KW vs LEDA vs KONI vs BILSTEIN vs ??? Fast road/DE/Track (not race)

[sawood12]

ORIGINAL: DivineE

I've only been in one KW v3 equipped car on a track and that may/may not have been set up properly at the time but I thought the KW's still felt way too soft for track use. Perhaps the perfect option for a fast road car but not really in the track day bracket.

On the other side I've heard people say the Gaz shocks are great for track work but not so great on the road. Perhaps as with everything it's horses for courses.

What are the spring rates of KWv3's vs Gaz off the shelf kits? I'd be surprised if they are softer. Don't mix up stiffness with compliance. They are two different things. KWv3's were built for the track so are plenty hard enough - the valving was designed to ride the kerbs and rumble strips better than conventional singe-rate shockers whilst running stiff spring rates - it just so happens that they are very good at riding our pot-hole ridden roads too.

KW also do the clubsport kit in the v3's if you do want stiffer springs and you can also spec stiffer springs still as a custom spec as someone on this forum has done.

My 944 rode better than any modern hot hatch i've ever driven - the body roll, dive and squat was much better controlled, it didn't lurch around, and didn't crash over every pothole and blemish on the road. The communication to the driver was much better - I swear you could almost feel the texture of the road surface through your bottom with the KW which is something i've not felt on any other car - Boxters, 996's, M3's and most hot hatches. It really brought the feel of the car into the 21st century. I'd thoroughly recommend KW if you can make your budget stretch - don't bankrupt yourself for it or sacrifice the family holiday for it, but if you can stretch the little extra over Gaz (which isn't that much less) then it will be worth it.

Not sure why KW wouldn't suit series 1 cars or 924's? There is no witchcraft going on with the KW's - they are still conventional spring and fluid damper technology just like any kit out there so no reason why they wont work with any car, they just have a clever valving system that varies the damping rate - as sort of passive active suspension.

 

[333pg333]

Just as a late option to the party, how much do you guys pay for Moton Clubsports in your part of the world? Their HQ is in Europe so I'd think they'd be affordable if not in the upper $ bracket.

 

[sawood12]

You're looking at double the cost of KW at least for Moton or anything like that - and that is just for the shockers.

 

[333pg333]

Really? Wow. I didn't think it would be anywhere near that difference Scott.

 

[steves944]

Ive been offered some LEDA for front and back but can find no reference to them. What sort of money should they be and where do they fit into the rankings of the above?

Thanks

 

[Neil Haughey]

I think the only other reasonable price remote reservoir option is the AST setup that Paul Follet has been trail blazing this year. Looks really well made, a bit more than GAZ but still much cheaper than the other stuff which costs many thousands.

The GAZ pro remote reservoir shocks mentioned in this thread will tend to be matched with spring rates far stiffer than KW v3, the v3 spring rates are only really fast road not comparable with full race setups which tend to be in the region 4x stock rates rather than 2x to 3x. The guy who sold me my GAZ setup originally supplied the MX5 racers and he was telling me they run 550 lb/inch even on those little things which weigh practically nothing (ISTR 890 Kg for a road going MK1).

 

[Jonny944CS]

Not sure why KW wouldn't suit series 1 cars or 924's? There is no witchcraft going on with the KW's - they are still conventional spring and fluid damper technology just like any kit out there so no reason why they wont work with any car, they just have a clever valving system that varies the damping rate - as sort of passive active suspension

I have second hand KW v3 kit (originally fitted to a 968) on my 1984 car.

- The KW front struts do not fit the pre-87 hub carrier spindles. From memory they are around 1.5mm too thick and the lower mounting hole is out of position. I got mine to fit by carefully machining my HC spindle clamp faces and slightly elongating the lower hole in the KW strut. But I do have access to a full machine shop....

- Also, the total free length of a pre-87 strut is longer to suit the different top mount design. This puts the damper close to the top end of its working range when running a sensible ride height

- The rears fitted fine but I had already upgraded to aluminum rear trailing arms and fitted 25.5mm torsion bars re-indexed to 9° (968 M030 spec). I have no idea if they would be compatible with the early steel arms.


My experiences have been as follows:

General positives
- very nicely designed quality parts with clever fast bump valving. I do 50/50 road/track and they provide a firm but tolerable ride for long journeys and country road blasts (think Audi S-Line), but firm-up nicely (with adjustment) for track work.
- excellent service and support from the German factory. All parts seem to be available at very reasonable prices.
- close to Porsche levels of quality - good resistance to dirt and grime
- easily adjustable ride height due to polyamide collars and inox stainless steel construction "" The front struts were nearly half the weight of my standard units!!

Negatives
- Weak area around the camber adjustment tab on the front strut - design fault. It does not affect function or safety, just merely makes the camber adjustment a little fiddlier.
- Rear rebound adjustment is literally a pain in the rear - I have so far failed to find an easier route that removing the unit!
- The polyimide (plastic) spring seats and caps are designed for light weight and low noise - use only with genuine rubber bushings - NOT ROSE JOINTS!
- Rear spring caps run very close to the torsion bar blade mount. Some cars some cars seem fine others catch and require adjustment. IMHO the rubber mounting bushings could do with being upgraded to a higher shore hardness to help combat this issue.

For me the positives far outweigh the negatives.