Discussion
Now that I have my new low profile tires on, there seems to be a huge gap between the wheel arch and the tire. I would like to "lower" the car a couple of inches to make it look "normal" again. I know that I can go with adjustable shocks but there is nothing wrong with the shocks that are on there and I hate to pay about 1k for the 4 when I don't really need them. I have been told that I could probably just get shorter springs and this would do the trick.
Does anyone know if this would work? Where I might get these springs? And if this would have any adverse effect on the handling? I realize that I would probably have to get the alignment set again but I should probably have that done anyway about now.
Thanks in advance for any help,
Mark
88 Turbo
Does anyone know if this would work? Where I might get these springs? And if this would have any adverse effect on the handling? I realize that I would probably have to get the alignment set again but I should probably have that done anyway about now.
Thanks in advance for any help,
Mark
88 Turbo
AZ,
I doubt that there is a couple inches to be lowered before you find yourself bottoming out every time you pass over a gum wrapper.
There are lower springs available, but their rate of progression is unfavorable and adversely effects the ride quality. Not adviseable.
Also, cutting the springs is a no-no for the same reasons listed above.
There is about 0.5" of lowering available by removing the rubber isolators which 'live' on top of the shocks. Many have done away with these with no ill effects, but it'll only lower the car about 0.5" as I mentioned. Happy Motoring! Jim'85TE
I doubt that there is a couple inches to be lowered before you find yourself bottoming out every time you pass over a gum wrapper.
There are lower springs available, but their rate of progression is unfavorable and adversely effects the ride quality. Not adviseable.
Also, cutting the springs is a no-no for the same reasons listed above.
There is about 0.5" of lowering available by removing the rubber isolators which 'live' on top of the shocks. Many have done away with these with no ill effects, but it'll only lower the car about 0.5" as I mentioned. Happy Motoring! Jim'85TE
Hey Jim,
I think I should be able to get around 2" without bottoming out. Remember I am running on the 15" wheels both front and rear with only 50 profile tires (down from 65). Right now there is over a 5" gap between the tire and the wheel arch. Kind of looks like one of those "raised" monster trucks for off-roading. I need to figure some way to get it down just so it doesn't look silly.
Are you saying the after-market springs are just not worth it? That it would change the ride too much to the negitive side? Just trying to figure out if I could find shorter springs with the same resistance if it would make all that much difference to the ride.
I think I should be able to get around 2" without bottoming out. Remember I am running on the 15" wheels both front and rear with only 50 profile tires (down from 65). Right now there is over a 5" gap between the tire and the wheel arch. Kind of looks like one of those "raised" monster trucks for off-roading. I need to figure some way to get it down just so it doesn't look silly.
Are you saying the after-market springs are just not worth it? That it would change the ride too much to the negitive side? Just trying to figure out if I could find shorter springs with the same resistance if it would make all that much difference to the ride.
Hi All
With reference to your queries on lowering, I take it it is a Turbo 'G' car, I've just lowered mine by 45mm. I had shorter springs made and sat them on ride height adjustable spax,which lower it further still, there was 65mm rear and 50mm front between arch and tyre on my car, now there's no clearance and it look's like a different car! I agree with Jim that under no circumstances should you cut the original springs down, you would lose the flat on one end of the spring then it would never sit proerly again, also you will need shocks with a shortened free length otherwise when you jack the car etc your springs will pop out!(not good).In my opinion, and I have owned my car for 18 years now, it has improved the handling and general feel of the car 10 fold, although as Jim said, quite rightly so, there is a trade off in ride quality. I decided however that the car looks far more purposeful being lower slung, as the press pictures from Lotus in the 80's first showed anyway. Also, my car sits on 17" alloys which I had made by a split rim manufacturer. The wheels are 8" front and 11" rear with 215 x 40 x 17 and 275 x 40 x 17 respectively which has also stiffened the ride up considerably. I think in the end it comes down to personal preference as long as you are aware that there will always be a trade off. If anybody wants any information via the site just let me know.
>> Edited by TurboAl on Sunday 14th September 22:36
With reference to your queries on lowering, I take it it is a Turbo 'G' car, I've just lowered mine by 45mm. I had shorter springs made and sat them on ride height adjustable spax,which lower it further still, there was 65mm rear and 50mm front between arch and tyre on my car, now there's no clearance and it look's like a different car! I agree with Jim that under no circumstances should you cut the original springs down, you would lose the flat on one end of the spring then it would never sit proerly again, also you will need shocks with a shortened free length otherwise when you jack the car etc your springs will pop out!(not good).In my opinion, and I have owned my car for 18 years now, it has improved the handling and general feel of the car 10 fold, although as Jim said, quite rightly so, there is a trade off in ride quality. I decided however that the car looks far more purposeful being lower slung, as the press pictures from Lotus in the 80's first showed anyway. Also, my car sits on 17" alloys which I had made by a split rim manufacturer. The wheels are 8" front and 11" rear with 215 x 40 x 17 and 275 x 40 x 17 respectively which has also stiffened the ride up considerably. I think in the end it comes down to personal preference as long as you are aware that there will always be a trade off. If anybody wants any information via the site just let me know.
>> Edited by TurboAl on Sunday 14th September 22:36
Why not fit the correct size tyres in the first place?
If the rolling radius has been drastically reduced, surely lowering the car so the top of the wheel meets the arch lip will move the centroid of the wheel within the wheel well so much it will never look right. And wont it rev its nuts off now?
I'm confused.
If the rolling radius has been drastically reduced, surely lowering the car so the top of the wheel meets the arch lip will move the centroid of the wheel within the wheel well so much it will never look right. And wont it rev its nuts off now?
I'm confused.
Yes i also agree with that last comment, what he really needs to do if like me i could'nt get matching tyres (and it's a problem to him} is get new rim's, personally i was sick to the back teeth of it and like i said above got a set of 17s, yes it's costly but hey it's worth it, it's an Esprit.
>> Edited by TurboAl on Sunday 14th September 23:04
>> Edited by TurboAl on Sunday 14th September 23:04
I've got the same issue...with the larger rims and lower profile tires, my Esprit sits very high.
I too have 2 or 3 inches of extra room, easy. I plan to do an adjustable suspension solution when I can tho...that way I can tune the driving performance, vice just chopping the springs for the aesthetic effect.
Your existing shocks may be good, but not for the current ride height.
I too have 2 or 3 inches of extra room, easy. I plan to do an adjustable suspension solution when I can tho...that way I can tune the driving performance, vice just chopping the springs for the aesthetic effect.
Your existing shocks may be good, but not for the current ride height.
I have read that smaller wheels = better handeling (look at the Mini Cooper). I love the handeling of my car with the 15" wheels and the low profile tires, just want it to sit lower really just for looks. Certainly don't want to spend 5k on new wheels/tires for that. I found a co. called Chassis Dynamics in the UK that make lowering springs for the Lotus, think I'll give that a try. I can allways put the originals back on and for about $200 if I ned to, it is worth the risk!
Well, that last comment is all vary well but where talking about a 23 year old car! And i think technology has moved on some what since then? don't you think that if that technology had been available to Lotus in 1980 they would have use'ed it? As i said earlier even Lotus thought it looked better lower on the original photo shoots, and maybe even handled better but we'll never know? I suspect they had to raise the ride height because of the crap roads we have in England, again i suspect it was a compromise, but that doesn't mean it's good for every one! Anyway it's a pretty safe bet that your suspension is going to were out at some time so why not upgrade it as you go, unless your concerned about originality, so hay where all individuals and like different things, i like a firmer ride, some don't, it's personal preference, as long as you realise it's always a compromise
>> Edited by TurboAl on Tuesday 16th September 03:49
>> Edited by TurboAl on Tuesday 16th September 03:49
Hi all,
Something you may want to consider is how sensitive these cars are to slight changes in suspension geometry. If you lower the car 1.5 inches or 7cm the camber will be offset to the point that you will loose strait line stability under acceleration, high speed stability will be reduced, and the car will eat tires. I agree that puting the cg lower to the ground will allow the car to corner with less body roll, and also looks much better. But the adverse affects could put you in a ditch on your lid.
John
Something you may want to consider is how sensitive these cars are to slight changes in suspension geometry. If you lower the car 1.5 inches or 7cm the camber will be offset to the point that you will loose strait line stability under acceleration, high speed stability will be reduced, and the car will eat tires. I agree that puting the cg lower to the ground will allow the car to corner with less body roll, and also looks much better. But the adverse affects could put you in a ditch on your lid.
John
I would think the biggest issue to deal with would be ground clearance. That is a judgement call. Only you know if the roads you drive on, and the things you drive over, are safe with less clearance.
I would suggest you go all the way with the shocks and springs, rather than cut any corners. The person installing the suspension should be able to set up the geometry as well. In fact, it would be irresponsible of them to just bolt it on and send you on your way. But that's not saying it doen't happen...
Most likely, you will find you like the improvement in handling as much as the appearance if you take this opportunity to fully revamp the suspension.
If it were me, I would just get some 24" chrome wheels (preferable 'spinners') and some Japanese lettering on the sides with a big "LOTUS" decal across the windshield and top it off with a 6" chrome exhaust tip. That way people will know you've got class ;-).
I would suggest you go all the way with the shocks and springs, rather than cut any corners. The person installing the suspension should be able to set up the geometry as well. In fact, it would be irresponsible of them to just bolt it on and send you on your way. But that's not saying it doen't happen...
Most likely, you will find you like the improvement in handling as much as the appearance if you take this opportunity to fully revamp the suspension.
If it were me, I would just get some 24" chrome wheels (preferable 'spinners') and some Japanese lettering on the sides with a big "LOTUS" decal across the windshield and top it off with a 6" chrome exhaust tip. That way people will know you've got class ;-).
Hey Clifton,
That sounds Phat, man. Real bling-bling. Source them and be sure to let us know.
When you lower a vehicle, it is not just a matter of re-aligning it. Something that is frequently overlooked is the camber curve. The curve is not smooth, but typically optimized for a particular range. If you change the static ride height, you are changing where on the curve the suspension is living. When designing suspension, you design it for a particular ride height and optimize it for that. You sacrafice the extreme ends, because it probably won't be there much anyway. Suspension design is all about compromises and is a real PITA. I designed the suspension on my Seven with the help of an automotive engineer friend, so I can tell you it is a PITA. Lowering my suspension 1" would totally screw up the camber curve.
Dr.Hess
That sounds Phat, man. Real bling-bling. Source them and be sure to let us know.
When you lower a vehicle, it is not just a matter of re-aligning it. Something that is frequently overlooked is the camber curve. The curve is not smooth, but typically optimized for a particular range. If you change the static ride height, you are changing where on the curve the suspension is living. When designing suspension, you design it for a particular ride height and optimize it for that. You sacrafice the extreme ends, because it probably won't be there much anyway. Suspension design is all about compromises and is a real PITA. I designed the suspension on my Seven with the help of an automotive engineer friend, so I can tell you it is a PITA. Lowering my suspension 1" would totally screw up the camber curve.
Dr.Hess
Kylie,
If you are going to lower your car, then new springs and/or coilovers are the way to do it. Keep in mind what I said about changing the suspension geometry. Maybe you will never notice the difference anyway. Not only the will you be running on a different part of the camber curve, but you don't know what your roll center is going to do either. It is like this: These numbers are made up, but selected just to illustrate:
inches degrees inches
Position Camber RC
-2 3 5
-1 1 3
0 0 2.8
1 -1 2.7
2 -3 1
3 -5 -1
At a normal ride height (0), you turn into a corner, loading the suspension to +1 and getting some roll, say 1 degree. Your camber (angle with respect to the road) is now -1 degree. Now say you lower your car so that you ride at +1 in the above chart as your new static 0. The suspension geometry has not changed, so now at 1" of bump you are at -3 degrees, or -2 degrees with respect to the road. Your suspension was desigined for -1 degrees initially, which is ideal according to the tire charts in Smith's books. You are running at -2 now, so you are achieving less tire grip to the road than if you had left your suspension alone. Same with the RC. You want it to not move, and originally it moved 0.1" but now it is moving 1.7 inches. Again, these numbers are for illustrative purpouses only. Every car is different.
It took me a couple months to develope my software to design suspension, so I have give this stuff quite a bit of thought.
You don't want to chop your springs because it changes the spring rate a lot. Gives less springy-ness. Another ghetto trick is to take a torch and heat the springs (while on the car) and let them sag down to where you want the car to ride. I wouldn't do this either, but some people do. Not to Esprits, but to Cheby's and the occasional Ford truck.
Dr.Hess
If you are going to lower your car, then new springs and/or coilovers are the way to do it. Keep in mind what I said about changing the suspension geometry. Maybe you will never notice the difference anyway. Not only the will you be running on a different part of the camber curve, but you don't know what your roll center is going to do either. It is like this: These numbers are made up, but selected just to illustrate:
inches degrees inches
Position Camber RC
-2 3 5
-1 1 3
0 0 2.8
1 -1 2.7
2 -3 1
3 -5 -1
At a normal ride height (0), you turn into a corner, loading the suspension to +1 and getting some roll, say 1 degree. Your camber (angle with respect to the road) is now -1 degree. Now say you lower your car so that you ride at +1 in the above chart as your new static 0. The suspension geometry has not changed, so now at 1" of bump you are at -3 degrees, or -2 degrees with respect to the road. Your suspension was desigined for -1 degrees initially, which is ideal according to the tire charts in Smith's books. You are running at -2 now, so you are achieving less tire grip to the road than if you had left your suspension alone. Same with the RC. You want it to not move, and originally it moved 0.1" but now it is moving 1.7 inches. Again, these numbers are for illustrative purpouses only. Every car is different.
It took me a couple months to develope my software to design suspension, so I have give this stuff quite a bit of thought.
You don't want to chop your springs because it changes the spring rate a lot. Gives less springy-ness. Another ghetto trick is to take a torch and heat the springs (while on the car) and let them sag down to where you want the car to ride. I wouldn't do this either, but some people do. Not to Esprits, but to Cheby's and the occasional Ford truck.
Dr.Hess
Gassing Station | Esprit | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff