What are the lowest springs?
11-09-2005, 05:34 PM
#1
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What are the lowest springs? What springs on the market drop your ride height the most? Forget about comfort, performance handling all the way. I was thinking maybe eibach sportlines dropped the lowest.. would this be accurate?
11-09-2005, 06:59 PM
#3
93formto98T/A, I like that slammed look! I had my car almost that low for a while.
Grim_Crow, if you slam your car like his, it will look cool, but that is not the best ride height for handling performace, unless you do some wild suspension mods that most people would never do. In short you are sitting right on the bumpstops, using them as springs. I suggest you get some coil overs so you can try different ride heights until you find what suits you best. Ground Control has the best bang for the buck on these. This will save money in the long run because you don't need to keep buying springs, and will allow you to run Eibach Race Springs, the best kind for serious performance. 26.5" from the ground to highest point the fenderwell arch is proven to yield the best handling.
Grim_Crow, if you slam your car like his, it will look cool, but that is not the best ride height for handling performace, unless you do some wild suspension mods that most people would never do. In short you are sitting right on the bumpstops, using them as springs. I suggest you get some coil overs so you can try different ride heights until you find what suits you best. Ground Control has the best bang for the buck on these. This will save money in the long run because you don't need to keep buying springs, and will allow you to run Eibach Race Springs, the best kind for serious performance. 26.5" from the ground to highest point the fenderwell arch is proven to yield the best handling.
11-10-2005, 04:31 AM
#5
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wow thanks for that info cal.. clearing that up about the most drop isn't exactly performance helped, i just had assumed lower CoG ment better handling. Tell you the truth coil-overs hadn't crossed my mind. Now I will be shopping for them. And thank you for supplying that advice with a reference number like 26.5, I'll use that as my control number when verifying what I want, which is pure performance. cheers mate.
Last edited by Grim_Crow; 11-10-2005 at 04:44 AM.
11-10-2005, 03:37 PM
#6
You're welcome. BTW that 26.5" is just a reference assuming you have stock height tires; if not, the number would be different of course.
Yes a lower CG CAN mean better handling, but only if you still have some suspension travel left, otherwise you cant' keep traction on all four tires. If you could lower the car to 25.5" and still have an inch of suspension travel left, you could pull some serious G's on the skidpad. It is possible to modify the car to be this way, but it would be expensive and labor intensive to do so. Also, you would have so little ground clearance left you could hardly drive on the street. But if building a dedicated race car that is trailered everywhere, it would be something to look at.
The best bang for the buck in CO's is the Ground Control kit from Strano Performance.
Yes a lower CG CAN mean better handling, but only if you still have some suspension travel left, otherwise you cant' keep traction on all four tires. If you could lower the car to 25.5" and still have an inch of suspension travel left, you could pull some serious G's on the skidpad. It is possible to modify the car to be this way, but it would be expensive and labor intensive to do so. Also, you would have so little ground clearance left you could hardly drive on the street. But if building a dedicated race car that is trailered everywhere, it would be something to look at.
The best bang for the buck in CO's is the Ground Control kit from Strano Performance.
11-10-2005, 07:57 PM
#7
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what do you think would be the best bang for buck co kit, should I got with the bilstein/stock kit, or should I just hold out a little longer and go for koni? how much performance difference would you say there is between bils and konis?
Trending Topics
11-10-2005, 08:45 PM
#8
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Ventura County, California
Posts: 1,476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 93formto98T/A
They are the intrax -2" springs. I run them with stock shocks and believe it or not it is only slightly more stiff than a stock ride quality. Check it out...
Dam! That is low, but looks really good.
11-10-2005, 11:46 PM
#10
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NW Houston, TX
Posts: 10,036
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Grim_Crow
So what do you think would be the best bang for buck co kit, should I got with the bilstein/stock kit, or should I just hold out a little longer and go for koni? how much performance difference would you say there is between bils and konis?
11-11-2005, 12:28 PM
#11
Originally Posted by stang killer
hold out for Koni's
11-11-2005, 10:46 PM
#12
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which GC coil over kit fits the Eibach Race springs, or do they all fit them, will sportlines fit? what do you think of the sportlines? The only turn off I have about the Koni's are the Twin Tube design, I don't care at all about a stiff ride so I would have the Koni's set to their most firm all the time anyway, would you say that the Bilstein SLP Performance shocks would give me the same rigidity as a Koni set to max firm? Or are the Bilstein Sports Series stiffer? Or do you know of any other shock that someone makes a good coil over kit that is better for track then the bilstein monotubes? sorry for so many questions cal, but i want to take advantage of you... um.. your knowledge.. heh.
Last edited by Grim_Crow; 11-12-2005 at 12:57 AM.
