|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Hate to bump an ancient thread, but there needs to be some clarification from the 935 specs and how those might translate to a beetle or 944T rear suspension.
If the shock/spring motion ratios and weights are all known, you can actually reasonably translate the springs/damping. I'm currently trying to pull some reasonable numbers out of the available calculators for spring rate and damping. The trailing arm length on a 911 and its children are IIRC much longer, so a given dia torsion would effectively be softer. The shock//coil over attaches out BEHIND the axle. The motion ratios for the rear shocks/coil overs is thus >1.0 The motion ratio of a 944T is supposedly ~.94 up front and .42 out back (pulled from Rennlist etc) (I suspect similar for the early steel T1/T3 arms) The front rates ~match up as the strut angle is close. The rear spring rate and damper rates on a T1 or 944 suspension will have to be >2,5 X the 935 rates to have the same effect at the wheel. Also, at least for the 934 (assuming same trailing arms), the published rear damping specs are more like 2200/1200. Note that the base recommended Bilstein damping settings for a baja bug prerunner/race app are almost EXACTLY what is spec'd in the previous post for the 935 (including a 2x motion ratio correction for the rear, again, the weights are about the same, the front ratio corrected damping would be softer on the baja by about 30%) Note Bilstein makes small body coil over-ready shocks in 6" stroke length, 17" overall (S6G) that take 1 7/8" springs, <100 for the shocks and $40 for the slip on coil over kit. (+ springs) They can be bought in 21 std digressive valvings or custom valved when built for only a little more. Too long if the car is slammed, but about right if the stock shock length still works. Last edited by piledriver; June 4th 2016 at 02:57. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|