Coilover Review - but not in the Boxster....hope its useful anyway |  |  |
|
Buying through this link, gets PB a donation. |
Products for your Boxster, Cayman and Carrera. |
 | |
| Coilover Review - but not in the Boxster....hope its useful anyway grant - Friday, 10 August, 2012, at 8:14:49 pm |
This is a repost from Quattroworld that i just posted.
Car - 2002 Audi S6 Avant - a 4000 lb factory hot-rod designed like a 911 in the mirror. The (big) motor is entirely in front of the front axle. That mean lots of weight on the front; high polar moment of inertia; understeer, a reluctance to turn in; and a real issue balancing control with comfort as the front crashes into road imperfections ( as opposed to a 911 who's front-end glides up and down like a lead-dog's nose).
First, let me start with great thanks to many people here and on other forums who provided data points, experience, how-to advice, satisfaction with various struts etc. Your info made this a success.
Now, to the info part for all: A success it was.
I put in the ST kit today in my 2002 S6. part # 90026. For those unfamiliar with the suspension techniques kit, its a sub-brand of KW, German made, coilover kit, with fixed damping (which i generally think is a godo thing - others give you one option for right and many variants of "wrong").
I also replaced two tight but failing upper control arms; and all the upper mounts (front and rear). Fronts were in great shape - in general don;t bother. Rears were "ok" - best to replace by not in the shape Sloop's were.
I'll provide a picture soon - maybe tomorrow. But i was concerned that this would slam my car. The suggested range is 40-70mm below A6 stock. Since the S6 is already 20mm lower from the factory, this means the highest setting is 20mm (4/5") lower than it was.
Conclusion: it will surely settle a bit but its not slammed ---- very practical even here in the northeast.
Next, the performance. The ride is more controlled than S6 stock. Note - m,y dampers were in good operating condition. weaker than new i'm sure, but felt pretty good when they came out. Maybe it heaves up and down, following the road surface, more than stock. But its also better damped; has less dive and squat, turns in better and is less upset by road variations.
Normally this comes with "harsh" - banging over expansion strips, patches, etc. Nope, doesn't seem much worse than it was. Under some conditions (such as speed bumps) it is BETTER. Hard to explain why, but it is.
Overall i am thrilled (so far).
Of course - YMMV because ride and handling are so subjective. I'm an oddball - i'm both a track junkie and someone who thinks that harsh, slammed rides are not only a bad street trade-off, but in many cases result in worse handling on typical bad roads. So i want it all, and rarely get it. if you want a car that floats over undulations, this is not it. It will act more like a shorter wheelbase car. If you want the ultimate in track control, this is not it. It is actually compliant. I'll comment more as a drive it more --- anyway I will not have it aligned until it settles, maybe 100 miles or so.
note to Bernie who criticized all the coilover manufacturers for using small, more highly stressed 2" coils: they are not. They are full-size and in fact use the original molded spring tops. Kudos to KW/ST.
the following notes may be 4.2/S6 specific, but they counter what i read, heard and hoped:
1. you DO need to remove the pinch bolt - one (at least) of the bolt to remove the spring hat from the control arm bracket was obstructed by the firewall; Another by a hard line.
2. The rear units would not come out without either removing the caliper to allow more lower arm travel; or removing the upper arm. I removed the upper arm, no big deal.
Anyway, thanks again, and if you want a taught, yet comfortable suspension - strongly consider this well-made, well engineered system.
Grant
__________________
Grant
gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com
Car - 2002 Audi S6 Avant - a 4000 lb factory hot-rod designed like a 911 in the mirror. The (big) motor is entirely in front of the front axle. That mean lots of weight on the front; high polar moment of inertia; understeer, a reluctance to turn in; and a real issue balancing control with comfort as the front crashes into road imperfections ( as opposed to a 911 who's front-end glides up and down like a lead-dog's nose).
First, let me start with great thanks to many people here and on other forums who provided data points, experience, how-to advice, satisfaction with various struts etc. Your info made this a success.
Now, to the info part for all: A success it was.
I put in the ST kit today in my 2002 S6. part # 90026. For those unfamiliar with the suspension techniques kit, its a sub-brand of KW, German made, coilover kit, with fixed damping (which i generally think is a godo thing - others give you one option for right and many variants of "wrong").
I also replaced two tight but failing upper control arms; and all the upper mounts (front and rear). Fronts were in great shape - in general don;t bother. Rears were "ok" - best to replace by not in the shape Sloop's were.
I'll provide a picture soon - maybe tomorrow. But i was concerned that this would slam my car. The suggested range is 40-70mm below A6 stock. Since the S6 is already 20mm lower from the factory, this means the highest setting is 20mm (4/5") lower than it was.
Conclusion: it will surely settle a bit but its not slammed ---- very practical even here in the northeast.
Next, the performance. The ride is more controlled than S6 stock. Note - m,y dampers were in good operating condition. weaker than new i'm sure, but felt pretty good when they came out. Maybe it heaves up and down, following the road surface, more than stock. But its also better damped; has less dive and squat, turns in better and is less upset by road variations.
Normally this comes with "harsh" - banging over expansion strips, patches, etc. Nope, doesn't seem much worse than it was. Under some conditions (such as speed bumps) it is BETTER. Hard to explain why, but it is.
Overall i am thrilled (so far).
Of course - YMMV because ride and handling are so subjective. I'm an oddball - i'm both a track junkie and someone who thinks that harsh, slammed rides are not only a bad street trade-off, but in many cases result in worse handling on typical bad roads. So i want it all, and rarely get it. if you want a car that floats over undulations, this is not it. It will act more like a shorter wheelbase car. If you want the ultimate in track control, this is not it. It is actually compliant. I'll comment more as a drive it more --- anyway I will not have it aligned until it settles, maybe 100 miles or so.
note to Bernie who criticized all the coilover manufacturers for using small, more highly stressed 2" coils: they are not. They are full-size and in fact use the original molded spring tops. Kudos to KW/ST.
the following notes may be 4.2/S6 specific, but they counter what i read, heard and hoped:
1. you DO need to remove the pinch bolt - one (at least) of the bolt to remove the spring hat from the control arm bracket was obstructed by the firewall; Another by a hard line.
2. The rear units would not come out without either removing the caliper to allow more lower arm travel; or removing the upper arm. I removed the upper arm, no big deal.
Anyway, thanks again, and if you want a taught, yet comfortable suspension - strongly consider this well-made, well engineered system.
Grant
__________________
Grant
gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com
| Updated info (all good) grant - Sunday, 12 August, 2012, at 10:59:41 am |
After 1 1/2 days of (light but regular) driving to settle, each time i brought the car in, i measured all 4 corners (on a poured concrete surface) and took an average. Note: it changes every time.
But that time o could reliably say which corners were higher and lower. I also had an idea of how it sat relative to S6 stock (with 11 years of sag maybe). Answer: about the same.
So i took the RR which was the lowest point, made that the reference, and lowered the entire car 0.5", plus compensated for the differences (to a granularity of 1/2 turn which is just > 1/16".
With the added 1/2-7/8" drop (depending on what corner you measured B4 and after) the car drives even better. Rode is the same, but roll, pitch and rive are reduced. Since they pretty much have to in theory, i'm pleased to confirm that the laws of physics have not been repealed.
Peter- i would begin 1/2" or so lower than you otherwise planned. I began at the highest level that ST suggested (higher could damage the piston and seal). Now i am 12mm / 0.5" lower than that - a bit more int he front which did not settle as much as the rear. That may be a wagon thing however.
I love the ride and handling balance so far. My first significant highway drive will be this afternoon.
Gets aligned Tuesday.
G
Grant
gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com
But that time o could reliably say which corners were higher and lower. I also had an idea of how it sat relative to S6 stock (with 11 years of sag maybe). Answer: about the same.
So i took the RR which was the lowest point, made that the reference, and lowered the entire car 0.5", plus compensated for the differences (to a granularity of 1/2 turn which is just > 1/16".
With the added 1/2-7/8" drop (depending on what corner you measured B4 and after) the car drives even better. Rode is the same, but roll, pitch and rive are reduced. Since they pretty much have to in theory, i'm pleased to confirm that the laws of physics have not been repealed.
Peter- i would begin 1/2" or so lower than you otherwise planned. I began at the highest level that ST suggested (higher could damage the piston and seal). Now i am 12mm / 0.5" lower than that - a bit more int he front which did not settle as much as the rear. That may be a wagon thing however.
I love the ride and handling balance so far. My first significant highway drive will be this afternoon.
Gets aligned Tuesday.
G
Grant
gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.