[Tortfeasor STi]

Originally Posted by Parker

But no more pissing on a picture thread...im separating the actual photos from the mess and moving this to the suspension forum.

Good separating the two threads and moving this to suspension. It will allow the discussion of lowering benefits/costs to continue without ruining the show car picture thread.

[Tortfeasor STi]

Originally Posted by BoostJunkie

I think it's important to clear up the misconception that ball joint extenders automatically make it ok to slam your car. The Whiteline RCK raises the car's roll center by 10mm. Enough to benefit a mildly lowered car, but if your car is slammed there aren't any parts you can throw at it to make it handle well.

If your car is only a street car, the real downside is the amount of bump travel you lose, which negatively effects ride quality. You probably aren't approaching the limit of the car on the street so the handling disadvantage isn't as much of an issue. But anybody who tracks or auto-xes their cars should know that excessively lowering a MacPherson suspension ruins the geometry. Some of the time attack cars you see in Japan get around this with tricks like running tons of static camber, long ball joint extenders, changing suspension pickup points, etc. but for the average person it's just not a good idea from a performance standpoint.

Boost you hit the issue right on the head. I would also like to add that suspension tuning is a black art. One can not simply slap on some parts and get the car to handle better then stock. Too often people just toss on some lowering springs or some coil overs and assumer they can slam their cars with no ill effects. The problem is that a suspension, like an engine, is an integrated system that works best when designed as a complete whole. If you are going to start mixing and matching parts that were not necessarily designed to work together quite often the whole is a lot worse then the sum of the parts used.

[cnelson]

honestly though how does someone else slamming their car effect you....just because you dont think it looks good doesnt mean that everyone else thinks that as well...and as for the performance aspect, some people as myself like the look of a "slammed" car and are willing to loose some performance for that "slammed" look.

[BoostJunkie]

Originally Posted by cnelson

honestly though how does someone else slamming their car effect you....just because you dont think it looks good doesnt mean that everyone else thinks that as well...and as for the performance aspect, some people as myself like the look of a "slammed" car and are willing to loose some performance for that "slammed" look.

Do whatever you want...more power to you. As long as you know the negative side effects the rest is up to you. The forum is for spreading information, not forcing anyone to do anything.

[Tortfeasor STi]

Originally Posted by cnelson

honestly though how does someone else slamming their car effect you....just because you dont think it looks good doesnt mean that everyone else thinks that as well...and as for the performance aspect, some people as myself like the look of a "slammed" car and are willing to loose some performance for that "slammed" look.

I think the point of this thread is to make sure that those who choose to slam their cars understand that they are making a decision that negatively affects their car's handling ability for looks. Also, its to at least inform you that certain members of the community will strongly look down on you for doing it. The STI already has a ricer image problem with the big goofy wing to begin with, so some people are a little sensitive to how the community presents itself to the world.

[Turninconcepts.com]

This argument again? When are we going to get some new subjects in here?

[Parker]

Originally Posted by twiSTies

why is this in the tech section?

where else should it be? since it turned into a tech issue from a photography thread, I moved it here.

Originally Posted by cnelson

honestly though how does someone else slamming their car effect you....just because you dont think it looks good doesnt mean that everyone else thinks that as well...and as for the performance aspect, some people as myself like the look of a "slammed" car and are willing to loose some performance for that "slammed" look.

absolutely nothing. if you don't want feedback, suggestions, etc., about the decisions you have made or plan to make, don't post here. the simple fact here was that slamming your car yields more negative factors than positive and some people read past that...as made apparent by your post as well.

Originally Posted by Turninconcepts.com

This argument again? When are we going to get some new subjects in here?

well, if it helps at all, this was originally in the pictures & photography forum.

[SRT4_2_STI]

OK, so what I'm getting from this thread, is that if I bought a set of KW Variant 3 coilovers, and lowered the car an inch or two, it would ruin the cornering capabilities of the car.

I find it hard to believe that less body roll and a lower center of gravity will adversely effect the handling due to the geometry of the suspension being off. I could see ride comfort being sacrificed, and off road handling, but on tarmac.... I don't see it. (EDIT, this is to a certain point. IE. one or two inches should not negatively affect handling)

And just to address the actual topic of this thread, I think slammed subarus do look a lot better than stock ride height. I could sleep in the wheel gap of your average subaru.

[Parker]

looks wise, they look much better. but at the end of the day, personally, I want a functional car that is going to last me.

[BoostJunkie]

Originally Posted by SRT4_2_STI

OK, so what I'm getting from this thread, is that if I bought a set of KW Variant 3 coilovers, and lowered the car an inch or two, it would ruin the cornering capabilities of the car.

I find it hard to believe that less body roll and a lower center of gravity will adversely effect the handling due to the geometry of the suspension being off. I could see ride comfort being sacrificed, and off road handling, but on tarmac.... I don't see it. (EDIT, this is to a certain point. IE. one or two inches should not negatively affect handling)

And just to address the actual topic of this thread, I think slammed subarus do look a lot better than stock ride height. I could sleep in the wheel gap of your average subaru.

Yes, lowering your car is fine to a point. But lowering the car too much is a common mistake. I wouldn't go lower than 14" front, 13.5" rear measured from the center of the hub to the edge of the fender at static ride height.

[Draco-REX]

Originally Posted by SRT4_2_STI

OK, so what I'm getting from this thread, is that if I bought a set of KW Variant 3 coilovers, and lowered the car an inch or two, it would ruin the cornering capabilities of the car.

I find it hard to believe that less body roll and a lower center of gravity will adversely effect the handling due to the geometry of the suspension being off. I could see ride comfort being sacrificed, and off road handling, but on tarmac.... I don't see it. (EDIT, this is to a certain point. IE. one or two inches should not negatively affect handling)

And just to address the actual topic of this thread, I think slammed subarus do look a lot better than stock ride height. I could sleep in the wheel gap of your average subaru.

The problem is with the MacPherson strut design. It is already prone to gaining too much positive camber in a roll. But when you lower our cars too much, you exaggerate that problem. A low center of gravity is good, but it doesn't help much if your tires can't grip the road.

Slam the car and do all the suspension mods, and you'll probably end up with a car that handles about the same as stock. Granted, stock is no slouch in the handling department, but the car can be so much BETTER!

I'm just about done with the suspension in my STI and it is incredible. Stock, the STI was such a step above anything I had driven before that it was amazing. But now that I'm 95% done, it's like the car is that much better all over again. I can't see going back to sliding and skittering through corners just to look "slammed."

And besides, it must be a real pain the back to be riding on the bumpstops all the time, or running really high spring rates to keep from bottoming out.

[Iron Giant]

Originally Posted by SRT4_2_STI

OK, so what I'm getting from this thread, is that if I bought a set of KW Variant 3 coilovers, and lowered the car an inch or two, it would ruin the cornering capabilities of the car.

I find it hard to believe that less body roll and a lower center of gravity will adversely effect the handling due to the geometry of the suspension being off. I could see ride comfort being sacrificed, and off road handling, but on tarmac.... I don't see it. (EDIT, this is to a certain point. IE. one or two inches should not negatively affect handling)

And just to address the actual topic of this thread, I think slammed subarus do look a lot better than stock ride height. I could sleep in the wheel gap of your average subaru.

If you are confused about the topic, here is a great link that describes the ins and outs of it in about as basic of wording as can be used while still being accurate.
Why is lowering a car so desireable?

When you read it it may still seem pretty tough, and that is probably the reason so many people have so many misconceptions about suspension tuning. The only thing that I think tops it in automotive tuning is the topic of aerodynamic tuning

[SRT4_2_STI]

Originally Posted by Iron Giant

If you are confused about the topic, here is a great link that describes the ins and outs of it in about as basic of wording as can be used while still being accurate. When you read it it may still seem pretty tough, and that is probably the reason so many people have so many misconceptions about suspension tuning. The only thing that I think tops it in automotive tuning is the topic of aerodynamic tuning

I'm a dumbass and responded too early. Can't figure out how to delete either.

Thanks for the link.