Jump to content
SAU Community

M35 Aftermarket Suspension

iamhe77

By iamhe77,
in Four Door Family & Wagoneers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Daleo Grand Master

Daleo

Posted
Posted (edited)

When I enquired with Just Jap they didnt believe they could get it to above stock height - they thought they could get JUST to stock height.. but no higher. They, apparently, asked the workshop next to them who fitted the BC's to their workshop/demo car and that was what they thought also. I are teh confused.

Don't be teh confuse...

I'm with Iain on this one. You can get around an inch (possibly more) over Std height on an RS or RX.:thumbsup:

Edited by Daleo
  • Replies 465
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

scotty nm35
scotty nm35

Ive heard Northshore do one of the cleanest compliance jobs, unfortunately mine wasn't done by them. Cam, I have worked out it was the silicone blocking the drain lip that caused the water ingress, al

Posted Images

Dunc Mentor

Dunc

Posted
Posted

i can only go by my own.

is it possible the two different type also have different adjustment capabilities?

Possible. Or they had no idea what was going on. You woulda thought they'd do what they can to get the sale - but they actively discouraged me from getting them because I wanted to go a touch higher than stock.

Dunc Mentor

Dunc

Posted
Posted

Don't be teh confuse...

I'm with Iain on this one. You can get around an inch (possibly more) over Std height on an RS or RX.:thumbsup:

Its possible their demo car was an ARX I guess; which may account for that "Not going higher than stock" issue they had (Given the ARX sits 2cm higher than RS/RX).

Irrespective, if Dale and Iain are suggesting they'll go higher than stock RS/RX then that's good enough for me :thumbsup:

Sunkist Grand Master

Sunkist

Posted
Posted

Its possible their demo car was an ARX I guess; which may account for that "Not going higher than stock" issue they had (Given the ARX sits 2cm higher than RS/RX).

Irrespective, if Dale and Iain are suggesting they'll go higher than stock RS/RX then that's good enough for me :thumbsup:

yeh i would be saying its an ARX but just out of curiosity. why would you wanna go higher then stock??

Commsman Veteran

Commsman

Posted
Posted (edited)

OK guys, I'm after some insight on spring rates. I've read this thread (& more) & still not sure what the deal is.

Looks like I will be getting BC's but was wanting a softer ride, without bouncing/wallowing etc, and was told spring rates can be specified +/- 2Kg/mm from normal. I guess that is so they are not too far from the ideal match for the dampers. Great, it all makes sense so far.

So, I start writing down the spring rates from various c/overs (beginning of thread) and I see that most have the fronts higher than the rears. Eg Silk Road F16 R10, Dolphin F9 R8, HKS F10 R6.8, AiStar F8 R7 & on & on.

Then there are exceptions with rears higher than front. Eg Nismo F8.3 R9.2, Tein GF Wgn F10 R11, Tein Superwgn F6 R7.2 and BC's (BR) F10 R12

Then there are a few with equal rates, or very close, & one very low (Kenstyle F5.4 R5.4).

What does all this tell me then? Maybe there is bugger all difference between a few kg/mm when you're bum is in the seat. Surely the difference between 5.4kg/mm and 16kg/mm would be noticeable, but I'm not sure that 8 - 10 or 10 - 12 would make a huge difference. Should the rears be higher? It would help if putting big loads in the back...

Does anyone have anything constructive (anecdotal or fact) to add before I go and order my BC's with 2kg/mm less on the front and rear? BTW that would put them pretty close to Nismo specs - at least you'd think they would have done some testing LOL ???

Cheers, Leon.

Edited by Commsman
Daleo Grand Master

Daleo

Posted
Posted

It's a shame you're not close enough for a test drive; I think you'd be surprised at how compliant the BC's actually are; if you rode in my car you would never know it had coilovers.

ironpaw Veteran

ironpaw

Posted
Posted

yeah id have to agree, with a softer spring you may find it does wallow around a bit. its a VERY heavy car so firmer spring rates wont be as noticable than say a 1200kg silvia or something.

I have to say with the 16kg front springs, though it seems overly firm on paper, the ride is not too bad...

sure hitting a pothole at high speed's gonna rattle you a bit but usually its pretty civil...

Daleo Grand Master

Daleo

Posted
Posted

The thing with the spring rate is; it's just a raw number.

You need to take into account the attachment point is almost halfway along the lower arm; front and rear, so you have a fair amount of machanical advantage acting on the spring, which certainly justifies a heavier rate.

And as Iain & Jet have said when correctly matched to a damper, the spring rate manifests differently.

I'm far from an expert, but as I say, the ride in mine is not at all harsh. My missus wouldn't tolerate it after my last car.:whistling:

Commsman Veteran

Commsman

Posted
Posted (edited)

Thanks guys. I've heard everyone say they're happy before, but I'm hard to convince pinch.gif . I understand (a bit more now, thanks) there is no relevance between spring rates in other cars & ours, due to different weights/mounting points etc, but why such a big spread of numbers available for the same car? I mean, just how soft would 5.4kg/mm springs be? Probably ridiculous, but then you go up to 16's & they are obviously firm (Silk Roads, seriously?).

I wish I was able to go for a quick spin in one of your cars. That would make the decision really easy I reckon. However, since I'm stuck with "opinions", let me pose this question: What difference does damper adjustment make compared to spring rate when determining ride compliance (softness)?

Eg, I've heard that most people using BC's have their damper setting at the low end of the scale for everyday use. Probably in the softest or bottom 3 or 4 clicks at most. Except for Scotty (with the V1's) who uses about the middle (15) & everyone says it is comfortable. See, I'd be happier with the 10/12 rates supplied if most guys were about middle of the adjustment scale for everyday use, & perhaps knocked it back 8 clicks for carrying their Grandma (or pregnant wife) around & increased it a few clicks for driving hard (track?). But when you are already at the softest setting, you've got no where to go except harder.

Is there a logical answer to my question (in bold)?

BTW, I appreciate everyone's patience. This is one decision that is hard (expensive?) to undo if I get it wrong :blush: .

Edited by Commsman
phat300 Enthusiast

phat300

Posted
Posted

I live near you (well just up in brisbane) and i have the BC's fitted on my, you are welcome to come a take a test drive with me

Thanks guys. I've heard everyone say they're happy before, but I'm hard to convince pinch.gif . I understand (a bit more now, thanks) there is no relevance between spring rates in other cars & ours, due to different weights/mounting points etc, but why such a big spread of numbers available for the same car? I mean, just how soft would 5.4kg/mm springs be? Probably ridiculous, but then you go up to 16's & they are obviously firm (Silk Roads, seriously?).

I wish I was able to go for a quick spin in one of your cars. That would make the decision really easy I reckon. However, since I'm stuck with "opinions", let me pose this question: What difference does damper adjustment make compared to spring rate when determining ride compliance (softness)?

Eg, I've heard that most people using BC's have their damper setting at the low end of the scale for everyday use. Probably in the softest or bottom 3 or 4 clicks at most. Except for Scotty (with the V1's) who uses about the middle (15) & everyone says it is comfortable. See, I'd be happier with the 10/12 rates supplied if most guys were about middle of the adjustment scale for everyday use, & perhaps knocked it back 8 clicks for carrying their Grandma (or pregnant wife) around & increased it a few clicks for driving hard (track?). But when you are already at the softest setting, you've got no where to go except harder.

Is there a logical answer to my question (in bold)?

BTW, I appreciate everyone's patience. This is one decision that is hard (expensive?) to undo if I get it wrong :blush: .

Commsman Veteran

Commsman

Posted
Posted

I live near you (well just up in brisbane) and i have the BC's fitted on my, you are welcome to come a take a test drive with me

Thanks, I might just take you up on that :thumbsup: . I'll be passing thru Brissy a few times in the next few weeks. Otherwise, are you able to make the cruise on the 9th of July (if it's still on)?

Cheers, Leon.

ironpaw Veteran

ironpaw

Posted
Posted

I had mine adjusted to the hardest setting up front for the past few days...can't really tell a huge difference....

BTW is it easy to f**k up the adjustment knob? I'm always scared I've overtightened it and pissed $1k down the drain...

Commsman Veteran

Commsman

Posted
Posted

I had mine adjusted to the hardest setting up front for the past few days...can't really tell a huge difference....

That's interesting. So what you're telling me is your suspension is either hard or rock hard lol.

Guys with the BC's reckon they can tell the difference with just a click or two.

ironpaw Veteran

ironpaw

Posted
Posted

That's interesting. So what you're telling me is your suspension is either hard or rock hard lol.

Guys with the BC's reckon they can tell the difference with just a click or two.

Really? Mine is only 8 click adjustable. The bcs are 30 clicks. Mmm beats me.....this IS my first car with coilovers though...

zei20l Grand Master

zei20l

Posted
Posted

yup the softest setting on mine is pretty pussy, but its firm, like a new car.

i run mine around 7-8 at the rear, and about the same at the front, maybe a little softer so it doesnt rattle the entire front end off the car

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • hoodedreeper
      Chris' Toyota Mark ii JZX110

      By hoodedreeper · Posted

      Next on the to-do list was an oil and filter change. Nothing exciting to add here except the oil filter is in a really stupid place (facing the engine mount/subframe/steering rack). GReddy do a relocation kit which puts it towards the gearbox, I would have preferred towards the front but there's obviously a lot more stuff there. Something I'll have to look at for the next service perhaps. First time using Valvoline oil, although I can't see it being any different to most other brands Nice... The oil filter location... At least the subframe wont rust any time soon I picked up a genuine fuel filter, this is part of the fuel pump assembly inside the fuel tank. Access can be found underneath the rear seat, you'll see this triangular cover Remove the 3x plastic 10mm nuts and lift the cover up, pushing the rubber grommet through The yellow fuel line clips push out in opposite directions, remove these completely. The two moulded fuel lines can now pull upwards to disconnect, along with the wire electrical plug. There's 8x 8mm bolts that secure the black retaining ring. The fuel pump assembly is now ready to lift out. Be mindful of the fuel hose on the side, the hose clamp on mine was catching the hose preventing it from lifting up The fuel pump/filter has an upper and lower section held on by 4 pressure clips. These did take a little bit of force, it sounded like the plastic tabs were going to break but they didn't (don't worry!) The lower section helps mount the fuel pump, there's a circular rubber gasket/grommet/seal thing on the bottom where the sock is. Undo the hose clip on the short fuel hose on the side to disconnect it from the 3 way distribution pipe to be able to lift the upper half away. Don't forget to unplug the fuel pump too! There's a few rubber O rings that will need transferring to the new filter housing, I show these in the video at the bottom of this write up. Reassembly is the reverse Here's a photo of the new filter installed, you'll be able to see where the tabs are more clearing against the yellow OEM plastic Once the assembly is re-installed, I turned the engine over a few times to help build up fuel pressure. I did panic when the car stopped turning over but I could hear the fuel pump making a noise. It eventually started and has been fine since. Found my 'lucky' coin underneath the rear seat too The Youtube video can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLJ65pmQt44&t=6s
    • hoodedreeper
      Chris' Toyota Mark ii JZX110

      By hoodedreeper · Posted

      It was picked up on the MOT/Inspection that the offside front wheel bearing had excessive play along with the ball joint. It made sense to do both sides so I sourced a pair of spare IS200 hubs to do the swap. Unfortunately I don't have any photos of the strip down but here's a quick run down. On the back of the hub is a large circular dust cover, using a flat head screw driver and a mallet I prised it off. Underneath will reveal a 32mm hub nut (impact gun recommended). With the hub nut removed the ABS ring can be removed (I ended up using a magnetic pick up tool to help). Next up is to remove the stub axle, this was a little trickier due to limited tools. I tried a 3 leg puller but the gap between the hub and stub axle wasn't enough for the legs to get in and under. Next option was a lump hammer and someone pulling the stub axle at the same time. After a few heavy hits it released. The lower bearing race had seized itself onto the stub axle, which was fine because I was replacing them anyway. With the upper bearing race removed and the grease cleaned off they looked like this The left one looked pristine inside but gave us the most trouble. The right one had some surface rust but came apart in a single hit, figure that out?! I got a local garage to press the new wheel bearings in, reassemble was the opposite and didn't take long at all. Removing the hub itself was simple. Starting with removing the brake caliper, 2x 14mm bolts for the caliper slider and 2x 19mm? for the carrier > hub bolts. I used a cable tie to secure the caliper to the upper arm so it was out of the way, there's a 10mm bolt securing the ABS sensor on. With the brake disc removed from the hub next are the three castle nuts for the upper and lower ball joints and track rod end. Two of these had their own R clip and one split pin. A few hits with the hammer and they're released (I left the castle nuts on by a couple of turns), the track rod ends gave me the most grief and I may have nipped the boots (oops). Fitting is the reversal and is very quick and easy to do. The lower ball joints are held onto the hub by 2x 17mm bolts. The castle nut did increase in socket size to 22mm from memory (this may vary from supplier) The two front tyres weren't in great condition, so I had those replaced with some budget tyres for the time being. I'll be replacing the wheels and tyres in the future, this was to get me on the road without the worry of the police hassling me.
    • Haggerty
      RB25DE NEO with Haltech ECU

      By Haggerty · Posted

      Yep, the closest base tune available was for the GTT, I went with that and made all the logical changes I could find to convert it to Naturally Aspirated. It will rev fine in Neutral to redline but it will be cutting nearly 50% fuel the whole way.  If I let it tune the fuel map to start with that much less fuel it wont run right and has a hard time applying corrections.  These 50% cuts are with a fuel map already about half of what the GTT tune had.  I was having a whole lot of bogging when applying any throttle but seem to have fixed that for no load situations with very aggressive transient throttle settings. I made the corrections to my injectors with data I found for them online, FBCJC100 flowing 306cc.  I'll have to look to see if I can find the Cam section. I have the Bosch 4.9 from Haltech. My manifold pressure when watching it live is always in -5.9 psi/inHg
    • brillo
      Leak from Tokico BM50 Brake Master Cylinder

      By brillo · Posted

      Hi My Tokico BM50 Brake master cylinder has a leak from the hole between the two outlets (M10x1) for brake pipes, I have attached a photo. Can anyone tell me what that hole is and what has failed to allow brake fluid to escape from it, I have looked on line and asked questions on UK forums but can not find the answer, if anyone can enlighten me I would be most grateful.
    • MBS206
      Cas issue

      By MBS206 · Posted

      It will be a software setting. I don't believe many on here ever used AEM. And they're now a discontinued product,that's really hard to find any easy answers on. If it were Link or Haltech, someone would be able to just send you a ECU file though.
×
×
  • Create New...