Thanks. You make some good points. The H&R's are progressive (don't know about the stocks). They are stiffer than stock, but I don't know the load rating difference. I'll look into it. I think that putting on both F/R would lower the car even MORE (proportionately) in front (1.4 inches) compared to the rear (1 inch), so it would "look" even worse than it does now. That can't be good for handling either.Originally Posted by AudiRS4ever
I would agree with your statement. If you end up just doing the rear springs, and not the front I would think you would have a car that no longer handles correctly though. I don't know the weight of either the stock springs, or the H&R's. As long as they are both linear you probably won't have that much of a problem, but if the H&R's are progressive and the stocks are linear you will get some very sporadic handling from the rear of the car. If you go this route I'd like to see pictures and get your input. I'm just like you as far as I don't think the front looks bad, just the rear. Let us know. Thanks!
Either way, since these are the only springs available, I can always add the fronts later, or switch the rears back to stock if the minor variation in how it handles (if it's even apparent) is somehow worse than having to look at the drc mullet (business in the front, :trash: in the back). I will definitely post pictures whichever I do.
Most understeer-prone track/race cars have stiffer rear spring rates to help compensate, no? I really don't think my car is going to flip over in a corner just because I stiffen the rear springs (I'm willing to take that gamble), or even lose a couple seconds/lap at the local track. I should be so lucky as to have a local track.
Reply With Quote
