how is everyone lower'd here heated spring/cut ??
01-22-04, 09:18 PM
#1
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LaCrescenta Ca/Fort Hood Tx
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how is everyone lower'd here heated spring/cut ??
=JUST KIDDING=
But seriously how is everyone lowerd here ????
since my car was only 100 bucks heating up the springs and droping it would hurt me to much but i know its the WRONG WAY TO GO. anyways how are you lowerd?
But seriously how is everyone lowerd here ????
since my car was only 100 bucks heating up the springs and droping it would hurt me to much but i know its the WRONG WAY TO GO. anyways how are you lowerd?
01-22-04, 09:37 PM
#3
when i didn't know better i had my springs heated in my high school 82 Ford EXP. absolutely the WORST way to lower a car. heating makes the springs brittle and dangerous. plus they get very very bouncy.
but it was cheaper than cutting them. of course now i know to buy some shorter, stiffer springs. go Racing Beat if you want performance or Eibach Pro-Kit if you want it not as stiff.
but it was cheaper than cutting them. of course now i know to buy some shorter, stiffer springs. go Racing Beat if you want performance or Eibach Pro-Kit if you want it not as stiff.
01-22-04, 10:15 PM
#5
http://diamondracingwheels.com/RoadRaceSeries.htm
13x8" BACKspace get the road race series, they have tighter tolerances
13x8" BACKspace get the road race series, they have tighter tolerances
Last edited by DriveFast7; 01-22-04 at 10:17 PM.
01-22-04, 10:46 PM
#7
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LaCrescenta Ca/Fort Hood Tx
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sweet thanks ! i love em low. my bimmer is really low so im used to low ****, the rx-7 is able to be low. its kinda durable compared to the alumium oil panned BMW!
Trending Topics
01-23-04, 12:20 AM
#8
i say what i want
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: richmond, va
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Tree25is
sweet thanks ! i love em low. my bimmer is really low so im used to low ****, the rx-7 is able to be low. its kinda durable compared to the alumium oil panned BMW!
sweet thanks ! i love em low. my bimmer is really low so im used to low ****, the rx-7 is able to be low. its kinda durable compared to the alumium oil panned BMW!
my friend has a lowered bimmer as well, and he has that same problem. we were going through a burger king parking lot in his e30, and there was this nasty scrape, all his 2 day old oil went all over the parking lot. sucked at the time, but was funny afterwards.. atleast to me
DriveFast7 - what did you do to your racecar? i know those arent eibachs or racing beat springs, unless they have been cut. do you have the racing beat lowering kit?
01-23-04, 08:28 AM
#9
Airflow is my life
Originally posted by DriveFast7
when i didn't know better i had my springs heated in my high school 82 Ford EXP. absolutely the WORST way to lower a car. heating makes the springs brittle and dangerous. plus they get very very bouncy.
but it was cheaper than cutting them. of course now i know to buy some shorter, stiffer springs. go Racing Beat if you want performance or Eibach Pro-Kit if you want it not as stiff.
when i didn't know better i had my springs heated in my high school 82 Ford EXP. absolutely the WORST way to lower a car. heating makes the springs brittle and dangerous. plus they get very very bouncy.
but it was cheaper than cutting them. of course now i know to buy some shorter, stiffer springs. go Racing Beat if you want performance or Eibach Pro-Kit if you want it not as stiff.
For a soft street ride, Suspension Techniques are progressive in the front and softer than Eibachs or RB's. They lower about 1" or so.
01-23-04, 08:44 AM
#10
I wasn't aiming to get lowered, but the RB springs are like .8" lower than stock. I probably won't notice a difference when I put them in because my old springs were so shot that they were pretty damn low!
But yeah, the safest, smartest and funnest way to lower is to get performance springs. That way you lower your car and instead of losing performance to look good, you gain it!
Jon
PS: I actually don't think lowering looks much better most of the time... but huge honkin' wheel well gaps don't look the best either... I'll post pics in the spring when my RB Springs and KYB shocks are in
But yeah, the safest, smartest and funnest way to lower is to get performance springs. That way you lower your car and instead of losing performance to look good, you gain it!
Jon
PS: I actually don't think lowering looks much better most of the time... but huge honkin' wheel well gaps don't look the best either... I'll post pics in the spring when my RB Springs and KYB shocks are in
01-23-04, 09:12 AM
#11
Old [Sch|F]ool
My car is "lowered" by having the original springs.
Mazda used the same springs for all 1st-gens. Look at the old ads and magazine pictures and notice where the wheel center was in relation to the rocker panels in the '79. Then look at them in '81, in '84, on the GSL-SE... you will notice a pattern. Every year, every time the car got heavier, the car'd get lower. Because Mazda used the same springs and rates, even though a fully loaded GSL-SE weighs lots more than a strippo '79. Even the later GSLs were weighed down like the GSL-SEs because most of the weight difference between the GSL and GSL-SE was in the brakes and wheels, which are of course unsprung weight and so don't affect ride height. (My GSL has A/C and P/S as well as sound deadener/insulation everywhere you look, and it sits *low*)
Now. Add 20 years of aging on the springs, and the cars sit even *lower*.
Most lowering springs actually raise the car, because the ride height difference is as compared to a new car, and who has a new 1st-gen? (Nobody!) This is good though, because the suspension geometry isn't that great at stock ('79) ride height and it only gets worse as you go lower.
I am working on fabricating some spring spacers to raise my car up. (1, 2, or 3 inches from where it is now, still pondering on the best way to go about it) Suspension travel is important, sop is good geometry. Certainly more important than getting the CG slightly lower!
Mazda used the same springs for all 1st-gens. Look at the old ads and magazine pictures and notice where the wheel center was in relation to the rocker panels in the '79. Then look at them in '81, in '84, on the GSL-SE... you will notice a pattern. Every year, every time the car got heavier, the car'd get lower. Because Mazda used the same springs and rates, even though a fully loaded GSL-SE weighs lots more than a strippo '79. Even the later GSLs were weighed down like the GSL-SEs because most of the weight difference between the GSL and GSL-SE was in the brakes and wheels, which are of course unsprung weight and so don't affect ride height. (My GSL has A/C and P/S as well as sound deadener/insulation everywhere you look, and it sits *low*)
Now. Add 20 years of aging on the springs, and the cars sit even *lower*.
Most lowering springs actually raise the car, because the ride height difference is as compared to a new car, and who has a new 1st-gen? (Nobody!) This is good though, because the suspension geometry isn't that great at stock ('79) ride height and it only gets worse as you go lower.
I am working on fabricating some spring spacers to raise my car up. (1, 2, or 3 inches from where it is now, still pondering on the best way to go about it) Suspension travel is important, sop is good geometry. Certainly more important than getting the CG slightly lower!
01-23-04, 02:42 PM
#14
Absolute Power is Awesome
Originally posted by peejay
My car is "lowered" by having the original springs.
Mazda used the same springs for all 1st-gens. Look at the old ads and magazine pictures and notice where the wheel center was in relation to the rocker panels in the '79. Then look at them in '81, in '84, on the GSL-SE... you will notice a pattern. Every year, every time the car got heavier, the car'd get lower. Because Mazda used the same springs and rates, even though a fully loaded GSL-SE weighs lots more than a strippo '79. Even the later GSLs were weighed down like the GSL-SEs because most of the weight difference between the GSL and GSL-SE was in the brakes and wheels, which are of course unsprung weight and so don't affect ride height. (My GSL has A/C and P/S as well as sound deadener/insulation everywhere you look, and it sits *low*)
My car is "lowered" by having the original springs.
Mazda used the same springs for all 1st-gens. Look at the old ads and magazine pictures and notice where the wheel center was in relation to the rocker panels in the '79. Then look at them in '81, in '84, on the GSL-SE... you will notice a pattern. Every year, every time the car got heavier, the car'd get lower. Because Mazda used the same springs and rates, even though a fully loaded GSL-SE weighs lots more than a strippo '79. Even the later GSLs were weighed down like the GSL-SEs because most of the weight difference between the GSL and GSL-SE was in the brakes and wheels, which are of course unsprung weight and so don't affect ride height. (My GSL has A/C and P/S as well as sound deadener/insulation everywhere you look, and it sits *low*)
01-23-04, 11:51 PM
#15
Ryan
01-24-04, 12:23 AM
#17
my friend has a lowered bimmer as well, and he has that same problem. we were going through a burger king parking lot in his e30, and there was this nasty scrape, all his 2 day old oil went all over the parking lot. sucked at the time, but was funny afterwards.. atleast to me
~T.J.
01-24-04, 02:09 PM
#21
Old [Sch|F]ool
Originally posted by purple82
Actually SAs had stiffer, taller springs than FBs. They have different part numbers.
Actually SAs had stiffer, taller springs than FBs. They have different part numbers.
AFAIK the only different springs are that RHD cars have a right front spring .5" longer than the left, whereas LHD cars have a left front spring .5" longer than the right.
01-24-04, 02:14 PM
#22
sold the FD...kept the FB
coilover setup with 2.5" eibach 350lb. springs, along with racing beat's lowering kit in the front. In the rear I eliminated the watts link and did a trilink setup from G-force with a panhard bar and 250lb. short springs
02-15-04, 06:36 PM
#24
i say what i want
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: richmond, va
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by FD Racer
coilover setup with 2.5" eibach 350lb. springs, along with racing beat's lowering kit in the front. In the rear I eliminated the watts link and did a trilink setup from G-force with a panhard bar and 250lb. short springs
coilover setup with 2.5" eibach 350lb. springs, along with racing beat's lowering kit in the front. In the rear I eliminated the watts link and did a trilink setup from G-force with a panhard bar and 250lb. short springs
granted the car is still in the air, and has been in the air for a long time, but for the picture i jacked the car off the stands by the rear diff (i dont have lugs for the wheels yet, so i cant put it on the ground). im not liking that wheel gap at all. i have eibach springs on my other car, but they are the pro-kit and i dont know if it will do the trick. i plan to do ground controll coil overs in the front, but what about the rear? i dont want it up like that.
02-15-04, 07:12 PM
#25
My wife bought me 2 RX-7s
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
Posts: 2,328
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Check out these springs from mazdatrix:
http://www.mazdatrix.com/getprice.as...ACESPRING-1R-2
They are 175 pounds/inch and have several dead wound coils so you can cut without affecting the rate. That should give you the height you want, but the rear end will be STIFF.
http://www.mazdatrix.com/getprice.as...ACESPRING-1R-2
They are 175 pounds/inch and have several dead wound coils so you can cut without affecting the rate. That should give you the height you want, but the rear end will be STIFF.