the car.

 

Here's a starter on the subject.

http://www.iemotorsport.com/gallery/v/tech/2002++Adjustable+Height+Suspension+Introduction/

--------------------------------------------------------

Edited August 24, 2015 by AceAndrew

[mikethevilla]

Fixed that for ya. ;-)

Stance not equal to better handling. ...different motivations.

 

Yeah. Those dumb race cars are way too committed to aesthetics...

 

 

Of course I know that some ricer kid's cut springs and rock-hard shocks aren't going to be beneficial in any way, and dragging your frame across the asphalt does nothing helpful. But in almost every scenario, a well put together "sport" or "race" suspension - one designed to improve handling - is going to sit a good bit lower than stock. It's arguably because of this that the exaggerated "stance" aesthetic is so popular.

 

But since the OP titled his thread "lowering" instead of referencing handling, it's likely that he's more concerned with looks than handling. But the fact that he's asking about the options here rather than on StanceWorks (or even worse, just posting a photo of "Look at my cool vintage BMW with chopped springs!) would make it seem that he does indeed care about more than JUST looks - maybe he wants the car to look cool (subjective) AND handle better (only partially subjective).

 

All that to say, stance can be, and often is, just as much about function as it is about aesthetics. 

Fixed that for ya. ;-)

Stance not equal to better handling. ...different motivations.

 

Yeah. Those dumb race cars are way too committed to aesthetics...

 

 

Of course I know that some ricer kid's cut springs and rock-hard shocks aren't going to be beneficial in any way, and dragging your frame across the asphalt does nothing helpful. But in almost every scenario, a well put together "sport" or "race" suspension - one designed to improve handling - is going to sit a good bit lower than stock. It's arguably because of this that the exaggerated "stance" aesthetic is so popular.

 

But since the OP titled his thread "lowering" instead of referencing handling, it's likely that he's more concerned with looks than handling. But the fact that he's asking about the options here rather than on StanceWorks (or even worse, just posting a photo of "Look at my cool vintage BMW with chopped springs!) would make it seem that he does indeed care about more than JUST looks - maybe he wants the car to look cool (subjective) AND handle better (only partially subjective).

 

All that to say, stance can be, and often is, just as much about function as it is about aesthetics. 

[vinntagejoe]

lowered "end of summer" stance

[M3M3]

Yeah. Those dumb race cars are way too committed to aesthetics...

 

racers (like me) could care less about aesthetics...ride height is a byproduct of optimizing all aspects of the suspension for lower lap times and the rule set of the sanctioning body.

 

stancers #1 goal is a look. the handling end result is not necessarily better.  not that there is anything wrong with that...those cars will never see a track where any performance is used anyway.

 

as i said...the motivation and desired end state are just different.   "i wanna lower my car" or "i want (sic) coilovers" are different questions than "i wanna make my car corner better".  how you ask the question tells the tale.

[TobyB]

 

the exaggerated "stance" aesthetic is so popular.

Yes.  It's the exaggerated part that makes me throw up a little...

 

5" at the rocker seems to work pretty well for the race car- it's a compromise for the front and rear roll centers,

and then a lot of other stuff's modified around that to try to minimise the resulting problems, like shock travel,

static camber, dynamic camber change, etc etc etc.

 

On the street car, I went almost that low, and then regretted it.  The trade- offs didn't work so well for urban driving,

and the damned thing wasn't more than 8/10ths at the track anyways.  So I raised it, softened it, out the 32/36

back on it, and it was STILL 8/10ths at the track as an instructor car, and a LOT better on the street.

Stance?  Fail...

 

But I'd also argue that rally's racing, and when those guys go off tarmac, they use something like stock travel.

And don't even look at the CORR trucks, with what, 24" or something insane like that.  Or Baja?

 

"Stance" is posing.  Improving handling's not. 

 

Lowering a car an inch or 2 because it looks better?  Well, it's your car....

 

(and there is a lot of good tire, clearance, etc info in the thread I dislike so much, but it takes half an hour to dig it out)

 

t

[Fatherof3]

When some look at the at the design of the 2002 they see a finished product, others see a great starting point

[TobyB]

Ha!  Well said.

 

t

[skipsfcr]

If I met the word "stance" in a dark alley, I would stab it to death. Then I'd put about 15 rounds in "nawssss" and companions, "drift" and "jdm."

[jmr_1602]

Are you going to let "Hella Flush" get away to report you to the 5-0?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fatherof3]

If I met the word "stance" in a dark alley, I would stab it to death. Then I'd put about 15 rounds in "nawssss" and companions, "drift" and "jdm."