[eurocarnut9xx]

Hi Everyone,



Porsche has re-released the 968 M030 30mm front sway bar, but… there are a few differences you should know about.



1) The part number has changed. The part number for the replacement bar is: 944.343.706.31. The original bar P/N ended in 30.



2) The inner bushings are different. The new bar is actually a little smaller than the original. The correct inner bushings to use are P/N 951.343.794.03. The original M030 bushings ending in 05 will NOT work, neither will delrin inner bushings for the M030 bar. Maybe Racer’s Edge will drum up some delrin inner bushings for the new bar if there’s enough interest?



3) The outer bushings and circlip retainers remain unchanged.



4) The bar is branded H&R and carries the Porsche P/N right on it.



I don’t have the bar installed yet; I’m waiting on the new inner bushings to arrive.



If someone has a place to put pictures up, let me know and I’ll send some to include on the thread. That way they don't disappear to make space for something else...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[DaveN]

First the rebirth of Saratoga roofs for 500.00 that were NLA for so many years and now the scarce M030 bars are back! Only about a dozen critical parts still to go that are endangered <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/rolleyes.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[chudson]

9xx - It is very common for the Germans to change a part number even if the only change is their supplier. How much smaller is the bar?



daven - Read that top thread carefully. I've ask questions there that have yet to be answered. If the statements (by the manufacturer) in the thread are true then only the Saratoga with the 4 mounting bosses on top of the glass are being reproduced. Better than nothing I suppose, but that would not have been my pick.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[vliegwielolaf1234]

Just mounted a set under my car .



It is as the one in your picture .



M030 bushing the ones on the inside are indeed to large for this bar . used the original ones and had to take some rubber out to make them fit .



Where the original m030 bars hollow ? because i don't think this one is .



I am happy , it is a real nice upgrade in the corners .

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Eric_Oz_S2]

Yes the M030 bar is hollow and exactly 30mm dia.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Qfrank]

Was it hollow for strength or weight? I wonder.



Hopefully we can find out if the new one is hollow?



Is it ok to just install a front bar, leave rear stock?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

lindsey racing makes a dead on clone of the original bar

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[vliegwielolaf1234]

this replacemet is not hollow i think , to heavy for that , that is compared to the original one . i don't think the difference in weight sould be that much .



Lindsay racing one is nice , it is just a lot of $$ after shipping to Europe

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

i just installed a set of lindsey units. i had my doubts, but they checked out.



i'm not a fan of H&R. their springs tend to sag early. no idea what the bar will do. not being an exact fit surprises me, especially coming from porsche

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[eurocarnut9xx]

Some more details, answers, and discussion:



chudson – the bar is about 29mm in diameter. I didn’t have a set of calipers handy, but a 30mm spanner on the bar leaves about 1mm open. This is also true with M030 inner bushes installed in the rings and on the bar.



flash – it carries a new P/N and uses new inner bushings that were not previously made. I think if Porsche wanted to reproduce the original bar, they would have. I too wonder why they decided to make something different. I also wonder if H&R didn’t make the original bars?



In querying the Pelican and Auto Atlanta catalogs, the P/N 944.343.706.31 just comes up as “STABILIZER.” The Paragon and Design 911 sites referred to it as a new 30mm M030 bar. Links follow.

http://www.paragon-products.com/Front_30...ntsway.htm

http://www.design911.co.uk/fu/pt385_1407...-Roll-Bar/



Things that remain unknown at this point are:

1. Why did Porsche not remake the 30mm bar?
   
   
2. While not a direct replacement, does this new bar have the same performance characteristics as its predecessor? There’s more to this than just size…
   
   
3. Is the bar hollow or not?
   
   

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[tamathumper]

Hollow or not? Easy peasy, just cut it in half and report back.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Langley968]

[quote name='tamathumper' timestamp='1336142223' post='126536']

Hollow or not? Easy peasy, just cut it in half and report back.

[/quote]



Too funny! <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/beer.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[unknown4u]

I have 32 mm original mounted version........ I think a tiptronic version is a bit stiffer.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

the 968 did not offer a 32mm bar. the M030 bar is 30mm.



no difference between tip and manual

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[chudson]

9xx - here's what you have to understand. Vehicle manufacturers make almost nothing. They assemble parts sourced from vendors and made to their specifications.



Directly from my friends at Porsche - Porsche lost the supplier of the original bar. The supplier folded, decided the production was no longer profitable, whatever. Porsche either had to drop it as a supplied part or find another supplier. It took the replacement supplier time to ramp up production. That is why the bar was NLA for a short while and also possibly why the bar is not identical to the OE. The new supplier is likely not using the original tooling to produce the bar.



And it appears the new supplier is H&R. I'm a little surprised that the bar displays their logo, but on second thought there's plenty of other logos all over the car.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Eric_Oz_S2]

A 29mm solid rod has approximately the same torsional stiffness as a 30mm hollow rod with a 6mm wall thickness (Di = 18). I don't know what the actual wall thickness of the original bar is - merely a guess at 6mm based on matching stiffness of a 29mm solid bar.



The hollow rod is obviously lighter but more complex to build. A 30mm solid bar would be 15% stiffer than a 29mm solid bar. So you would want to avoid making it too stiff compared to the original - hence smaller diameter.



A 29mm solid war weighs 5.2 kg/m. The hollow (assuming t=6mm) weighs around 3.5 kg/m. So the weight penalty is around 2.5kg between the 2 bars.



I would say that this was a cost decision by Porsche.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[chudson]

Porsche does not fix what is not broken and production cost was also not the deciding factor. Porsche lost the original supplier - that is fact directly from my P friends. The new supplier may have indeed discovered that design changes were necessary to produce the bar at competitive pricing, but cost to Porsche was not the deciding factor for this move. If cost alone had been the issue Porsche would have had the new supplier in place so to have no lapse in supply.



Porsche has the following opinion. If you want to attempt to drive these cars forever then we will still attempt to supply parts. But the parts are not going to be cheap junk. They will be the quality we are known for at whatever the price has to be or we will not offer them.



This is what I love about posting and why I post very little. I repeat a fact as it was quoted to me by people in position to have the knowledge and someone follows it up with "I think you're wrong".



Oz_S2 is speculating - I am not.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Eric_Oz_S2]

You missed my point. My point was Porsche could have asked the new supplier for the bar to be hollow. The supplier could have tooled up for this. But I bet it would have cost more - and yes perhaps take a lot longer to get into production.



If you think Porsche doesn't care about the price of components I would say you are wrong. Every manufacturer is price sensitive. The quality may still be good as you allude to, but I never questioned quality only cost.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

all manufacturers consider many things when choosing a vendor.



cost is a factor. they have to consider whether or not they will sell the unit, given their cost and what their markup must be.



ability to supply is another one. they have to be sure they don't get into a situation of backordering and lack of supply.



vendor reputation is another one. if the vendor is putting their name on it, the marketability of that name has to be considered.



all that being said, i am extremely surprised, and more than a little concerned, that the part is not a direct fit. that is one of the key factors in supplying something that is OEM. can you imagine buying a waterpump that you had to change your hoses for?



i'd go with the lindsey unit before i would buy that one, if only because it is a direct fit. clearly it can be made, and for a reasonable cost. no idea why porsche really dropped the ball on this.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[vliegwielolaf1234]

Maybe just maybe it is better than the original one .

The only thing they missed is getting the right size rubbers made .

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.