No announcement yet.

S13 - 200SX European Ride Height

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • S13 - 200SX European Ride Height

    I read every ride height thread here and was also able to find some values here. But these values seems to be for the 240SX version.
    I got often the hint to look into the FSM , end of chapters FA/RA.

    I have an englisch and a german Service Manual but in both versions the
    ride height dimension is simply missing.

    Because 240SX has different engine aka weight i would like to ask if
    someone has maybe additonal infos or if i should go with the 240SX values.

    I have now a H&R spring, koni yellow damper combination but will swap to
    a coilover soon. With my actual setup i cannot go higher.
    With the coilys i would aim a moderate drop of maybe 1" to come back closer
    to factory geometrie. I have swapped in a S14 subframe because i'm more
    traction orientated.

    The car is around 100kg lighter then stock and coilovers would give me the possibility to crossweight the car.

    But i would like also to have front and rear (angle of the car) in stock or maybe a better angle and that's why i'm looking for stock ride height values to have something from where i can start.

    I have no idea if i should aim flat / straight line or if rear should maybe lower
    to shift some weight to the rear.

    I found also often a hint that i should choose lower control arm pivot point as as a starting reference. But i don' have tools or patience to get so deep into
    chassis dynamics , roll center and knuckles.

    Is there maybe a simpler way to come back into the ball park ?
    Example - > Lower control arm just flat not angled with tires on the floor.

    From what i have found til now (240SX values) and my actual measured ride height it seems that i have 2" drop front and 1" drop rear with my H&R.

    - 638mm Front , 635 Rear / ground til arch
    So it's a measured drop but optically it looks same front and rear

    So car weight is already shifted even more to the front (wrong direction)
    I don't have an idea from how much weight transfer we're talking with
    a 1" angled car. But from feeling (oversteer) i would think it should be better
    the other way round.

    Maybe measuring from frame rails is better then arch ???

    Can someone please comment my ideas .. maybe i'm completly wrong.
    Last edited by redline; 05-22-2013, 03:49 AM.

  • #2
    The car will make more downforce overall with a bit of front rake (front slightly lower than back), but uncorrected geometry up front is pretty bad when low.

    I'd personally measure the frame rails and pick a height you like and make it all even with all stock stuff up front.
    '18 Chevrolet Volt - Electric fun hatch for DD duty!

    DefSport Koni Sleeve and Spring Perch Buy!!!


    • #3
      At least one answer.

      Thanx a lot.
      I noticed in winter, rebuilding the car on the ramps that frame rails are
      17cm at the front and 19cm at the rear section away from the ground.
      On two other measuring Points i got 13 and 15cm.
      So in the end it's 2 cm lower at the front.

      And no, there is no Geometrie correction at the front.
      I found also a drawing where i could see that frame rails are exact the same height but this is referenced against a "datum line" so a construction line.
      This is not ride height.
      I was astonished that everyone can tell you how low the car is but not what
      stock ride height was before . (So, lower then what ?)

      But okay, i combine your tip with the "datum line" and will setup it this way that front and rear are just at equal height measured from the ground to the frame rails. I adjust this as a base and maybe then i corner weight from there.

      In the Moment i'm building some hubstands so the adjusting of the coilovers will be easier.