Lennym1984 Posted October 17, 2020 Author Share Posted October 17, 2020 ... And photos https://ibb.co/Prj84KYhttps://ibb.co/pPbTc43https://ibb.co/sRvZSFw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted October 17, 2020 Author Share Posted October 17, 2020 I've just noticed that those photos make it look incredibly low at the front. It is quite low (probably exaggerated by the camber it's currently running) but not scraping the floor like it looks. The gravel at that place is higher where the front is, it's also very deep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windymiller Posted October 17, 2020 Share Posted October 17, 2020 It does look low at the front, like the wheels actually up in the arch 🤔😮 Thanks for posting the photos. Do you know your new geo settings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted October 17, 2020 Author Share Posted October 17, 2020 2' toe at the front, 2 degrees 15 minutes camber (i'll bring this back to under 2 in the next few months), 5' toe in the rear with 1.6 degrees of camber. The front camber makes the wheel look 'tucked' but it actually isn't that low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Founder Beanoir™ Posted October 17, 2020 Founder Share Posted October 17, 2020 How did you manage to get that much camber on the front?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted October 17, 2020 Author Share Posted October 17, 2020 4 minutes ago, Beanoir™ said: How did you manage to get that much camber on the front?? I have powerflex camber bushes (they came as part of a kit) which push the coffin arms out. They're actually really good... I just wasn't expecting that much when I told them to "max out the front." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted October 18, 2020 Author Share Posted October 18, 2020 12 hours ago, Windymiller said: It does look low at the front, like the wheels actually up in the arch 🤔😮 Thanks for posting the photos. Do you know your new geo settings? Using a bit of trig, I've worked out that the front 'looks' 15-20mm lower than it actually is.its a bit of an optical illusion but this should give you an idea on what it'd look like without the camber (I assumed 0.75 degrees as my baseline) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted October 18, 2020 Author Share Posted October 18, 2020 (edited) This is a better photo Edited October 18, 2020 by Lennym1984 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted October 19, 2020 Author Share Posted October 19, 2020 It has the standard top mounts. As mentioned though, it is running quite a lot (a little too much at the moment) camber on the front which will make the outer edge of the wheel look closer to the wheel arch edge. With normal camber (~0.75 degrees) the arch gap should look ~15mm higher on the front (so flipping it the other way, it currently *looks* as though it is lowered 20mm on the rear and 35mm on the front). The actual ride height shouldn't be any different (assuming minimal tyre deflection). I'll dial the camber back to ~1.8 at some point. It'll still look a little lower on the front but not quite as extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted October 19, 2020 Author Share Posted October 19, 2020 You might be right. I'll give it a few weeks and then tweak the camber and see what I think. Other than the added camber (and added LCA length) I can't think of anything that would cause it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windymiller Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 51 minutes ago, Lennym1984 said: You might be right. I'll give it a few weeks and then tweak the camber and see what I think. Other than the added camber (and added LCA length) I can't think of anything that would cause it. Take the 25kg sack of spuds out the frunk... 😉😁👍🏻 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mc5 Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 (edited) I'm looking at upgrading to r springs due to what should be a subtle drop. May end up changing to b4 or b6's now. This guy on youtube has installed r spring on what looks like oem shocks and looks spot on. This suggests the b8 shocks could be the issue if it does indeed look to low. Edited October 19, 2020 by mc5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygo Posted November 15, 2020 Share Posted November 15, 2020 On 19/10/2020 at 14:06, Lennym1984 said: You might be right. I'll give it a few weeks and then tweak the camber and see what I think. Other than the added camber (and added LCA length) I can't think of anything that would cause it. Maybe if anyone could see if the part number for an R damper is different to a standard Cayman damper would help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted November 16, 2020 Author Share Posted November 16, 2020 Sorry I forgot to respond to this but the ride height looks fine now and based on my before/after measurements is only around ~23mm lower on each axle (hence i haven't really given it much more thought). That said, the Cayman R dampers (and part numbers) are different from a standard Cayman/Cayman S damper and apparently have a shorter shock body. Having done more miles now, I'd say that the ride was definitely stiffer but less crashy. The handling is significantly improved but some of this will be down to the geo it is now running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Lennym1984 Posted January 14, 2021 Author Popular Post Share Posted January 14, 2021 On 19/10/2020 at 13:45, eponymoose said: Not totally convinced. If you ignore the arches and just look at the sill gap, to my eye there's quite a bit of rake. As I said, I had my own issues in this area with my gen one and have seen plenty of other reports (mainly on Planet 9), so I personally think there's something going on and that your car is running more rake than an R and is probably lower up front. As an update to this (and to prevent others from making the same mistake), despite my Cayman settling and looking much more normal, I kept catching the front mudflaps on a particularly aggressive speed bump near me. After a bit of investigation (working through all of the front suspension components), I eventually realised that I had fitted the wrong spring pads for the Cayman R springs. The Bilstein B8s I bought (used) had come from the B12 kit and used the 3mm pads up front. I had transferred these over but the shocks I removed from my car (and indeed the Cayman R) call for the 6mm spring pads. Whilst 3mm sounds like a negligible amount, the effect is actually quite considerable. The arch gap has now increased a little (more than 3mm... which the alignment place said was to be expected due to the "lever effect") and the front end compliance is considerably improved. More importantly it now clears the fecking speed bump without catching. So the moral of the story is... If you are fitting B8s and Cayman R springs use the correct spring pads! In terms of the initial rake shown in the photos, I still think that was just a weird angle and/or pre-settling but the front arch gap does look higher now. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windymiller Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 (edited) That’s great further feedback to learn thanks Lenny. I enquired about R springs from OPC Silverstone and they are £231.17 per front and rear pair (incl VAT) so with a PCGB / TIPEC discount all 4 R springs could be had for £416.10, which is a reasonable price. R front shocks (987-343-042-09) are £277 each (inc VAT) R rear shocks (987-343-051-18) are £389 each (inc VAT) So with a club discount ~£1200 for OE R shocks, which I don’t think is too dissimilar to B8s. But B8s might be a better shock than OE R shocks in terms of engineering construction, although not specifically matched to R springs. (NB - all above part nos and prices are for a manual) Edited January 14, 2021 by Windymiller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenfourate Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 5 minutes ago, eponymoose said: Pricing for the R Springs pretty outrageous if you ask me. Dirt cheap to make, just massive markup because you can't get them anywhere else. Not saying I wouldn't use them. I tried both the H&R and the Eibach kits on my last 987 Cayman and they both went too low on the front axle, if you ask me. So, I'd favour the R springs and I swallow the extra cost. But the price is a rip off. There's nothing special about the R springs that justifies the cost. As a slight aside from the topic in-hand. I was trying to decide between H+R and Eibachs....and went to see a friends with H+R's fitted to before Christmas. I was slightly shocked at how low the front was - and went with Eibachs. Doesn't sound like they are much different from your experience. Why was being so low a problem for you. Was it visual, getting the Geo settings you wanted from that, rubbing issues at the front or ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevenfourate Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 1 hour ago, eponymoose said: Also, if you search Planet 9 forum, you'll find quite a bit of discussion with people using various spring pad combos to increase front axle height with the Eibach Springs, which leads me to believe that my problems were not isolated. Interesting ! And thanks for your thoughts and experiences. I thought i'd done due research ref Eibachs on a Cayman - and found many glowing reviews; and thought the concensus was they weren't quite as 'aggressive' / the drop wasn't as great as H+R's. I also studied plenty of pictures, saw an H+R fitted out 987 in the flesh - and spoke to another very happy friend who has Eibachs fitted. I've also had Eibach's Pro-Kit fitted to 3 recent cars; Audi S3, Clio RS200 (Where they are supposedly designed to be used on / with stock dampers and work within the working range of those) - and have recently fitted the same to my MX-5 daily. Where incidentally - they form Mazda's 'Lowering kit' (At huge expense from a dealer) - or you buy from any aftermarket supplier like i did. And somewhat based on these 3 long-term and very happy experiences - i followed suit here..... Can i ask you: 1/ Are you referring to Track use and "running out of travel', really at the limit on the road - or on somewhat 'normal' road useage ? 2/ What exactly is a Spring pad. Is this something thats fitted between coils to limit spring movement and increase ride height (If so these can be easily fitted / after spring install i presume)..........? Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mc5 Posted January 14, 2021 Share Posted January 14, 2021 Does the car come with 6mm spring pads as standard or do these have to be bought from Porsche Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennym1984 Posted January 14, 2021 Author Share Posted January 14, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, mc5 said: Does the car come with 6mm spring pads as standard or do these have to be bought from Porsche It depends on your specific car. Mine had 6mm pads all round but some will have 3mm. The springs are colour coded and tell you what pads you need. Blue spots are 6mm @sevenfourate if you want the 2 3mm pads I have (to raise your eibachs a little further on front) send me your address and I'll put them in the post. You can stack them as eponymoose has alluded to Edited January 14, 2021 by Lennym1984 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now