Spring question

[Pnasty]

I have no clue what spring rates etc. correspond to in the real world for driving. I like the look of the CJPP springs and the BMR performance. Can someone help me compare the two? As far as I remember they are an equal drop, how will the two stack up from a handling and ride perspective? thanks :cheers:

Sponsored

 

[LHousePhoto]

[ame="[MEDIA=youtube]hGZRairqHNI[/MEDIA]"]This video explains spring rates a bit.[/ame]

 

[Pnasty]

Okay that was informative but I understand that much, its basic logic. I'm just asking specifically for application on the GT how do our options stack up to each other in real world situations. Thanks for the video though

 

[wildcatgoal]

BMR springs vs. CJPP are notably different.

BMR:
- 1.2" Front
- .5" Rear Drop
- 170lb/in Front Spring Rate (Linear)
- 740lb/in Rear Spring Rate (Linear)

CJPP (basically the Eibach Prokit rear, Sportline front)
- 1.5" Front Drop
- 1" Rear Drop
- 182-217 lbs/in Front Spring Rate (Progressive)
- 799 lbs/in Rear Spring Rate (Linear)

The CJPPs are going to lower the car more (top of tire basically level with fender, there'bouts). Both will have a relative rake stance. The CJPPs are a stiffer spring, not by a whole bunch (relatively, anyway) but the front one is progressive, which some folks don't like and some would argue the top end of its range is entering into "you should get better dampers territory".

If you're in it for looks, well... just ask yourself how low do you want to go? Both setups are going to "look the same" from a rake perspective, more or less, but one is going to be lower than the other. I personally think Eibach Sportlines are too low in the front and the CJPP springs use the Eibach Sportline front spring (essentially). That is why I would go with the Eibach Prokit or Steeda Ultralite Linears (a 1.2"-ish drop front, 1" in the back). But on some cars that ends up leaving the front a little higher looking than the rear still. In come BMR, where the back is only lowered .5" which actually eliminates a lot of wheel gap and ensures that the back doesn't end up looking lower than the front but just about even (with a 1.2" drop up front). Also a nice spring if you are going to load your trunk up with stereo equipment or your hockey bags or whatever most of the time and for 20" wheels with 35 aspect tires.

This commentary from my research and some real life observations.

Frankly I haven't found a spring set I do like consistently. Some cars a spring looks good, others it looks like the front wheel gap is more than the rear. Generally though with the BMR springs, I have not seen that variation - which could just be luck of the draw in photo quality and perspective, but that is reassuring. Unfortunately, BMR's spring rates don't quite match what I'm hoping for... but I probably should car less about that because I'm not a spring engineering expert.

 

[Pnasty]

BMR springs vs. CJPP are notably different.

BMR:
- 1.2" Front
- .5" Rear Drop
- 170lb/in Front Spring Rate (Linear)
- 740lb/in Rear Spring Rate (Linear)

CJPP (basically the Eibach Prokit rear, Sportline front)
- 1.5" Front Drop
- 1" Rear Drop
- 182-217 lbs/in Front Spring Rate (Progressive)
- 799 lbs/in Rear Spring Rate (Linear)

The CJPPs are going to lower the car more (top of tire basically level with fender, there'bouts). Both will have a relative rake stance. The CJPPs are a stiffer spring, not by a whole bunch (relatively, anyway) but the front one is progressive, which some folks don't like and some would argue the top end of its range is entering into "you should get better dampers territory".

If you're in it for looks, well... just ask yourself how low do you want to go? Both setups are going to "look the same" from a rake perspective, more or less, but one is going to be lower than the other. I personally think Eibach Sportlines are too low in the front and the CJPP springs use the Eibach Sportline front spring (essentially). That is why I would go with the Eibach Prokit or Steeda Ultralite Linears (a 1.2"-ish drop front, 1" in the back). But on some cars that ends up leaving the front a little higher looking than the rear still. In come BMR, where the back is only lowered .5" which actually eliminates a lot of wheel gap and ensures that the back doesn't end up looking lower than the front but just about even (with a 1.2" drop up front). Also a nice spring if you are going to load your trunk up with stereo equipment or your hockey bags or whatever most of the time and for 20" wheels with 35 aspect tires.

This commentary from my research and some real life observations.

Frankly I haven't found a spring set I do like consistently. Some cars a spring looks good, others it looks like the front wheel gap is more than the rear. Generally though with the BMR springs, I have not seen that variation - which could just be luck of the draw in photo quality and perspective, but that is reassuring. Unfortunately, BMR's spring rates don't quite match what I'm hoping for... but I probably should car less about that because I'm not a spring engineering expert.

this is exactly what I needed, thank you :cheers:

Sponsored