Question for those who have fitted lowered suspension to 996

X51 996 · 14 Mar 2017

Hi,

My 996 (2003 C2) has the factory X74 suspension option which I understand is approximately a 30mm drop from the standard Carrera ride height.

As this is factory fit it has obviously got the shorter yellow Bilstein dampers, different springs and ARBs etc as well as shorter bump stops and different top mounts (on the front at least!)

I understand from a quick look online that the camber setting is fairly neutral on the front at -0.15 to -0.45 and about -1.3 to 1.5 on the rear (in minutes and degrees, I'm typing from my iPhone!)

I am guessing as mine doesn't have the adjustable lower control arms (GT3 type?) the camber can only be dialed in/out with the slotted adjustment on the top mountings.

What do people on here do with their lowered 996s to get correct geo then? Are they replacing the top mounts with aftermarket or X74 type parts or are they fitting different coffin arms and adjusting from there?

Or is there a large enough degree of adjustment at the top mounting point to compensate for even a ~ 30mm drop?

Or are people just running a much more aggressive level of camber - by choice or having to as a trade off for the drop in ride height? Are the factory geo settings not ideal then - how much camber would people want for a mainly road based 996?

Any info or input appreciated.

Thanks,

Will

Jamesx19 · 14 Mar 2017

Hi Will,

Just done this to my C2 which originally had MO30 fitted from the factory. Fitted the H&R springs which give a 30mm drop. Car Geo's up fine with pretty much everything in the middle of its adjustment range, inc the front slotted holes for the top mounts. Mine set at 48' neg front and 1deg 40' at the rear. All the top mounts etc are standard C2 parts.

Cheers James

Marky911 · 14 Mar 2017

Hi Will, I'm always wary of entering suspension discussions as to be honest I'm not an expert. I just know what I like but that's just me.

All I would say is if you're happy how your car drives on the standard settings then just ensure an alignment every now and then (mileage dependant) to ensure it's all as it should be.

As James says you'll have no problem achieving factory figures with a factory setup or even a 30mm drop. The main issues people hit with stock setup is not being able to add enough negative camber if that's their thing. That's where adjustable bottom arms or bushes come in.

I personally don't like how RWD 911s drive with minimal neg camber and when they're running more camber on the rear (as standard). I feel the car is a bit slow to turn in and the front wants to push on in bends, hence I always go for negative camber.

My current setup was done quickly last year as I literally drive past my alignment place on the way back from my Indy and I'd had adjustable camber bushes fitted (996.1 C2).
It's running 2 degrees on the front and about 1.5 in the back. This does make it twitchy over really badly surfaced roads however turn in and cornering are great.

Ideally I'll have it set to 1.5-1.8 front and 1-1.2 rear next spring. I'll run it how it is for this summer as I know my rear bushes are showing wear and I have a full overhaul planned over next winter.

It's such a personal choice. Go over 1.5 degrees though and you will see your inner edges of the tyres wear first if you sit on the motorway a lot. It may not be drastic but with a set of Michelins costing £800, it's worth bearing in mind.

X51 996 · 14 Mar 2017

Jamesx19 said:
Hi Will,

Just done this to my C2 which originally had MO30 fitted from the factory. Fitted the H&R springs which give a 30mm drop. Car Geo's up fine with pretty much everything in the middle of its adjustment range, inc the front slotted holes for the top mounts. Mine set at 48' neg front and 1deg 40' at the rear. All the top mounts etc are standard C2 parts.

Cheers James

Hi James,

Thanks for the reply - very useful, exactly what I was asking for

So with yours being an original M030 car, did it have the standard top mounts on the front or the ones for lowered cars? Did you re-use the mounts or replace them?

Ie

These:

https://www.design911.co.uk/mobile/#part;id=127543

Or these:

https://www.design911.co.uk/mobile/#part;id=127133

Thanks,

Will

X51 996 · 14 Mar 2017

Marky911 said:
Hi Will, I'm always wary of entering suspension discussions as to be honest I'm not an expert. I just know what I like but that's just me.

All I would say is if you're happy how your car drives on the standard settings then just ensure an alignment every now and then (mileage dependant) to ensure it's all as it should be.

As James says you'll have no problem achieving factory figures with a factory setup or even a 30mm drop. The main issues people hit with stock setup is not being able to add enough negative camber if that's their thing. That's where adjustable bottom arms or bushes come in.

I personally don't like how RWD 911s drive with minimal neg camber and when they're running more camber on the rear (as standard). I feel the car is a bit slow to turn in and the front wants to push on in bends, hence I always go for negative camber.

My current setup was done quickly last year as I literally drive past my alignment place on the way back from my Indy and I'd had adjustable camber bushes fitted (996.1 C2).
It's running 2 degrees on the front and about 1.5 in the back. This does make it twitchy over really badly surfaced roads however turn in and cornering are great.

Ideally I'll have it set to 1.5-1.8 front and 1-1.2 rear next spring. I'll run it how it is for this summer as I know my rear bushes are showing wear and I have a full overhaul planned over next winter.

It's such a personal choice. Go over 1.5 degrees though and you will see your inner edges of the tyres wear first if you sit on the motorway a lot. It may not be drastic but with a set of Michelins costing £800, it's worth bearing in mind.

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback.

I was kind of wondering about the relation of camber with lowered ride height as I'm thinking as the strut height drops, it pivots upwards hence bringing more negative camber automatically? Hence the different strut top mounts from factory to compensate if the factory geo is for fairly neutral camber as standard.

What's your current suspension setup?

It seems as though for a more focussed drive and for better tyre contact on hard cornering/track work a bit of negative camber is desirable.

Hence by lowering and not offsetting the negative camber that is introduced (by adjusting it out using different top mounts or the other way around with adjustable lower arms) could be what most people are looking for anyway?

Sorry if this sounds confusing.

As an aside, does anyone know approx (as in a ball park figure) how many degrees of camber can be adjusted +/- using the slotted tops at the top?

And also approx how many -ve degrees of camber would be introduced with say a 10mm (M030) or 30mm drop all else being equal?

Thanks,

Will

Jamesx19 · 15 Mar 2017

Hi Will,

Good question.

This is what came off.....

These are what went on:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Porsche-9...493556?hash=item465f97c8b4:g:KssAAOSwOgdYxyR4

I could see no discernible difference between the two. Well, apart from the obvious!
So to answer your question I don't know if they were original (they look it though) and I don't know what type they were, but they were replaced with standard items, which appeared identical in design.

I did look at those for Mo30 suspension from design911 but I never called them to ask the difference. They look exactly the same. Maybe the rubber is higher spec?

X51 996 · 15 Mar 2017

Jamesx19 said:
Hi Will,

Good question.

This is what came off.....

These are what went on:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Porsche-9...493556?hash=item465f97c8b4:g:KssAAOSwOgdYxyR4

I could see no discernible difference between the two. Well, apart from the obvious!
So to answer your question I don't know if they were original (they look it though) and I don't know what type they were, but they were replaced with standard items, which appeared identical in design.

I did look at those for Mo30 suspension from design911 but I never called them to ask the difference. They look exactly the same. Maybe the rubber is higher spec?

Hi James,

Wow - they had seen better days for sure!

You've answered my question now in fact

The difference between your mounts (both the original ones shown and the new ones you fitted) and the X74 type is that the mounting points (the 3x captive bolts) are slightly offset, which is done - as far as I can work out - to compensate for the lowered ride height and the negative camber that it introduces.

If you have a look at the two links for D911 that I posted earlier you might just see on the pics - on your ones the captive bolts are central and the X74 ones the bolts are shifted across slightly by a few mm.

What I wanted to know was, if there was still sufficient adjustment to align the camber to spec using the standard mounts with a -30mm ride height. It may be a case that it puts the adjustment towards the end of the scale hence the correct mount for lowered cars see it in a more central point of the adjustment range?

I do wonder about D911 listing the X74 mounts for the M030 cars because I don't remember seeing this listed anywhere else like that, including on the Porsche PET parts catalogue? So it seems a 10mm drop Porsche don't think they're needed but perhaps the -30mm X74 ride height made them produce an alternative mount to ensure enough adjustment on the camber was available if needed.

You having confirmed that you managed to bring the camber into spec with adjustment to spare using the original type mounts is useful - thank you.

Will

Jamesx19 · 16 Mar 2017

Well what do you know?!! - I never noticed the offset before.

A mod that someone could achieve with the stock mounts judging by the price differential on D911.

Having got the standard settings for X74, but seeing Marky911's post, I'm wondering how it would feel with a smige less rear camber, and a touch more front. May try it at the end of the summer.

Question for those who have fitted lowered suspension to 996

X51 996

Trainee

Jamesx19

Hockenheim

Marky911

Portimao

X51 996

Trainee

X51 996

Trainee

Jamesx19

Hockenheim

X51 996

Trainee

Jamesx19

Hockenheim

Similar threads

Latest posts

New Threads

Porsche Model Range

Porsche 911

Porsche Hypercars

Other Current Porsche Model

Porsche Legacy Models

Forum statistics