View Single Post
      06-13-2017, 11:01 PM   #43
Mvez
Private First Class
124
Rep
137
Posts

Drives: 2013 M3 coupe
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Louisville, KY

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_s View Post
Mvez very cool info on the built-in helper spring theory. Not shitting on you or what Bilstein says by calling it a "theory"; obviously good enough for 997 gt3/rs, but curious as to why not actual helper spring set up. But very cool to know it's a linear rear in that sense.

Yes; I forgone that thought on the KWCS after purchasing; the twin tube is definitely not track oriented and definitely leaves it far behind when talking about upper echelon suspension groups.

As for spring rate, would you happen to know what the range is? 570/800 to jump to a more track rate like 700/1000 I'd only assume you'd have to revalve and adjust.
It's not a theory, it's just a fact of what the spring is. Why they use it? Because H&R supplies all the springs for every Bilstein kit, and they engineered something that works. Same spring on the GT3 was H&R. Why wouldn't they go with a solution that packages better for their kit? Most other smaller shock companies don't have huge supply partnerships like this, so they use whatever is easier or they choose to use, which is fine too. Both types accomplish the same thing. The only difference is the twin spring setup makes for easier main spring changes. Big deal. If I want to change rates, I'll replace it. Quit overthinking the springs....

No revalving is needed for higher spring rates such as 700-1000. All performance, adjustable shocks have valving ranges which will handle 20%-30% more spring rate without any issues.

That is the same for MCS, JRZ, KW, Bilstein, etc. etc. They will all tell you the same thing. You want to use 700-1000, no problem. Slap them on.
__________________
'18 GT3 - 6MT
'13 E92 M3 - street/track
'07 Cayman S - track car
'15 FRS - Sprint racecar
'00 Miata - Enduro racecar
Appreciate 0