A warning on the merits of lowering and uprating

[oliverjamesthomas]

It's MOT time again and my pride and joy C2S, (20mm lowered and uprated by a previous owner) has failed - due to a torn floorpan!

After the initial shock, I now realise when and how it happened. One dark night, not too long ago, I was on a motorway junction, in the outside of two lanes and with a wagon on my inside. As we both rounded a bend, I saw a brick in the middle of my lane and had little choice but to swerve as best I could and brace for impact. I avoided the wagon, but sadly I didn't avoid the offending brick. The result is a two inch tear in the floorpan, virtually under the pedal box.

Whilst I'm not about to revert to standard running gear, it has shown the downside of lowering an already reasonably low Porsche. I just wanted to share the experience with you all and warn of the fragility of a floorpan! Thankfully, I seem to have got away lightly. A little metal manipulation and a carefully placed seam weld should take care of the problem, so I'm considering myself lucky. Looking at the underside of the car though, it's easy to see that a great deal more damage could have been caused.

It may sound daft, but I'm now investigatuing the merits of a steel guard; something similar to those found on rally cars. With the state of the roads and the debris we see on a frequent basis, maybe it would be a good investment! Suggestions are welcome!

 

[Bertroex]

Speaking from the perspective of regularly jumping a favourite humpback bridge, i destroyed the sump of a Golf GTI Mk4. (my 911 never had a problem having all fours off the ground). A few rental cars did incur scars as well, but thats another story.

A carbon fibre sump guard protection costs about 300 pounds and is substantially lighter and I believe stronger than the metal one.

 

[Porker993]

As you say, standard ride height is plenty low enough in these days of sleeping policemen and car park ramps. I have to be careful of both in my standard C2.

 

[mbrands]

On the subject of sleeping policemen (sorry to veer off topic somewhat), I read that it somewhere it is stipulated that speedbumps may not exceed more than 10cm in height.

Can anyone confirm this ?

 

[oliverjamesthomas]

Hi Maurice

I have the invoice and alignment report from when the work was carried out. Although I'm not up on RS ride heights, the paperwork states 20mm lower than standard. Having parked next to another C2S at a show, mine appears to be significantly lower, so perhaps it is at an RS ride height. To be honest, although the handling is truly fantastic, you are correct on the care over bumps factor - it can actually be a complete pain in the neck, because you find yourself slowing to walking pace in order to negotiate speed bumps , etc. Still, it does heighten your attention to the road! Having lived with the car for a period of time though, I'd consider it right on the verge of impracticality.

Thankfully, the problem has been pretty easily rectified. I now have a nice straight seam weld under my feet, although we also identified another similar 'injury' in the rear offside footwell that has been remedied in a similar manner. I might have to put the lottery on this weekend - I got away with removing only the carpets and sound deadening and managed to avoid the wiring channel!

Regards

Oliver

 

[Melv]

Oliver -IME I think the brick would have damaged the underside regardless of whether it was lowered or not...

Bad luck and thank goodness it didn't go thru your screen!!

 

[oliverjamesthomas]

Mel

That is a very good point. The other thing to come out of it all is that as we had it on the ramps anyway, the catalysts came off and the x-over pipes went on, which is something I've been meaning to get around to for ages. The result soon put a smile back on my face!!

Regards

Oliver

 

[38F3E1]

I am assuming you have to put them back on to pass the MOT?

 

[oliverjamesthomas]

Hi Ian

That's an interesting point. Whilst we were putting them on, the MOT tester told me he'd recently seen a car that had by-pass pipes on it and it went through its test without problem. His, (possible), suggestion is that as modern engines become more and more efficient, emissions are reducing and the effect of a catalyst becomes more marginal in the overall scheme of things. If an engine is in a good state, the emissions will be well within the tolerances of the MOT test. I can halfway see this, because I do know of a car that was on the rollers and they had to nip out and get fuel because they were running low. They put Optimax in and saw a three brake horse increase over the previous results. Other environmental factors may have had a part in it, but maybe it's a prime example of engine efficiency and it does get you thinking!

The swap was that simple, I don't think replacing the catalysts will be that difficult, should it be needed. I've used stainless fixings and plenty of PX24, so hopefully things won't sieze up. The whole job took abour half an hour, although the car was up on a ramp. Scrabbling around on the floor wouldn't be quite so easy!

Regards,

Oliver