Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

OEM ride height
#1

I did a search on the forum, but the searchfilter didn't fit well.
Can anybody tell me the OEM ride height for a 968cab non M030 in mm from teh wheelarch till center of rim.
Front = ?
Rear = ?
I taught i've red it somewhere ....

thanks
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Reply
#2

right around 14" - i'd have to crunch some numbers to get exact
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

94 Midnight Metallic Blue Cab Porsche 968 w/deviating cashmere/black interior and WAY too many mods to list - thanks to eric for creating www.968forums.com



"It isn't nearly as expensive to do it right as it is to do it wrong."
Reply
#3

thanks bob,

14" would give 343 mm (factor x 25,4)
actualy with KW-V3 an my cab i measure 345 at rear and 340 in front, I thaught I lowered the car a bit
is the height in front always the same as in the rear ? when accelerating the rear will copress a bit, so perhaps 5 mm higher at rear isn't too bad
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Reply
#4

well, ride height setting front to rear is subjective - i set them equal because i am looking for braking balance - having the rear a touch high is fine for acceleration, but it puts more load on the front springs at other times, especially during braking - also, these cars like to be a little bit rear soft, so level, or even 1/8" low in the rear works nicely

this all presumes that the weight is balanced - contrary to popular belief, the cars are not 50/50 stock - in stock form, the cab is about 75lbs tail light (as opposed to the 66lbs the hardtop is tail heavy) - with the stock layout, it is even more critical that the front not be lower than the rear

i have moved the battery to the ballast location, and removed a lot of rear weight - this means that i have to pay even more attention to the ride heights - i'm still fiddling with small changes, and i can feel them - i am going to purchase corner scales soon so i can really nail this down

as i said though, to get the real specs, i'd have to do some number crunching - the manual does not measure it from the wheel arch

what i did for a quick answer for you was run the 26.5" from the arch to ground that i remembered that stock seemed to work out to the last time i did this, and then back out the tire radius (12.5")
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

94 Midnight Metallic Blue Cab Porsche 968 w/deviating cashmere/black interior and WAY too many mods to list - thanks to eric for creating www.968forums.com



"It isn't nearly as expensive to do it right as it is to do it wrong."
Reply
#5

ok, more questions.
the coupe is 66 lbs heavier rear. is this the 6 speed? how much does the tip add to the rear? since i have been removing weight from the back and may need to
reduce more just to match the 6 speed. damn, I guess I still miss my 6 speed. lol

Also, will raising the rear ride height compensate for the rear weight bias?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Reply
#6

i'd guess another 50lbs or so - they seem to like the number 66 - that's the difference between a manual and a tip in both models - part of that though is the cooler up front and the lines that run to the trans

you can probably figure that out for sure by using the axle weights on the door sticker

interesting side not: the maximum permissible weights don't change, even though the tip starts off heavier, which would have reduced that figure in any traditional layout car, where the trans is part of the chassis weight, just like the engine - but, in a torque tube car, it's really part of the suspension weight
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

94 Midnight Metallic Blue Cab Porsche 968 w/deviating cashmere/black interior and WAY too many mods to list - thanks to eric for creating www.968forums.com



"It isn't nearly as expensive to do it right as it is to do it wrong."
Reply
#7

Hi Bob, thanks and my apologies to everyone for hijacking this thread....lim [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif[/img]
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Reply
#8

Well, as I have KW-V3, I adapted ride height in front equal as the rear, so 345 mm, but the front feels a bit looser now, and this because of only 5 mm ?
I wrote on the technical form (for legal technical control) that standard ride height = 360 mm, I suppose this is +/- correct.


Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Reply
#9

there is a point when lowering that you go below ground in roll center, but you shouldn't be there - this generally happens when the front control arms are pointing up and not down - this makes for a wandering sensation and larger camber change - again though, you are a good distance away yet
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

94 Midnight Metallic Blue Cab Porsche 968 w/deviating cashmere/black interior and WAY too many mods to list - thanks to eric for creating www.968forums.com



"It isn't nearly as expensive to do it right as it is to do it wrong."
Reply
#10

All those height adjustments, could the lose feel just be time for an alignment?
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Reply
#11

the tighter you go, and the lower you go, the more small angles make bigger differences - that's why i posted different alignment settings for different stages of suspension development
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

94 Midnight Metallic Blue Cab Porsche 968 w/deviating cashmere/black interior and WAY too many mods to list - thanks to eric for creating www.968forums.com



"It isn't nearly as expensive to do it right as it is to do it wrong."
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread / Author Replies Views Last Post

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)