1994-2002 [Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
I found that getting the kit less the lower brace did not save much money VS individual parts. It is the usual product bundling issue. So you will have to see how the numbers stack up when you get quotes.
The steel sherical bearings will not transmit and vertical components of road shock. The road shock component that will transmit would be in the fore-aft direction. The wheel couples to the lower arm via the ball joint. The urethane is not in the path, as it only serves to connect the lateral control arm to the lower arm. So the only supple components in the fore-aft direction would be the tire itself, and strut top mount. For most road surface irregularities, I think that these forces are minor. I have not heard others complain.
And fore-aft load componets at the tire contact patch will want to create rotational shock acceleration of the wheel tire unit. And the reaction forces of that rotional dynamic at the wheel bearing will be divided between the shock tower and the lower arm with the strut being the lever.
Have you considered the SAS sway bar?
I thought that the motorsport valves was not a piston type, and that it was rebuildable but failed too often.
So steering is very good. I have some harshess that has reciently developed. This I assume it is the shocks wearing out. If the rescue kit was responsible for the harshness, I would have seen it from day one. So I feel quite confident in stating that the rescue kit did not produce a harsh ride. I drove for a long time with the kit and 38PSI in winter and summer tires. Then things changed and dropped the pressure to 34PSI which made a big difference.
Turn is very responsive and very impressive. The steering is less rubbery. So is you hold on tight, you can control the steering under hard acceleration on rutted pavements etc. Before, holding the wheel still had nothing to do with control and the suspension was a rubber snake that you ahd to fight with.
It is hard to say what sub selection of the kit would be a good choice. Is the criterion saving labor or being cost effective?
You will see a profound inprovement with the rack clamp and brace. Look at the amount of rubber at the RH clamp. I had the big aluminum rack and the amount of rubber in the mount was quite small. The C900's had the rack hard bolted to the subframe. No rubber, and no cookie sheet firewall to deflect or make noise.
Because the steering is very precise, it is very responsive to all inputs, including body roll. So I do feel the shocks with 127000 miles are allowing lane change type manouvers to develop body roll that interacts with the steering. I think that new shocks would help me there a lot, and that the SAS sway bar for $16x would also contribute to better vehicle dynamics. So the sway bar is cheap and easy to install. But the shock, plus labor, plus thrust bearing etc etc will be good hit, and I need a new rear caliper and teh lightning just blew a $1000 hole in my wallet. Maybe I can get these thing done just in time for driving in the snow and ice!
Remember to get lower toe in settings. With the stock system, when underway, the rubber suspension bits would yield to reduce the running toe in angle. With hard suspension compoents, the running toe in will be close the the static toe-in setting. Forces in the steering system will be high and the steering will be heavy as a result of the induced friction in the four ball joints. The tire squirm would also create higher wear rates. And when driving over icey spots, you will get the impression that the suspension is trying to decide what wheel has traction and what wheel is side slipping. That does not inspire confidence.
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
