I have been playing around with the suspension setting for some time and decided to leave it close to stock. I had
the car lowered down to 23.5 ground to fender lip. At that height I noticed the shocks are rubbing i.e. paint peeling on the strut. So I am back up to 24.5 without issue. Just wondering if I am missing something, I know my question is vague but has anyone had this issue. Would you recommend a different suspension?
Last edited by Fubawu; 09-17-2013 at 08:34 AM.
911 1967S 308470
[B]911 1965 301946 Irish Green
[B]911 1965 302962 Polo Red
911 1965 300760 White SOLD
911 1971S S/T 2.5
914-6 1970 GT 2.3
Look for me at a track near you!
Early S Reg #2699
https://www.facebook.com/#!/MachineMotorsports
What was it rubbing on the exhaust or the half shaft? hard to tell with pics, but looks like exhaust(?)
What exhaust is on the car, that would be where I would start to look for clearance issues. I dont think changing camber will help that. in opening the post I was assuming a tire rubbing on a front shock cover. this makes me question the exhaust bends.
Regards
As mentioned above the rubbing is not from ride height. Ride height should not be checked by fender height but by the difference between hub center and torsion bar center.
David
'73 S Targa #0830 2.7 MFI rebuilt to RS specs
This is good info, Why not check height ground to fender?
As for the rubbing it is not the exhaust...it was but that's a different story.
It seems to be the half shaft that is rubbing under compression??
Last edited by Fubawu; 09-17-2013 at 11:55 AM.
911 1967S 308470
[B]911 1965 301946 Irish Green
[B]911 1965 302962 Polo Red
911 1965 300760 White SOLD
911 1971S S/T 2.5
914-6 1970 GT 2.3
Look for me at a track near you!
Early S Reg #2699
https://www.facebook.com/#!/MachineMotorsports
It looks like the upper dust shield is rubbing which shouldn't be effected by ride height. The marks are vertical and if the half shaft was rubbing i would expect some rotary type marks. The relationship betweem the lower shock and halhshaft remains fairly constant (limited range of movement that close to the pivot point) but note the marks in the 2nd pic. Most dust sheilds can be easily moved so they are more central.
Jeff Eelkema
69E (project)
S Reg #1431
Aust TYP 901 #132
I notice you have a 71 car, what year trailing arms do you have?
Early S Registry member #90
R Gruppe member #138
Fort Worth Tx.
72 trailing arms, could that be an issue?
That might be the issue what arms are compatible with a 71? Now that I think of it when my friend and I changed
it the shaft was not centred the same as the original arms. i.e. the dust shield was closer to the rear of the body.
Last edited by Fubawu; 09-18-2013 at 08:21 AM.
911 1967S 308470
[B]911 1965 301946 Irish Green
[B]911 1965 302962 Polo Red
911 1965 300760 White SOLD
911 1971S S/T 2.5
914-6 1970 GT 2.3
Look for me at a track near you!
Early S Reg #2699
https://www.facebook.com/#!/MachineMotorsports
The rear shocks on my '72 are bolted on the inboard side of the trailing arm.
1972 911 Narrow-Body Group 4 Project - On The Road.
You've just solved your problem, 72 arms don't (easily) work. The mounting point into the rear cross member is different, as is the mounting point of the shock bottom into the arm. Easy answer is go back to 71 arms. If you want a fight they can be made to work, do a search , plenty of posts on this.Originally Posted by Fubawu
Early S Registry member #90
R Gruppe member #138
Fort Worth Tx.
Thanks Ed! I'm going to see what is involved to make it work. The reason
I swapped the arms is one of my original arms was cracked. Are the differences
noticeable to the eye?
911 1967S 308470
[B]911 1965 301946 Irish Green
[B]911 1965 302962 Polo Red
911 1965 300760 White SOLD
911 1971S S/T 2.5
914-6 1970 GT 2.3
Look for me at a track near you!
Early S Reg #2699
https://www.facebook.com/#!/MachineMotorsports
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote