Question on OEM springs
- Thread starter mirage83
- Start date
they're likely only prone to degradation if they have experienced significant corrosion or heavy abuse. otherwise, the springs should still be good. Slight "sagging" might come from the degradation of the rubber isolator on the upper shock mount.
Alec;1303477 said:
Some certainly lower more than others. I want to say the Whiteline Springs only lower an inch if that.
Why wouldn't you want to take advantage of a slight drop?
I'll check out that isolator, see what kind of shape it's in. I don't think my car is unusually low for stock springs, but wanted to learn if they were likely to cause trouble or "sag" given their age.
If they're fine I don't plan on changing them, but at some point down the line I might end up getting some fresh ones for it anyway. And I'm definately not interested in lowering it much if any. Our roads and stuff around here aren't kind to lowered vehicles, and with a new 3" exhaust system I'd hate to trash it with repeated hits from speedbumps and other undercarriage road rash.
That was a good question Alec asked, just for the general knowledge if nothing else. Are the Whiteline series about the closest to a stock-height ride that anyone knows about? How do they ride for anyone who has them?
If they're fine I don't plan on changing them, but at some point down the line I might end up getting some fresh ones for it anyway. And I'm definately not interested in lowering it much if any. Our roads and stuff around here aren't kind to lowered vehicles, and with a new 3" exhaust system I'd hate to trash it with repeated hits from speedbumps and other undercarriage road rash.
That was a good question Alec asked, just for the general knowledge if nothing else. Are the Whiteline series about the closest to a stock-height ride that anyone knows about? How do they ride for anyone who has them?
search the faq section, there should be some information on the springs in there. As far as I remember, the stock springs should have a yellow or red line painted on them.
adampecush;1303708 said:
Finally found the thread I vaguely remembered on the subject. It was hiding in the General Discussion area. Here's a link if Alec or anyone else was interested...
http://www.supramania.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1065733&postcount=1
Thanks for reminding me about it Adam.
Stock is linear, progressive is a waste because of the forces built into our suspension design (basicly makes them progressive)
No, I haven't seen any supras with terrible sagging, sagging is much more common on leaf spring suspensions than coil spring.
No, I haven't seen any supras with terrible sagging, sagging is much more common on leaf spring suspensions than coil spring.
mirage83;1303468 said:
I had a 90 targa before and I had that height problem. The body shop told me that MKIII supras are prone on twisting the body specially driving when the targa is off and aggressive turns. We did not any cracks on subframe just the body alone is twisted. I could have made it straight again but it would cost more than the value of the car. I had a friend that wanted the car even on its condtion so I sold it to him. I bought an 89 turbo hard top and eventually found a nice 91 turbo with sunroof and been happy with it ever since.
I think our MKIII's needs more frame support if its going to be driven aggressively.
these cars don't just twist on their own....chances are the 90 targa had been in a pretty good accident.
adampecush;1304202 said:
Car was in no accident. Previous owner just probably drove the car with the targa off most of the time then driving it aggrssively. Most targa owners in here knows this problem. Thats why most tragas leak and some have the screws keeps on getting lose on the one side (these is a common problem that most targa owners know about). I supra owners put braces on the roof everytime they remove the targa.
If the supra had u unibody chassis it probably not have the problem but instead they made two seperate subframes without enough support to hold the car. I would suggest installing reiforcement especially when driving it on the track.
I didn't look up the rest but for the link posted, The H&R's are 1.6" in the front and 1.3" in the rear. And the Arospeed's are 2" all around.
I have H&R on my car but I wanted linear spring rate lowering springs but I didn't find a set with a low enough drop for me.
I have H&R on my car but I wanted linear spring rate lowering springs but I didn't find a set with a low enough drop for me.
bsupra;1304289 said:
Um...no. sure, you can feel the chassis flexing with the roof off, but that is as far as it goes. I have never EVER had a problem with the screws coming loose on the roof, and my car gets driven pretty damn hard. If you bend the chassis of the car while driving, you are doing something very wrong.
The supra IS a unibody chassis. I'm not sure how you figure the two subframes are detrimental to the design of the car. They are bolted to the main framerails, which form the basis of the car structure. With the targa on, the car is as stiff as a hardtop. As someone who has owned both, I feel I can comment rather accurately on this...
adampecush;1304342 said:
Well i never said all targa owners. i said im suresome targa owners had problems on the screws keeps getting lose. U ur self already said the hard top is stiffer, its stiffer because it does not flex like the targas.
And about the chassis, the body of the car its self is whole. Im taliking about the two separate subframes 1. the one where the engine attaches and 2. where the rear end stuff is attaches to (the one that cracks). The two subrames are attach to the body of the car, which is not ideal for rear wheel drive cars. And "its not the chassis of the car that flex but the body itself" where both subframes are attach to. Thats what strut bars are for "to minimize body flex". The chassis im talking about is like the muscle cars, where u can just lifet up the body and the car is still attach as a whole.
Try measuring ur car. Some tragas I measured is like about 1/2 inch difference on the front. Most of the time the right front is 1/2 higher than the left and the right rear is about 1/4 inch lower than the right. If ur car is even, u are one of the fortunate ones.
If the screws come loose you're tightening in the wrong order, or the screw are damaged.
Most (all?) unibody cars have subframes.
Muscle cars are NOT unibody, they're frame on chassis, the body doesn't take any loads.
No, targa cars don't get twisted from riding with the top off, if they're twisted something happened.
Also, you do realize they use the same springs for left andf right side? Ever corner weighed a stock car? Yeah, they're not perfectly balanced...
Most (all?) unibody cars have subframes.
Muscle cars are NOT unibody, they're frame on chassis, the body doesn't take any loads.
No, targa cars don't get twisted from riding with the top off, if they're twisted something happened.
Also, you do realize they use the same springs for left andf right side? Ever corner weighed a stock car? Yeah, they're not perfectly balanced...
Poodles;1304378 said:
Ok i may have used the wrong term about the unibody but im just trying to make a point about the difference between the chassis of our cars and the muscle cars. And ur right, the body of muscle cars does not take load because the speparate frame takes the load just like the way i explained it. For our supras, the body its self takes that load rather than having another separate frame to take it.
ok if u guys do not like the height measurement, just check it with tha targa cover. take the targa screws off, lift up the targa and set it on top again without installing the screws, one side of the traga cover will not be completely flushed if ur body is twisted or flex. And again, it does not mean all targas, just SOME.
And im not talking about sudden flex. Im talking about driving it hard for a period of time. And no, off course the traga supras will not flex by just driving it. Im talking about fast and hard cornering for a a long period of time.
MY MAIN POINT IS, THE BODY OF A SUPRA, WHEN THE TARGA IS OFF, FLEXES MORE THAN THE HARD TOP. All cars experience body flex when cornering. its just some cars are too heavy and do not have enough support to hold the body.
IF U STILL DO NOT AGREE ABOUT BODY FLEXING ON ALL CARS, THEN I DO NO WHAT TO SAY.
Body flex is a lack of rigidity in a motor vehicle's chassis. It is often something to be avoided by car manufacturers as higher levels of body flex is a sign of structural weakness, and means that the vehicle's suspension cannot work as efficiently - the body takes up some of the 'slack', rather than the parts of the car which were specifically designed for this purpose. A chassis that flexes may be prone to fatigue and further "softening" with use will eventually result in failure. Cars of a sporting nature are, therefore, often very 'stiff', while convertibles or cabriolets are not often considered to be good candidates for high-performance sports cars because of their lack of a rigid roof.
Targas are like convertibles because the roof gets disconneted to the body.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_flex
I have more sources. Just trying to make a point
Targas are like convertibles because the roof gets disconneted to the body.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_flex
I have more sources. Just trying to make a point