Nose down attitude with Eibach on G50?

[HeavyDuty]

Hi guys,

I have a set of Eibach Pro-Kits and To(crap)o's on my 91 Q. When I bought the car, I noticed how high the rear was, even with a load of stuff in the trunk & a full tank of gas.

Obviously with 5 passengers, etc., it would lower a bit, but I rarely travel with anything more than three children @40lbs each.

The nose of the car with the Pro-Kits is soooo low compared to the rear it looks a little goofy. And, as Q45Tech advised someone the other day, the Pro-Kits can be more trouble than they're worth, these cars don't have a whole lot of susp travel anyway and the ride is a bit jouncy with the cheesy Tokico valving.

Looks like Eibach paid more attention to fender gap symmetry front & rear than overall look.

Soooooo......

Has anyone ever installed stock front springs with Pro-Kit rears? I think it would sit more level, and have a nicer ride with more travel. Also, my 18x8, 18x9 OZ's will be in on Tuesday and I'm anxious to replace my H rated Goodyears.

I know the sets are matched, but how adverse would the combo be?

[PalmerWMD]

I have the regular Eibach springs and togoko's all around on ym car and dont have these issues.

Fred...

[Q45tech]

The Eibachs state 1.0" front 0.8" rear drop.

Nothing wrong with just using them on the rear as the [lack of]extra 10-15% front stiffness just shifts the roll stiffness more rearward...............as long as you don't decrease the front 29 mm sway bar.

Not as much as adding a 20 mm rear sway bar to stock springs.

40 # x 3.5"= 100-140 # for bar vs the Eibach rear springs which add say 140-150# of rear roll stiffness at max roll.

Obviously the combo adds at least 250# of rear roll stiffness with 3.5" of roll [doubtful you can get the rear to roll 3.5" with both].

By using the Eibach fronts plus the smaller 28mm front bar the two ALMOST wash out...........the 75# gain is reduced by the 60# loss.

The point IS almost 90% of the added roll stiffness is in the rear on my Q..............if I swapped back to oem Front springs I would need to go back to the oem 29mm front bar.

I like the stiffer front springs for the added resistance to brake dive they provide........~~ 75# x2 =150#

[AZhitman]

Hmmmm.

I have the Tokico's and Eibachs as well, and I am ecstatic with the stance (somewhat raked) and the handling.

[Q45tech]

The only problem is the progressive nature of the rear springs [there to create an 'as oem softness' in the first inch, then say 150 in the next inch and ultimately rising to 200 in the final inch.

This 120>200# inch stiffness can get you in trouble especially if the Tokico blues are rebound worn and you have a road course with varying G curves..............you can have the Goldilocks problem too much, too little, just right but it changes from curve to curve.

With my setup I have gotten very close to neutral steer with ultimately 56-60%* of the total roll stiffness on the front when the body roll is at 3-3.5 inches vs 70-75%* with stock springs and no rear bar.

* variation a function of condition and tightness of the front sway bar bushings.

No Q will be the same due to the bushing variation.

[AZhitman]

This is very true. I have noticed with my new setup, that lateral stability is MUCH increased from before, as the rear remains level and doesn't "roll over" as far. However, there is far less margin for error now. When the tail breaks loose now, it's gone, and only an increase in throttle and countersteer will remedy it.

[Q45tech]

Whenever you increase the rear roll stiffness, you decrease the rear traction [that's how it works].............as the rear has way too much compared to the front!..........UNDERSTEER.

The normal method is to increase the sideways stickson [dynamic sliding friction] by softer compounds and wide treads [on the rear]. Important that the wider treaded tires have a higher load index to decrease the slip angles.........something in the 98-103 range. Each extra 100 pounds of reserve will decrease the slip angles by about 0.5 degrees [based on Going from 215 to 235 Pilot H4].........obviously a 255/50/16 or 275/17 rear tire would be great.

[AZhitman]

obviously a 255/50/16 or 275/17 rear tire would be great.

The sticky 255/50ZR's I have really make the difference, as Dennis says.

This combination, IMO, is unbeatable.

[HeavyDuty]

My tech thinks I'm goofy. I wish there were better struts readily available. If I could slow down the rebound, it would be much more comfortable & controlled.

I guess I'll see how it looks with the new wheels & go from there. Thanks for the input, guys. Maybe I'll try it for a week & see how I like it.