Almost There...
- Thread starter Phil W
- Start date
AmDaMan said:
I seriously doubt it handles better just slammed on its arse. Lowering a car excessively sends the castor and camber completely out thus reducing the tyres contact patch with the road. The only way to have a stupidly low car handle well is if it has fully adjustable top mounts and wishbones but this would be useless for a road car as they are solid and would need to be rebuilt all the time as well as having a bone-crunchingly hard ride. Also with a torsion bar rear setup with a front thats stupidly low then you will need uprated torsion bars if you want to match the spring rate at the front of the car. If you don't, this will again unbalance the handling. And finally on a torsion bar setup you do not want the rear lower than the front, as this can cause the car to excessively snap oversteer when cornering hard.
Far too low at the rear. Why do people lower more at the rear than the front? It looks crap 
Don't get me wrong, I like lowered cars (mine scrapes the tarmac on coilovers), but not when it is lower at the rear that it is at the front.
Should be the same at the front and back, or if anything slightly higher at the rear. That looks much better than dragging the arse around.
Don't get me wrong, I like lowered cars (mine scrapes the tarmac on coilovers), but not when it is lower at the rear that it is at the front.
Should be the same at the front and back, or if anything slightly higher at the rear. That looks much better than dragging the arse around.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2003
- Posts
- 2,872
- Location
- Manchester
If cars could be homosexual, that would be the Richard Simmons of the car world 
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,562
- Location
- Falling...
It's far too low and I'm not convinced by the "handles better" argument in this case. The mirrors don't do it for me either.
However other than that it looks great.
However other than that it looks great.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,224
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
great advice said:If cars could be homosexual, that would be the Richard Simmons of the car world
Ahahaha, yet another classic!
The car looks ok cept its too low and i don't like the mirrors, sell it for 3.5 imho.
- Joined
- 3 May 2004
- Posts
- 17,705
- Location
- Kapitalist Republik of Surrey
Well I disagree with all of you on this one. I like my cars low, this one has a proper man's lowering job, so it gets thumbs up. Nice work Phil W 
Not like these half assed 20mm lowering jobs. 1. what the hell is 20mm? 2. What's the point in lowering something under an inch? Either lower it properly or don't bother
However I would drop the front a bit more as it does have a bit of a tail drag to it. But that's probably just the photo doing it...
Not like these half assed 20mm lowering jobs. 1. what the hell is 20mm? 2. What's the point in lowering something under an inch? Either lower it properly or don't bother However I would drop the front a bit more as it does have a bit of a tail drag to it. But that's probably just the photo doing it...
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,562
- Location
- Falling...
Personally I reckon 30mm up at the back and 20mm up at the front would make it look a lot more sorted.
Jonny69 said:Well I disagree with all of you on this one. I like my cars low, this one has a proper man's lowering job, so it gets thumbs up. Nice work Phil W
For me it's not so much the amount it's been lowered, I do like a tarmac scraping car. I just hate the back being lower than the front.
GT3 said:
Well as it's a clio on 17"'s I think my low is a little different from his. It's 40mm on the front and slightly more on the rear (I was going to strip the seats out of the back).
I can't say i've noticed any of your symptoms. The ride is firm but not 'bone crunching' Also I don't experience oversteer, but maybe this is because it's too damn slow, but doesn't kick out at say a roundabout at speed. It does understeer on some sharp corners if taken too fast though..
Why do people lower the rear more then the fronts? Do they enjoy lots of understeer? You want it equal, or if anythign lower at the front, but you only want a tad extra on the front unless you like dragging. If you have the rears lower then your rear tyres have more load on them then usual, but whats the point of that on a FWD car? At stock it will be the fronts that will lose traction first, so you want to give more grip to the fronts, not the rears.
If i was you i would be tempted to swap the springs around, though it will mean it will make your rear break from you more often so be ready for it. That way though you will be able to do corners faster. Thoguh i would go back to the springs it came with.
If i was you i would be tempted to swap the springs around, though it will mean it will make your rear break from you more often so be ready for it. That way though you will be able to do corners faster. Thoguh i would go back to the springs it came with.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 11,919
- Location
- SE England
Low? That's nothing
I have 20mm of clearance at worst
(going back up soon mind )
But anyway - I digress.
You need darker wheels, preferably black to match the trim, and lose the tres dull mesh in the bonnet - looks silly. Other than that, very clean!
(amen to raising it though, does look like a Rover P6 that's been used for banger racing)
I have 20mm of clearance at worst
(going back up soon mind
)
But anyway - I digress.
You need darker wheels, preferably black to match the trim, and lose the tres dull mesh in the bonnet - looks silly. Other than that, very clean!
(amen to raising it though, does look like a Rover P6 that's been used for banger racing)
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}