Menu toggle

anyone any pix of S2's with spacers?

mik_ok

mik_ok

New member
I'm still harbouring a (frankly quite unhealthy) lust for some 17" Cup1s.

The original Design90s have been refurbed and are spotless, including centrecaps. Front tyres are half decent, and rears are brand new.

I therefore have absolutely no need whatsoever to get some Cups (other than the obvious tart value).

Part of my desire centres on the fact that the S2's wheels (rears in particular) look a little lost in the blistered haunches. The 9" Turbo wheels look much better.

So..... considering some spacers as a "more sensible" route forward. Maybe some simple 7mm shims on the front (threads long enough to cope with these?), and some 18mm proper bolt-on jobs on the rear?

Thoughts?

And anyone got any pix of an S2 with some spacers on?

Much obliged! [:)]
 

ORIGINAL: mik_ok

So..... considering some spacers as a "more sensible" route forward. Maybe some simple 7mm shims on the front (threads long enough to cope with these?), and some 18mm proper bolt-on jobs on the rear?
Click to expand...

Sorry to hijack this, but has anyone ever used 7mm shims? I've got some 9mm shims which is just what I need to fill the rear arches on my 924S, but there's frighteningly little thread left (hence they're still laying on a shelf in the garage). I'd have thought that 7mm shims would still be dodgy. Anyone know better?

thanks ....... Phil
 
Here are a couple of pictures of mine with 15 mm spacers all round.
I doubt all four wheel arches could look any more properly filled.

DCP_3830.JPG


DCP_3838.JPG
 
TTM - superb ~ thankyou!

They do look much better. [:)]

Did you notice any real difference in the handling? I don't really want to increase the camber sensitivity....it's quite prone to this already. In saying that 4-wheel alignment is happening as we speak.

You could have cropped your picture to remove the Alpine car in the background with the Cup1's ! [:eek:] [&o]
 
You're welcome.

I fitted the rears two years ago along with a 18 mm ARB instead of the stock 16 mm and it vastly improved overall rear stability.

To get rid of subsequent increased understeer I fitted the fronts a couple of months ago but had to have them machined prior to fitting them as they did not fit on the front as they came. Unfortunately the guy who machined them did not do it properly and they are now out of balance, resulting in front judder. I've had them off the car since and they are due to proper remachining at another place when I will have the time to go there.
Anyway, as far as influence on handling is concerned I did not notice much difference because of the annoying judder ruining the following test drive, except perhaps that the steering appears a bit heavier in tight slow corners.

Forget the Cup 1 - 944s feel best on 16". I personnally dislike very much how they feel on 17" as bigger wheels ruin what you feel through the steering wheel, IMO [8|]
 

ORIGINAL: TTM
I fitted the fronts a couple of months ago but had to have them machined prior to fitting them as they did not fit on the front as they came.

Forget the Cup 1 - 944s feel best on 16". I personnally dislike very much how they feel on 17" as bigger wheels ruin what you feel through the steering wheel, IMO [8|]
Click to expand...

So was 15mm too thick for the front wheels? How much did you try to machine off?

Interesting comments regarding 16"s vs 17"s [:)]
 
It is not too thick (friend went up to 21 mm at the front), it is an issue with the hub of the spacer. I could not explain it without pictures, sorry.
 
I've never driven a 944 with 17's (yet) but to be honest I don't think there's that much difference between 16's and 18's on a coupe with 968 castor mounts. Combine that with the fact that the pinnacle of the model (in terms of handling) the M030 968CS comes with 17's then I would be surprised if they are a negative. I stress I haven't driven one though so I could be wrong.

The spacers fill your arches nicely Thom, although the subtle extra width of rim from the 9" D90 rears would be just spot on.
 
Well, the only 944/968 I have driven with 968 castor mounts was a 968 Lux on 17" with shagged shocks, so I can't really comment.
Besides, I have driven a 951 with 968 M030 goodies on 17" (the one half pictured above) and I did not enjoy it as much as my S2. It handled definitely better and felt more stable and more efficient than my S2 (M474 and CS springs) but it did not feel as lively and rewarding to play with. It all depends wether you want a car that's as stable as a train and as such will feel a bit unsubtle when being adjusted into a corner or a car with slightly softer suspension that requires some fiddling until it has perfectly settled on its shoes just before entering the corner, like a cat continuously putting and raising his front feet before he has found the 'right' position then lies on a cushion. TGV vs ballerina, I prefer the swiftness of the latter, and it's just a matter of taste anyway. [:)]
Anyway, anything less stiff or hard than a M474 is not to be considered. The set up of the base suspension is just plain rubbish, IMO.

Here is '90 951 with 15 mm spacers at the rear on standard 9" D90s and the arch looks indeed pretty well filled as well. It looks better from the left than from the right - curiously the left rear wheel is more 'out' of the wheel arch than the right rear wheel. IIRC you chaps had talked about that in another thread, anyway.

5774B89C290346B896B22CBF1BEC98AC.jpg
 

ORIGINAL: Fen

The spacers fill your arches nicely Thom, although the subtle extra width of rim from the 9" D90 rears would be just spot on.
Click to expand...

I think the same could be said of the (even subtler) extra half inch on the Turbo D90 fronts, but if I'm gonna go to the bother (and expense) of changing my wheels I may as well do a proper job and get some Cup1s. [:)]

 
If you are fitting shims for aesthetic reasons don't go over board because they do affect handling for day to day driving alround. Wheels will be kerber more easily.

Incr'd track at the front will induce more oversteer, incr'd at the rear will counter this with more understeer, so you need to get the balance right.

I'd be inclined to fit 7mm alround, the existing wheel bolts should be able to accomodate this. Any wider requires a 2nd set of nuts/bolts incr (weight). Wider track can stress wheel bearings more so, correct adjustment is essential.

andy
 
Thanks Andy - I've pondered all of these things!

Cup1 rears are 9J ET47, so "stick oot" more due to extra width and increased offset. I'm therefore assuming that a little extra offset at the rear on standard 8J ET?? D90s (around the 15mm mark) won't hurt.

Settled on 7mm shims for the front.

May just put 7mm shims on the rear too.....

Then again I've seen a set of Red Rose 16"s for sale too...... oh I don't bl00dy know! [:(]
 

ORIGINAL: mik_ok

Then again I've seen a set of Red Rose 16"s for sale too...... oh I don't bl00dy know! [:(]
Click to expand...

That would be silver rose...

Blimming newbies [8|] [8D]
 
ORIGINAL: racerhead
If you are fitting shims for aesthetic reasons don't go over board because they do affect handling for day to day driving alround.
Click to expand...

I first fitted spacers for handling reasons. No Max Power Boy intent here.
That it makes the car look better is a bonus.

ORIGINAL: racerhead
Wheels will be kerber more easily.
Click to expand...

Err ... no, sorry.
 

ORIGINAL: mik_ok
My excuse is that the taxi was waiting for me...... back home now (hoorah!)
Click to expand...

That's sweet, taxi waiting to take you home to the missus and red roses on your mind. Not even Valentines day or anything.
 
That's a damn good point fen ~ I shall point this out to her when I am next feeling frisky....... I shall keep you posted. [;)]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members

Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the Club, who shall have no liability in respect of them or the accuracy of the content. The Club assumes no responsibility for any effects arising from errors or omissions.

Porsche Club Great Britain gives no warranties, guarantees or assurances and makes no representations or recommendations regarding any goods or services advertised on this site. It is the responsibility of visitors to satisfy themselves that goods and/or services supplied by any advertiser are bona fide and in no instance can the Porsche Club Great Britain be held responsible.

When responding to advertisements please ensure that you satisfy yourself of any applicable call charges on numbers not prefixed by usual "landline" STD Codes. Information can be obtained from the operator or the white pages. Before giving out ANY information regarding cars, or any other items for sale, please satisfy yourself that any potential purchaser is bona fide.

Directors of the Board of Porsche Club GB, Club Office Staff, Register Secretaries and Regional Organisers are often requested by Club members to provide information on matters connected with their cars and other matters referred to in the Club Rules. Such information, advice and assistance provided by such persons is given in good faith and is based on the personal experience and knowledge of the individual concerned.

Neither Porsche Club GB, nor any of the aforementioned, shall be under any liability in respect of any such information, advice or assistance given to members. Members are advised to consult qualified specialists for information, advice and assistance on matters connected with their cars at all times.

Porsche
Lockton
Pirelli
Officially approved
Oracle Finance
WEX Esso
Collecting Cars
Archant Dialogue
Back
Top