Springs - H&R or Eibach pro?

[Tom]

Cheers mate.

I don't either, but like I said - it doesn't look unbalanced at all!

 

[Makaveli160]

Just a thought and i know this thread is done but i think the 30/40 is to allow for the engine weight, and generally the front is under more load - passengers/ steering/ engine/ braking etc

Dont know about anyone else but out of the front and back the front is lower on my car because of the above, and yet only lowered 30mm but to be honest is more like 40-50mm lower at the front now.

 

[Tom]

That would make perfect sense...

 

[BenW]

Its not to do with engine weight etc, the front is lower as standard to give better turn in. The aftermarket springs lower 10mm more at the back to give a more balanced look but with possibly worse turn in (Didn't notice this with my eibachs though).

The front springs are stiffer than rear springs to deal with the extra weight, this isn't related to the spring length though.

 

[Makaveli160]

"Just a thought"

Guess that told me lol

 

[Tom]

Now we know.

 

[fmp]

I went with eibachs in the end.

So will be interested to see how they perform over the coming weeks and at the RS track day at Le mans towards the end of this month.

 

[Yiannis197]

Its not to do with engine weight etc, the front is lower as standard to give better turn in. The aftermarket springs lower 10mm more at the back to give a more balanced look but with possibly worse turn in (Didn't notice this with my eibachs though).

The front springs are stiffer than rear springs to deal with the extra weight, this isn't related to the spring length though.

That makes absolute sense, that's why I mentioned in a previous post that I would prefer the front to be a bit lower than the rear, exactly as Renault set it up basically but a bit lowered. I guess I'd go for 30 all around then(23mm to be absolutely precise.

Thanks for clarifying that.

 

[p4l0m0]

Any advance in this post? Any different opinion about k-tech eibach/ h&r?

Thanks

 

[VolumeX]

Yes...