Thoughts: Uneven Drop on the Gen3

[Venom_5]

Now lemme preface this thread with something: all that matters in this discussion is performance.

With that being said, did it ever occur to anyone that maybe the uneven drop from lowering springs is intentional?

If so, has anyone given any thought to these things:
+ Even fender gap vs. Rake
+ Weight Distribution
+ Strut Travel and Spring Rates


.... i was just thinking the other day that maybe the rear sags a bit on some of the Gen 3, even with a good brand of springs, to bring more weight to the rear - our cars are inherently nose-heavy

Ive just been messing around a lot with my suspension settings, and its funny how i notice a difference in understeer, weight-transfer, and turn-in from little changes here and there - but there is a lot of room for improvement on the Gen 3 IMO and i havent yet found the ideal setup for what im working with...

[renmike]

That's something worth really thinking about. On my '93, I ended up with the vogtlands up front and the OEM's in the back; it give me a slightly raked look (which I like) and the fender gap is about the same. When I had the vogtlands on both the front and back, the back squatted down a little lower than the front, and while that might have been good for performance/weight distribution/etc, it wasn't aesthetically pleasing to me(and yes I know this is a performance thread, just saying, lol).

Performance-wise, though, I have been told that even with my raked suspension, when I perform a good pull take-off, the rear still looks like it'll squat down (which I have felt but dismissed it being a fwd car and all). As for handling, I do not notice any difference between the vogtlands in the rear with my whiteline bar vs. oem springs, it still handles pretty well, better than my 95 when it had the oem sway bar then switched to a whiteline on it.

[eurohazard]

The uneven drop in intentional, but not for performance in the way we think of a "performance" sports car. It allows more wheel travel in the back because that's mostly where the weight will be transfered once you add passengers, cargo, subwoofers etc.

Once a lowered car is loaded, it levels out. I guess for driver-only driving, it would be better to have an even lowering. I'd imagine it does no good with the ass up......in high speed tight corners, the tail would wag the dog so to speak. But with an even lowering job, the feeling of the back end rolling/pitching around would be lessened.

[renmike]

Originally Posted by eurohazard

The uneven drop in intentional, but not for performance in the way we think of a "performance" sports car. It allows more wheel travel in the back because that's mostly where the weight will be transfered once you add passengers, cargo, subwoofers etc.

Once a lowered car is loaded, it levels out. I guess for driver-only driving, it would be better to have an even lowering. I'd imagine it does no good with the ass up......in high speed tight corners, the tail would wag the dog so to speak. But with an even lowering job, the feeling of the back end rolling/pitching around would be lessened.

Unfortunately with the vogtlands, the rear was low enough then when just a couple of skinny people sat in the back seat, it looked like I had a carload of clowns ready to hop out, lol. With the oem's, with a couple of people and some luggage in the trunk, it gets just an inch or so lower, which at least still gives plenty of wheel travel.

[Venom_5]

you guys have probably seen my car's setup on the coils - its almost dead even (not the wheel gap, but the height ... aka: no rake)

i dont really squat much on acceleration, but i do dive under breaking (with 7kg/mm and 5kg/mm springs, i do believe) ... and with passengers in the rear, my tires rub going over anything larger than a pebble - its actually really bad

but for "performance" driving, i think its almost a better setup - and im wondering what companies like Vogtland had in mind when they made the springs, because im not so sure its a mistake that the rear sags

[DAMON]

The biggest performance oriented spring brands for the gen 3 are Eibach and H&R and both provide an even drop with no rear sag- thats enough for me to believe that the rear sag is NOT intentional in relation to performance. Sprint, Dropzone, etc are not performance springs IMO.

[Venom_5]

^ but Vogtland is well-known and Performance-oriented ...

and ive seen people sag on Eibach and H&R before, although i dont think ive seen it on the Gen 3 - id have to look around

[bigbird]

well over time thell sag no matter what. my sprints did sag and i can tell ya...that was not on purpose. there was little performance when they were new but i feel they made up for some of teh stifness by lowereing the entire center of gravity..still didnt work well but if they had been a taller spring they woudl have been much worse.

as far as ive larned, the fender gap thing was just a result of asthetic perferances among buyers. i dislike un even fender gaps. now i know that because my rear sits higher then it would if the drop was even that i have a higher center of gravity, so slightly worse handeling. however it looks bette...to me.

[Venom_5]

what were the Sprints like when you first got them tho?

[bigbird]

well they didnt sag..and that was on stock shocks. it was an even drop front and back..well almost even. the front was a tiny bit lower then the rear.

[Venom_5]

the other possible point to consider:

+ Do you think that aftermarket spring companies make their product for aesthetics or performance?

because i know that there are only "entry-level" springs for the Camry, and companies like Eibach and H&R make upper-level springs for other, more popular cars

[fakehawk]

any rake/"reverse rake" could also be due to the spring company looking to make the lower control arm parallel to the ground or find the "right" suspension geometry in their mind.

[Venom_5]

Originally Posted by eyeball96

^^^^^They make them for Profit!!

lol, thanks joe

Originally Posted by fakehawk

any rake/"reverse rake" could also be due to the spring company looking to make the lower control arm parallel to the ground or find the "right" suspension geometry in their mind.

^ good point ... didnt even consider geometry, not used to thinking about that on MacPherson Strut cars ... but we really should

[bigbird]

id say as far as the camry, depending on the company of course, id say asthetic then performance.

[Venom_5]

i just hopped out in the garage for 15 mins to raise my front end a little bit ... ive been toying around with various ride heights, stiffnesses, etc. and i figured i might as well sort of mimic the uneven drop:



the fronts have a small gap, and the rears are still tucking a bit of tread ... i know with the "bad" aftermarket springs its more extreme than this, but im gonna see if i can notice a difference this way