Ohlins supposedly available for 986 / 987 in May

[Slippydiff]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I fear you're overthinking this J, I was merely highlighting the fact we're all different ..... you're correct, the two issues aren't in any way shape or form comparable in this context.... but they weren't intended to be They were purely to show we all differ in our thoughts and choices.

[Porsche911R]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

really, this bullst again, it's pointless giving good advice on here.

[Escy]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Perhaps not but I have to say I was surprised when I first heard of people doing this on Porsche's. It's a bodge, no two ways around that, I'd have it in the same bracket as chopping a coil off your springs. The sort of thing you might do on a 1k track car. Each to their own, not saying I'd be above doing it myself (if I didn't have adjustable top mounts) but not sure I'd be offering out as advice.

[edc]

Escy said:

Perhaps not but I have to say I was surprised when I first heard of people doing this on Porsche's. It's a bodge, no two ways around that, I'd have it in the same bracket as chopping a coil off your springs. The sort of thing you might do on a 1k track car. Each to their own, not saying I'd be above doing it myself (if I didn't have adjustable top mounts) but not sure I'd be offering out as advice.

I certainly wouldn't put it in the same bracket as chopping off a coil. Firstly, whilst not reversible you so t have to use all the range. It also doesn't risk bottoming out a damper like shortening a spring might. The mod is all of perhaps 5mm and with a tidy hand is pretty much undetectable save for somebody with a micrometer to measure.

[edc]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I got -2 and just a fraction more on my old car with new Tip M030. I had a pretty square camber set up.
Current car has more camber all round on old standard manual M030. This time about from memory -0.25 to -0.5 more on the front that rear.

I've now managed to pick up some solid adjustable front top mounts for £130 ish so will put on either the other new suspension bits in the coming weeks or months.

[Slippydiff]

edc said:

I certainly wouldn't put it in the same bracket as chopping off a coil. Firstly, whilst not reversible you so t have to use all the range. It also doesn't risk bottoming out a damper like shortening a spring might. The mod is all of perhaps 5mm and with a tidy hand is pretty much undetectable save for somebody with a micrometer to measure.

I would And I think that just as many would see hacking a coil or two of a coil spring to lower their car/stiffen their spring rates, many would see drilling/filing your turret tops as a "bodge" rather than a properly engineered solution. All the more so when there are plenty of nicely engineered (more expensive though I grant you) solutions on the market that don't require you to take a file, drill or die grinder to the car's metal work, (of which I'm quite capable of doing) but just wouldn't.
Put bluntly, the very idea of filing/drilling the car's bodyshell offends my sensibilities irrespective of whether it's £15k track rat or a £150k garage queen.

Added to which, it's pretty pointless winding on the extra smidge of camber gained by butchering the cars turrets whilst using oe top mounts made out of blancmange ...... as any extra grip that theoretically would be afforded/generated by the mod will most likely be nullified by the rubber in the top mount compressing unduly under the increased loading and reducing the effective camber

Hence why I said earlier in this very thread, I'd invest in set of two piece coffin arms or if the budget is tight, these :

http://www.design911.co.uk/fu/prod13174/Sealed-Fro...

Anyway, what do I know ? I'm running the blingy 19's on my car with the comedy tyre stagger

[ATM]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Moo

Can I ask why you decided to go with the B12 kit?

[ATM]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

That's the problem with dampers and tyres and such - its suck it and see.

[MDT48]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

You mean you didn't enjoy the surprise warning message halfway around the circuit in March?!? :-)

[Rocket.]

Ohlins are going on today, as mentioned they don't come with springs which have to be ordered separately. 

CG looked at the Ohlins 'recommended' spring rates of 70nm Fr 80nm R and was a tad concerned maybe too stiffly sprung front for the road and may induce understeer

for comparison:

GT4 981 - 45nm / 80 nm (35nm difference)

Cayman R - 30nm / 43nm (13nm)

Cayman S 987 - 27NM / 37NM (10nm)

KW Clubsport - 70NM / 120 NM (40nm)

PSS9 CS - 50nm / 114NM (64NM)

Ohlins - 70NM / 80NM (10NM)

We've decided to go for 50nm / 80nm (30 nm difference) so about the same as 981 GT4. Here's hoping ! 

[Porsche911R]

Rocket. said:

Ohlins are going on today, as mentioned they don't come with springs which have to be ordered separately. 

CG looked at the Ohlins 'recommended' spring rates of 70nm Fr 80nm R and was a tad concerned maybe too stiffly sprung front for the road and may induce understeer

for comparison:

GT4 981 - 45nm / 80 nm (35nm difference)

Cayman R - 30nm / 43nm (13nm)

Cayman S 987 - 27NM / 37NM (10nm)

KW Clubsport - 70NM / 120 NM (40nm)

PSS9 CS - 50nm / 114NM (64NM)

Ohlins - 70NM / 80NM (10NM)

We've decided to go for 50nm / 80nm (30 nm difference) so about the same as 981 GT4. Here's hoping ! 

tricky 50/80 looks hard vs a Cayman R (it's already bouncy and a light car) the GT4 with a 3.8 and 20" 295's weighs a bit more at the rear.
Also the GT4 feels too hard at the back and too soft at the front, the rear does not roll I had to dial back in some +camber over recommended amount.
Add add loads more front.

KW seem way off, but I always find them rock hard in other peoples cars.

I would have gone 40/60 1st try in a 987, it's a pure guess of course.

The R is a 13NM split, Ohlins recommend 10NM split, a 30NM splint on a 987 sounds wrong to me, a 20nm split sounds kinder.

Edited by Porsche911R on Thursday 29th June 14:19

[Rocket.]

Interesting thanks, looking at the weight of 987 Gen.2 S and 981 GT4 they seem quite similar overall (circa. 1350kg), I was kind of hoping there would be superior damping ability with the Ohlins DFV over the stock GT4 damper, but without knowing what the GT4 was like on the road, also trusting in GC knowledge of other coilover kits they have fitted to Caymans, as always it is the case with these things when you are one of the first it's a bit of trial and error.

[Porsche911R]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Damping better yes but the GT4 is not the same as a 987, it has a 3.8 motor in it, it will need a firmer spring relative to the front vs a 987 agree ?

yes one can go firmer loads, but to me the 30NM difference front to rear sits uneasy with me on the 987.

Porsche must have got the balance right in all their cars give or take. why would Ohlins say 10NM is correct and Porsche did 13 NM both very close.

them some one says lets have a 30NM gap front to rear ?

40/60 or 50/70 looks better than 50/80 to me, take a look at the axel weights 987 vs gt4.

Edited by Porsche911R on Thursday 29th June 15:02

[isaldiri]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Spring rate determines the ride frequency though? Dampers control the movement of the spring, imo I wouldn't be going with firmer springs unless there was a good reason to do so (ie track usage or more likely that's what the dampers are valved for).

If anything, higher quality damping I'd have thought would allow one to go softer in spring rate whilst still having the car handle properly.

[Porsche911R]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

the maths still is closer to a 20nm split than a 30 nm one ! your 72-50 on my calc is 22 ;-) as you cannot get a 72NM spring 50/70 is spot on. as I stated.

[Johnniem]

I really hope that the new Ohlins work out OP but all this willy waving about who knows the most technically isn't really helping is it. It is more obfuscation than anything. Stick to what your professional advisors set up for you. Your contract is with them and they should help you get it right, for you. It still makes me wonder why you didn't want to opt for a tried and tested unit. After all, the arguing and vitriol here is getting you no further forward. Your thread is serving only as a dias for armchair experts. I don't know what they are talking about most of the time and nor do I care. cmoose's sole purpose seems to be contrary and he loves that PH is a perfect place for it. My original point, post no 2, still stands.

I do hope that your professional experts manage to get it right for you, eventually.

[Porsche911R]

Johnniem said:

I really hope that the new Ohlins work out OP but all this willy waving about who knows the most technically isn't really helping is it. It is more obfuscation than anything. Stick to what your professional advisors set up for you. Your contract is with them and they should help you get it right, for you. It still makes me wonder why you didn't want to opt for a tried and tested unit. After all, the arguing and vitriol here is getting you no further forward. Your thread is serving only as a dias for armchair experts. I don't know what they are talking about most of the time and nor do I care. cmoose's sole purpose seems to be contrary and he loves that PH is a perfect place for it. My original point, post no 2, still stands.

I do hope that your professional experts manage to get it right for you, eventually.

Ohlins are the experts are they not, they said go 70/80 and they made the kit and tested it no doubt ? and the shocks are valved for those rates.

So why shy away from that in the 1st place ?

I think it's interesting ;-)

[Johnniem]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

True to form and nothing less than expected. Enjoy your sport.

[isaldiri]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

That's possibly more to do with either the damping quality or the effort put into making the suspension work properly I'd have thought. Lotus afaik run softer springs than most and they have considerably better ride quality and handling than most other equivalent cars. In any case there's many ways to skin a cat depending on the skill of the person doing the setting up I guess. With high quality damping many things are possible!

[Rocket.]

Gents, relax, I was merely informing those interested of my choice for spring rates based on some assumptions and hopefully some expert advice.

Also the fact that these have finally made it to market, time will tell if I should have gone tried and tested, if not it won't be the first time I've jumped in early on a new product/modification and had to rethink but for me it's part of the fun, it's a project car so it won't all be great out of the box.

I'll do my best at giving a honest subjective non biased view when it's done as will others who try it I'm sure, hopefully it'll be worth it, if not you can say I told you so