Jump to content
SAU Community

Bilstein/sydneykid R33 Gts-t Suspension - Best Ride Height?

Trav33
 Share

Recommended Posts

Trav33 Mentor

Trav33

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hey All...

I've had SydneyKid's Bilstein suspension on my 33 for a while now, and overall fairly happy with it. Handling is good, firm, but not too bad over bumps. I set the circlip one level lower than standard, so my ride height is 350mm - 8mm = 342mm. This has been a good ride height, ok over speed humps, etc.

I'm about to get some new wheels, and think they'd look better if my car was a little bit lower, how would ride *comfort* be affected if i lowered the circlips down to 334mm or 326mm. I dont want a ride thats too harsh, thats why i threw my old Tein HA's in the bin!

Edited by Trav33
MBS206 Grand Master

MBS206

Posted
Posted

DON'T DO IT.

Mine sits down quite low (318mm) and I keep smashing tyres into guards, going in driveways the bar hits the ground, speed humps are a bitch, roundabouts = massive scrub.

Overall it's terrible.

I've found the meaning of bump steer. To the point I can't go through a certain corner any where near as a quick as a stock standard V6 Commodore exec (I used to own one) as the bump steer would throw me around.

Leave the height up, and bugger the looks.

But that's IMO from my experiences of a low car.

Trav33 Mentor

Trav33

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well i dont have any inner guards to get ripped off.... the last owner had all 4 guards rolled, and launched the plastic inner guards!

334mm ride height should be ok though? Thats only going another 8mm lower than my current setup, and still a fair way off MBS206's 318mm.

I'd like to hear from other people who have SydneyKid's setup... what ride height have they chosen?

Trav33 Mentor

Trav33

Posted
  • Author
Posted

They are not meant to be changed on the car, I believe you are meant to take the strut out and disassemble, but i'm going to have a go with some spring clamps on the car - compress spring, push c-clip out with screwdriver, and move into the next grove.

Bl4cK32 Grand Master

Bl4cK32

Posted
Posted

There s no point going lower than Sk's recommended settings (350rear /340front mm?) as hes has said numerous times as it doesnt help handling at all, and puts excessive wear / load on the suspension parts. Even if it does look better :P

Do a search of his posts for a detailed explanation...

Al Grand Master

Al

Posted
Posted
Well i dont have any inner guards to get ripped off.... the last owner had all 4 guards rolled, and launched the plastic inner guards!

334mm ride height should be ok though? Thats only going another 8mm lower than my current setup, and still a fair way off MBS206's 318mm.

I'd like to hear from other people who have SydneyKid's setup... what ride height have they chosen?

I was not talking about guard liners i was talking about pulling out the metal guard itself. It unfortunately happened to me not to long ago, my guards are also rolled, and i was using my 17" rims at the time. When i measured the "centre of hub" to arch clearance (after it happened) i was shocked to see 332mm, as i thought the front was higher, this explained why the tyre cought the gaurd. Front now sits at 350mm with rears at 340mm.

Trav33 Mentor

Trav33

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I was not talking about guard liners i was talking about pulling out the metal guard itself. It unfortunately happened to me not to long ago, my guards are also rolled, and i was using my 17" rims at the time. When i measured the "centre of hub" to arch clearance (after it happened) i was shocked to see 332mm, as i thought the front was higher, this explained why the tyre cought the gaurd. Front now sits at 350mm with rears at 340mm.

Ah bugga. Do you have the Bilstein setup, organised by SK?

Al Grand Master

Al

Posted
Posted
Ah bugga. Do you have the Bilstein setup, organised by SK?

No, but am currently considering his "track spec" coil-overs, with adjustable height (not grooves/clips).

Still deciding between these and the proper Bilstein Motorsport PSS9 coil-overs with adjustable height and damper control, but the package is about $1500 more expensive :D .

post-1811-1169546458.jpg

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • MBS206
      r34's love to squeal

      By MBS206 · Posted

      And make sure the belts are tightened appropriately too.
    • MBS206
      Rb26 iron block limit

      By MBS206 · Posted

      They care about emissions, and cost the most. Save weight where possible, and make manufacturing easier. Less material also let's the engine transfer heat to water quicker, and bring the engine up to temp quicker, better for emissions and getting them past their warranty period.
    • joshuaho96
      Rb26 iron block limit

      By joshuaho96 · Posted

      I was under the impression the reason why OEMs are going with solutions like relatively thin "right-sized" cylinder walls with technologies like PTWA and open deck is because they care a lot about whatever marginal knock margin benefits they get from that vs the structural rigidity benefits of a closed deck block and thicker cylinder walls. I also see some weird stuff like plastic inserts in the water jacket around the cylinders to try and equalize cylinder wall temperatures. re: the PRP blocks and heads at the end of the day it's hard to know what is and isn't going to work there, just have to see what the initial buyers say about it.
    • GTSBoy
      Rb26 iron block limit

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Which is why I didn't mention that hardness testing, and specifically mentioned the bore and deck thickness testing. Yeah, not really. The bore temperature will be a lot more even around the top half inch or so, where the material distribution is dominated by the deck, and which is the only place where the bore surface temperature heating any gas in the cylinder is likely to have any effect on detonation. Think about it. Another inch or so down the bore, you might have a hotter spot. The gas there might get a bit hotter, then the piston rises squeezes that gas away from there at high speed and mixes it with other gas from nearby. Instant dilution of the problem. I'd be surprised if it was an issue at any time other than in racing engines or OEM dev engines being run at the ragged edge of tuning. Say what now?
    • joshuaho96
      Rb26 iron block limit

      By joshuaho96 · Posted

      https://dsportmag.com/the-tech/education/engine-tech-material-hardness-testing/ The PRP testing on block hardness I'm not sure how much it actually can be trusted. The thinner cylinder walls on RBs is a bit of a problem vs 2JZ but it really depends on the design goal. Siamesed cylinder bores like a 2JZ cause uneven cylinder wall temps too, which means a bit of distortion induced by that + the hotspot can affect knock margin. Something that actually gives me a bit of pause with the PRP block, whether super thick cylinder walls are going to keep it from being drop-in compatible on an otherwise OEM rebuild. 
×
×
  • Create New...