Lowering Springs Comparisons

ChopsZ

This doesn't make sense to me...

Swift = 1.2" F - 1.0" R
Ark GT-S = 1.4" F - 1.2" R

That's less than a 1/4" difference front and rear going from Swift to Ark. That's like the thickness of an iPhone. How can only dropping that much more all of a sudden cause you to scrape everywhere and damage mufflers?

When I had my '91 Miata, I had it lowered on coilovers, 1.75" front and 1.5" rear. That car sat a lot lower than a Z on Ark springs and I didn't bottom out and scrape on stuff with it at all. The only issue I had was a little scrubbing on full lock in the front.

Not arguing, just trying to understand that post.

__________________
She's For Sale! PERFORMANCE: Aero Workz | Akebono | BC Racing | EcuTek | HKS | MaxBore | Motordyne | Nismo | RJM | SPL | StopTech | Z1
AUDIO: Arc Audio | Bazooka | Helix | Pioneer | Stereo Integrity

MaysEffect

Although the static ride height difference may be negligible, the spring rate at those heights may have a difference in excess of 50-250ib/in.

A softer spring will allow more ride undulation. Given the fact they are both dual rate progressive springs, the length and transitional rates could be massively different.

*** After further research, the swift spring actually is the stiffer overall spring. The coil diameter is larger and has a higher rate for the tighter wind coils "dead coils". The transitional rate between soft and stiffer would probably be smaller overall. So even though the ARK srpings sits a marginal amount higher, the spring travel is greater. Which ark springs is said person talking about though? Gt-s or Gt-f?