Removing rear shocks (and brake pad options)

[Big Dave]

Rear shocks easy to do....
Pads. DONT even think about EBC,s in ANY form,, COMPLETE + utter rubbish..[On a Porsche at any rate][][][][] ...I agree with Fen on that point,,[]
Get yourself some Pagid BLUES,[for the front] if you are doing T days...
BUT,
"[Any suggestion the 968 is anything other than an expensive 944S2 in an ugly frock ]".
Dont get me started on that point, otherwise this thread would run + run + run...[][][][].After owning BOTH...[][][]

 

[Fen]

[] Well done Neil, I forgot the Silver Rose combo.

Nick, the wheels are Rota Slipstreams in flat black. I deliberately chose them as they are so sngular against the rounded body as the car is bit cuddly and I wanted to try to toughen it up a bit. Rotas are strong and really light and I used to live quite near the UK importer (RareRims) and I also had them on one of my MX5s. They are primarily aimed at Jap stuff so don't come in the right PCD/offset for Porsche.

Dave - I forgot, the S3 is heavier than an S2 as well, isn't it? [][]

 

[944Turbo]

I quite like EBC greens (equal to standard) and yellows (uprated) as a road and occasional trackday pad, hate reds though which I found dissapear at an unbelievably fast rate on track.
Tony

 

[Fen]

I liked Greens for the road years ago, and on the strength of that I bought some for my BMW. They have changed and not only do they now produce loads of dark dust like the worst of road pads, but they are thinner to start with than other pads and at best work only as well as the OE ones I had hence I withdraw my recommend even for them.

 

[Peter Empson]

I've posted this elsewhere recently but will add that I too couldn't get on with EBC's at all. I've tried most of them over the years, including reds and yellows very recently and for me they were a complete waste of money as I ended up taking them off the car once they were bedded in. I admit I think I've been spoilt with the performance of the Porterfields, but I'd rather have std pads for the road than the EBC's and this isn't the case with my normal ones even though they are a dedicated track day pad (only downsides are the noise/dust and disc wear). I tried both Pagid Blue and Orange a few years back but going up to carbon metallics was such a massive improvement I've never looked back. I will be trying some Performance Friction when my stash of the Porterfields run out as I'd like to see how they compare.

I will also now admit that I like the look of 968's, am not particularly keen on red 944's and somehow survived dozens of track days on P6000's (almost all seemingly completed on the same set []).

 

[944Turbo]

ORIGINAL: Fen

I liked Greens for the road years ago, and on the strength of that I bought some for my BMW. They have changed and not only do they now produce loads of dark dust like the worst of road pads, but they are thinner to start with than other pads and at best work only as well as the OE ones I had hence I withdraw my recommend even for them.

Last greens I had were V3 and did create more dust than earlier ones I had but were less dusty than the standard porsche pads. Getting on well with yellows though they squealed horribly until they got really hot on track, then they calmed down. They turned my discs blue though and smoked very heavily when I was black flagged (exhaust poping by the noise meter) and they didn't get a cooling down lap. I dont doubt that there are more stoppy pads but I do far more road miles than track miles, they are relatively gentle on the discs and I dont have to polish particles from the side of the car. They work well enough for me on track in big blacks.
Tony

 

[Big Dave]

Fen
The "S3" is heavier, in normal trim, but mine is now lighter....[][][][]
Want to go quicker,,,, first add lightness......[][][] + DONT fit EBC,s.....[8|][8|][8|]

 

[James_G]

ORIGINAL: Big Dave UK

Rear shocks easy to do....
Pads. DONT even think about EBC,s in ANY form,, COMPLETE + utter rubbish..[On a Porsche at any rate][][][][] ...I agree with Fen on that point,,[]
Get yourself some Pagid BLUES,[for the front] if you are doing T days...
BUT,
"[Any suggestion the 968 is anything other than an expensive 944S2 in an ugly frock ]".
Dont get me started on that point, otherwise this thread would run + run + run...[][][][].After owning BOTH...[][][]

Well I was 50:50 Pagids:Mintex, so on pure votes alone, Pagids it is. Rear shocks you all assure me are a doddle and since I've already sprayed releasing fluid on the bolts recently they should just come straight off.

Thanks all for the tips.

 

[zcacogp]

ORIGINAL: Big Dave UK
The "S3" is heavier, in normal trim

That's an interesting point ... why is the S3 (/968) heavier? Given that so much of the car is pure 944, what is it that adds the weight? 6-speed box will possibly weigh a bit more, as will the VVT on the engine, but the weight difference is considerable, as I remember.

So, what's become heavier?


Oli.

 

[Fen]

I'm not sure, but I have heard that the "lightweight" CS is at most 30kg lighter than the S2, and possibly actually a little heavier. Incidentally the 968 has a poorer drag coefficient as well.

Remember the 968 is supposed to be 80% new - any similarity to the S2 must be purely coincidental []

 

[zcacogp]

That fits with my understanding as well - the (lowest-fat *) CS was comparable with an S2, weightwise, and the S and Coupe went up from there. What's so heavy though?

Didn't know about the drag coefficient. That's interesting. Given the similarity, that's a bit of a surprise. Ugliness clearly has real, measurable downsides when it comes to dragging it through the air ...

80% new? I'd refer my learned friend to the Late, Great Mark Twain ... "There are lies, there are damned lies and there are statistics." I rest my case.


Oli.

* - Is motoring the only arena where low-fat is desirable? As opposed to every other context where low-fat is definitely not a patch on the real thing. Low-fat Mayonnaise? [:'(] Low-fat Ice-Cream? [:'(][:'(] Low-Fat Chips? [:'(][:'(][:'(][:'(]


Oli.

 

[944Turbo]

The knowledge in EVO had the CS as heavier than the S2 but not by a lot - different sound proofing? side impact bars? cat, engine diagnostics, thicker arbs and springs etc.

 

[zcacogp]

You'd expect the CS to have less sound-proofing than the S2, so it can't be that. And they lack the rear seat as well, so that's weight saved.

Thicker ARB's - yes, good point. Cat? The late S2's had cats. Early ones had extra silencers. Engine diagnostics aren't heavy. Did the 968 have side impact bars where the S2 didn't? I thought the doors were the same - they are interchangable, I'm sure ...


Oli.

 

[944Turbo]

You might expect there to be less sound proofing but I would also expect the 968 to be more refined so less than the regular 968 but maybe more than the S2. The weight in the mags might be an early pre cat car, but my 944t cat isnt that heavy anyway - and as an aside it is a sport cat with very open design compared to more mundane cars.Dont know about the side impact bars but they were fashionable back then in the early 90's would epexct the only changes to be internal. The CS seats looked racey but were not especially light, dont know how they compare with a S2 fabric non sport seat. Is the wooden shelf really much lighter than the rear seat?

 

[Big Dave]

Ok weights..
The rear seat [back/upright] 944 or 968, is 9kg.
The CS "mdf" rear shelf is 6kg.
Rear seat belts [complete]2.5kg.
Rear /boot carpet,4.4kg.
Spare wheel + jack,14kg.
Rear wiper motor + arm,2kg.
Havnt got round to weighing the CS buckets, or the Sport seats yet...

These are all off a 968 either sport or Club Sport.
There is more sound proofing in a 968 CS or otherwise.. LOADS of glue...
Not like an S2, where the rear carpet section comes out relatively easyly...
Maybee the metal on the 944 is thinner...???? That could be why the sills rot faster....[][][][]. You dont see many rusty 968,s, but there loads of rusty 944,s around....

 

[Fen]

You mentioned two things I was going to point out right at the end, Tony. The CS buckets are more for show than anything else - they are really wide (and I mean really) and they are only light compared to the dark matter seats of the standard car, not in any real Earthly terms. Similarly I've heard that the structure across the back where the rear seats aren't is pretty heavy.

I have long held the belief that the 968CS is a triumph of marketing and the right timing over all else; it isn't a bad car, but it's not deserving of the iconic status it gained as it was at best an incremental improvement over the S2.

I have said before but will repeat now that the entire 968 was just a marketing exercise to eke another few years out of the ancient 924 design at minimal cost. The engine is S2 with a few bolt-on tweaks like (the fantastically crude) variable cam timing which was en vogue at the time and a MAF rather than the archaic AFM. It is amazing how little extra Porsche got out of it (29bhp supposedly) for those modifications. Perhaps it was all about improved torque? Why on earth then did it suddenly need a 6-speed gearbox to go with this wider torque band when I've never, ever heard the S2 criticised for having too much gap between cogs? All marketing and indicative of a car who's design was first and foremost for that purpose rather than for engineering improvement.

Looks aside I have nothing against the 968, but I do think it's overvalued and people refuse to see it for what it is; the 944 S3 (which I understand it was originally going to be called).

 

[Fen]

ORIGINAL: Big Dave UK

You dont see many rusty 968,s, but there loads of rusty 944,s around....

Actually on a serious note I have wondered about this very point. The 944 rots from the inside out, normally (we think) because the plastic trim under the sill has too little clearance, the drains get clogged with crud and moisture builds up in the sills. For many people they don't know it's happening until a blister appears on the outside, but which time the rot has well and truly set in.

Now on the 968 where the sill is covered by the plastic trim you wouldn't even see the blister, so if it hasn't got better drainage (which it might, or it might not, I really have no idea) then corrosion could be a hole different league worse again before it's spotted - possibly when the side trims come adrift because the hole they clip into has rotted out.

Also worthy of note is that it's only 2 or 3 years since we really started to see rusty 944s and the 968 is that much younger than most 944s, so it could yet be to come to light if they do have the same corrosion issues.

 

[Alexw]

I might be wrong here but i recall reading the 968 was double galvanized - dipped twice in zinc (is it?). That might explain the extra weight too... or i could just be dreaming it up.