Jump to content


Photo

2in low springs


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 knoath

knoath

    far.... FAR

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Northern Subs
  • Joined: 09-November 05

Posted 13 March 2007 - 08:02 PM

I'm waiting to install (2in) lowered springs in the UC, just wondering if any gurus can tell me once and for all, do I need lowered shocks front and rear or either???

Cheers.

#2 TerrA LX

TerrA LX

    Fulcrum Fixture

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,241 posts
  • Location:Sid 'n' knee
  • Joined: 31-May 06

Posted 13 March 2007 - 08:27 PM

the lowered shocks, as they were, are axctually shorter shocks to stop your springe falling out with the suspension on full extension etc and it is a defect and un road worthy for rego check in NSW if they pick up on it that your springs are loose as above.
safty also, go over a big bump in the road and have a rear spring fall out, never had it happen to me in 15yrs of modding cars but do you want to be the first.
i don't know of any other purpose they serve.

#3 _MYLJ_

_MYLJ_
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 08:31 PM

rears only, they have to be short enough to stop the spring falling out at full travel :D if the spring can't fall out at full suspension travel then its all good.

#4 LXCHEV

LXCHEV

    Lotsa Posts!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,510 posts
  • Name:Brett
  • Location:Melbourne
  • Car:'76 LX - 383 Chev
  • Joined: 08-November 05

Posted 13 March 2007 - 09:43 PM

Yeah I reckon you'll be right knoath.... 2inches isn't excessive....

#5 _CHOPPER_

_CHOPPER_
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2007 - 12:02 AM

With 2" lowered springs on the front, you risk having the shocker bottom out if using standard length shocks. So I was told many moons ago by a shock expert.

#6 knoath

knoath

    far.... FAR

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,036 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, Northern Subs
  • Joined: 09-November 05

Posted 15 March 2007 - 12:10 PM

Where's the best place to go for 'industry' advice?

Pedders?

I rang them and they said yes, short throw on the rear.
Fronts not a problem, bump stop will hit before shocker bottoms out.

#7 _CHOPPER_

_CHOPPER_
  • Guests

Posted 15 March 2007 - 01:08 PM

I'd call Top Performance, Industy Place Vermont. They are a Koni dealer.

#8 Toranamat69

Toranamat69

    Forum R&D Officer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,117 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Joined: 07-November 05

Posted 15 March 2007 - 06:17 PM

With 2" lowered springs on the front, you risk having the shocker bottom out if using standard length shocks. So I was told many moons ago by a shock expert.


What is the point of the bumpstop on the lower control arms then?

#9 _JBird_

_JBird_
  • Guests

Posted 17 March 2007 - 01:03 PM

With 2" lowered springs on the front, you risk having the shocker bottom out if using standard length shocks. So I was told many moons ago by a shock expert.


What is the point of the bumpstop on the lower control arms then?

To stop metal to metal contact?

I've been told before that running "lowered shocks" is the safer than not. I've been in a friend's skyline r34, running lowered springs/standard shocks. He had that set up for a year. I asked him why his ride was so bumpy and pitched and dived over road undulations and then he told me of his suspension set up.

He decided to get it changed, when we went to the workshop the mechanic pulling apart the suspension mused "It looks like you've had this car for 10 years" (judging by the condition of the bushes etc. NB. car is about 6 years old. Furthermore, the springs sagged further (alot further than they are meant to) than 2".

Car has never been better, though he is changing to coil overs sometime in the near future.

end rant.

#10 Toranamat69

Toranamat69

    Forum R&D Officer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,117 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Joined: 07-November 05

Posted 17 March 2007 - 05:23 PM

To stop metal to metal contact?


Correct - but if your front shock absorber bottomed out before hitting the lower bumpstop then the bumpstop may as well not be there - you would be achieving metal on metal.

If you want to clear this issue up for your self, why dont you take the spring out and put just the shock back in and do up the balljoints - it you can push the suspension right up and down to the upper and lower bumpstops without the shock binding then you will have no worries with the shock absorber.

I can tell you there is no way Holden would have designed a suspension system with a shock that bottomed out before the bumpstop was reached.

To quote Mr Kevin bloody Wilson - 'Half of what you hear is bull and the other arf's all shit.'
The challenge is sifting through and finding the 1% of truth that lies in amidst all of that.

If you do lower your front 2", you are getting pretty close to the lower bumpstop and you may bottom out on the lower bumpstop quite easily which is maybe what the suspension guy Chopper was talking about ^^^ was referring to. This is quite different to needing a shorter shock absorber though.

A standard UC Torana front end has a total 115mm of travel - 65mm of bump travel and 50mm of rebound. If you lower it 50mm, you will have 15mm of bump travel and 100mm of rebound travel. Putting a shorter spring in does not change the total travel between stops, it just moves the point you are operating at in that same range. 15mm is SFA to have before you hit the rubber bumpstop - I know I wouldn't run that setup.

This is one of the reasons CRS make the 2" drop stubs as you drop the front 2" and your suspension travel is in the correct spot. The other reason a drop stub is better is you don't root up your front roll centre.

#11 _JBird_

_JBird_
  • Guests

Posted 17 March 2007 - 08:25 PM

Very interesting read there.

So are you saying, instead of running 2" lower springs at the front, run a 2" lower drop stub?

#12 _CHOPPER_

_CHOPPER_
  • Guests

Posted 17 March 2007 - 08:33 PM

That would probably be a better way of doing it, provided you don't mind spending $600 on a pair of stub axles.

#13 Toranamat69

Toranamat69

    Forum R&D Officer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,117 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Joined: 07-November 05

Posted 17 March 2007 - 10:38 PM

$720 a pair plus freight now Chopper - I have had a set on order for about 8 weeks now :furious:

#14 _CHOPPER_

_CHOPPER_
  • Guests

Posted 18 March 2007 - 12:40 AM

Let's see now. I can spend $720 to lower my car two inches by purchasing new lowered stub axles, or I can spend $110 to lower my car two inches by purchasing new lowered springs. What to do?

#15 _TOBES_

_TOBES_
  • Guests

Posted 18 March 2007 - 04:07 AM

That's a no brainer...!

99% of people would take the cheap route and end up with an unsafe suspension setup.

Fitting shorter shocks to the front of a Torana does nothing to keep the spring captive as the amount of travel is limited by bump stops top and bottom.
The shock does not limit travel as it does in the rear...

#16 arrimar

arrimar

    "Have you still got that Torana!"

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,123 posts
  • Location:brisbane
  • Car:Salamanca L34, Absinth LH SLR/5000, Caribean Blue LH 5.0, C250 Merc,
  • Joined: 13-January 06

Posted 18 March 2007 - 02:06 PM

hmmm what would an enthusiast do? save the cash and take pride in knowing it was done right?

depends on the reason why you would want to lower the car 2 inches.
handling ? performance? to look like the cars in magazines that sit on mirrored tiles 90% of their life?

cheapest option in that case is to get one of the boys to do the photoshop on it and stick it on the wall.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users