Menu toggle

M030 springs & standard shock absorbers

Page: 12 > Showing page 1 of 2
Author
Richard_Hamilton
PCGB Member
  • Total Posts : 8025
  • Joined: 2004/10/08 11:07:01
  • Status: offline
Richard_Hamilton PCGB Member
2004/10/09 10:26:41 (permalink)

M030 springs & standard shock absorbers

Hi All

After 3 years of Porsche ownership I finally joined PCGB! My previous car was a 993 Tip, and I traded it for a 1998 996 C2 Tip in February. The car is fitted with M030 sports suspension, which gives quite a harsh ride, especially on the cr*p roads we have in East Berks/South Bucks. I am considering fitting standard shockers, but retaining the M030 springs. I have measured a standard front strut, and the spring platforms are at the same height as the M030 strut. Therefore the ride height must be determined by the spring length and I want to keep the ride height the same.

Has anyone tried this combination? The car is my everyday drive, and although I drive it fairly quick whenever I get the opportunity, I realise that I am going to substitute comfort for handling. I also realise that it is going to be a compromise, but I would hate to go through the pain of parting with around £600 to find that it didn't make much difference!

Richard
1989 3.2 Carrera Sport in Guards Red/Linen & Audi RSQ3
Previous:
2012 Cayman 2.9 PDK, 2006 Cayman S, 2000 996 Turbo, 1998 996 C2, 1994 993 C2

20 Replies Related Threads

    Guest
    Guest of the Club
    • Total Posts : 62235
    • Joined: 2015/06/29 11:09:45
    • Status: online
    Guest Guest of the Club
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/09 22:34:51 (permalink)
    Hi Richard,

    Welcome to PCGB and Thames Valley Region!!!

    I hope I'll see you @ our Next Monthly Meeting:

    Sunday 7th November 2004: Bird in Hand, Knowl Hill, off the A4 near Maidenhead, from 12:30.

    Cheers,

    Fab
    Thames Valley R.O.
    Grant
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 807
    • Joined: 2003/04/09 13:19:09
    • Status: offline
    Grant PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/11 13:55:13 (permalink)
    Richard, I know the 030 can be a bit wearing on days when you only want to cruise the B roads, but if you go for a semi-standard set up there is a trade off, the car will roll, pitch & understeer more! My first 996 had 030 (10mm lowered) & after a couple of years I fancied a change so specified the next car with standard set up, MISTAKE, i didn't bond with the car..if you are a press on driver the 030 is a must have! If I was you I'd leave well alone until you can test drive a standard car at full chat on the twisty's!!!
    oliver
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 3140
    • Joined: 2003/09/03 22:17:15
    • Status: offline
    oliver PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/11 14:15:37 (permalink)
    Grant,

    I'm not convinced about your comments regarding the standard set up. I've had a 3.4 and, currently, a 3.6 and find the handling/ride just perfect for public roads. Even in the Isle of Man, where the de-restricted roads can be very fast and challenging, I felt that the modest levels of roll were very useful in communicating the cars' handling.

    However, I have done two Porsche Cars driving days (Castle Combe and Thruxton) and I would agree that the cars with Sports suspension had a handling advantage on track.

    I don't think the benefits versus cost justifies changing either the dampers or springs. You could try running at 10% beow the recommended tyre pressures. Or, swap from 18" to 17" wheels/tyres. Alternatively, when the time comes, a change of tyres might help. Michelins are supposed to give a harsher ride, with Continentals slightly better and Pirelli Rossos the best.

    Richard_Hamilton
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 8025
    • Joined: 2004/10/08 11:07:01
    • Status: offline
    Richard_Hamilton PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/11 15:54:17 (permalink)
    Oliver & Grant

    Thanks for the input - obviously you are both equally satified with your individual setups. I think I am looking for something of a midway point. I am hoping the stiffer springs of my existing 030, combined with a softer shocker will give me a less harsh ride and a bit more compliance. I realise the trade off, but I have been living with it for 6 months and it is getting wearing. I drove a couple of standardly suspended 996's on local roads (to me) prior to buying mine, and felt comfortable with the setup. When I test drove mine it was on smooth roads and it felt quite acceptable. However, I find it a bit twitchy on the bumpy, uneven roads in my area.

    I was kind of hoping that someone might have tried doing the same and could give me an idea of what to expect.

    Good point about the tyres. Mine has Kuhmo's which were on it when I bought it. The rears were about half worn, and I have done 6000 miles and they still look half worn! (They provide lots of grip too.) My old 993 would definitely be looking for a new set by now. When I eventually get round to replacing them I will try the P Zero Rosso's.

    Richard
    1989 3.2 Carrera Sport in Guards Red/Linen & Audi RSQ3
    Previous:
    2012 Cayman 2.9 PDK, 2006 Cayman S, 2000 996 Turbo, 1998 996 C2, 1994 993 C2
    oliver
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 3140
    • Joined: 2003/09/03 22:17:15
    • Status: offline
    oliver PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/11 17:55:29 (permalink)
    Back in 1997, my wife and I tried the then new Boxster near Nice. My wife wanted one so we duly ordered it from Lovetts. The brochure said Sports Suspension provided improved handling with little effect on comfort. So we selected this option.

    Delivery day arrived, the car looked fantastic. But, the moment I drove down the road I knew the ride was different to the French car. After a few days on mixed roads I was really disappointed. The ride was very fidgety - not harsh, but jiggly and a lot more trim rattles were noticeable. My wife hated it.

    Lovetts lent me their standard demonstrator and the extra compliance was quite obvious, with no downside to the handling. I wrote to Porsche requesting their advice and they forwarded the letter to Germany. I received a very polite, detailed, reply. This explained that the suspension components were carefully designed, tested and tuned by their engineers to work together and changing individual components would lead to unpredicatable results.

    The only option was to buy brand new suspension system, which would have cost over £3000 fitted.

    We decided it was more economical to change the car. Boxster demand was high so we got our money back. Unfortunately we had to wait 8 months for a new one. My wife now has an 'S' and this has the standard, lightly lowered suspension, which, on UK roads, is just about perfect.
    Guest
    Guest of the Club
    • Total Posts : 62235
    • Joined: 2015/06/29 11:09:45
    • Status: online
    Guest Guest of the Club
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/11 22:56:24 (permalink)
    Richard,

    It doesn't seem very popular to mess about with suspension in the UK. Have a look on Rennlist & Renntech sites in the US as they seem to talk a lot more about suspension mods - perhaps because their standard setup is even softer than ours !!

    regards

    Richard_Hamilton
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 8025
    • Joined: 2004/10/08 11:07:01
    • Status: offline
    Richard_Hamilton PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 11:08:28 (permalink)
    I have looked at some of the Rennlist postings, and it appears that their M030 is softer than ours. Several of them have changed to "European" spec M030. I have looked at the PET, and the struts and springs are different for US and RoW. On the standard suspension, the US spec cars have the same shockers, but different springs. So not much help really.

    Thanks for all the replies. I have booked the car in to have it done at the end of the month while I am away on holiday. I'll let you know the outcome.


    Richard
    1989 3.2 Carrera Sport in Guards Red/Linen & Audi RSQ3
    Previous:
    2012 Cayman 2.9 PDK, 2006 Cayman S, 2000 996 Turbo, 1998 996 C2, 1994 993 C2
    Grant
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 807
    • Joined: 2003/04/09 13:19:09
    • Status: offline
    Grant PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 13:04:12 (permalink)
    ORIGINAL: oliver
    Grant,
    I'm not convinced about your comments regarding the standard set up. I've had a 3.4 and, currently, a 3.6 and find the handling/ride just perfect for public roads. Even in the Isle of Man, where the de-restricted roads can be very fast and challenging, I felt that the modest levels of roll were very useful in communicating the cars' handling.
    However, I have done two Porsche Cars driving days (Castle Combe and Thruxton) and I would agree that the cars with Sports suspension had a handling advantage on track.

    Oliver whilst I understand that you are happy with the standard set up (& many are!) with respect you can't really comment on the sports suspension after a couple of track days, you need to live with both set ups over an extended period & on familiar roads.
    Up to 7/10ths the standard suspension is fine & does certainly offer a slightly improved ride quality. BUT (& it's a BIG but!!) things start to fall apart when you really press on over the twisty stuff, with the 030 car you feel a part of the car, connected & in control , with the standard car it still goes round the twisty stuff but by comparison it pitches, floats & rolls & is definitely not as focused or involving as a drivers car. The standard car also understeers dramatically more than one with the 030 option.
    Having said this each to his own & if you are happy with your car great, but to me a Porsche is for driving & the standard set up is too mass market, the 10mm lowered set up offers a good compromise (standard on the C4S &TT) sitting between standard & the track focused X-74 (30mm lowered & standard on the GT3's).
    post edited by Grant - 2004/10/12 13:06:12
    oliver
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 3140
    • Joined: 2003/09/03 22:17:15
    • Status: offline
    oliver PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 13:22:20 (permalink)
    Grant,

    I do get the opportunity to drive quite a lot of different 911 variants. Porsche Cars GB occasionally use some of my earlier 911s for display purposes and they normally lend me one of their demonstrators. This year I've had a couple of C4Ss and a C4. The reason I cited the driving days was because they provided a unique opportunity to drive different configurations back to back.
    Grant
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 807
    • Joined: 2003/04/09 13:19:09
    • Status: offline
    Grant PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 13:34:56 (permalink)

    ORIGINAL: oliver
    Porsche Cars GB occasionally use some of my earlier 911s for display purposes


    030 aside (we can agree to disagree!!!) what other tasty 911 shaped beasties have you got tucked away in garage then?
    beershark
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 593
    • Joined: 2004/02/16 21:03:51
    • Status: offline
    beershark PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 14:32:24 (permalink)
    Hi Richard,

    I believe that the ride height on US vehichles is slighty higher, probably something to do with crash tests etc.....

    So, the shocks may be the same but the springs slightly higher.

    Having the 030 shocks and US may give a higher ride and would probably be less firm...... just a thought!


    Rob
    2015 991 C4 GTS
    2013 Cayenne D

    Past:
    2007 997 Turbo Coupe Tip
    2005 Cayenne Turbo
    2005 997 C2S Manual
    1998 996 C2 Coupe Tiptronic
    1990 964 C4
    1992 968 Cab Tiptronic
    1988 944 Turbo
    1978 911 SC Super Sport Targa - many years ago..
    oliver
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 3140
    • Joined: 2003/09/03 22:17:15
    • Status: offline
    oliver PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 14:59:55 (permalink)
    Grant, my interest in 911s has always been towards the lightweight, driver focused road/track cars, where less is often more. So, mainly the RSs. Porche Cars and Porsche Club tend to use my 2.7RS Sport (lightweight) and 3.2 CS for display. For track use I play with Caterhams. Eoin Sloane always describes my taste as 'catholic', whatever that means.

    However, it may explain why my preferred 996 is a straight-forward C2 Coupe. Of course, handling and ride preferences are subjective, but I find the standard, properly, set up 996 to be perfect for road use. It is really only necessary to stiffen and lower the suspension as weight increases. The C4S, for example, probably needs the sports suspension to overcome the extra weight it carries. It also reduces the understeer that is slightly more evident in the standard C4.

    All Colin Chapman's designs had two ditinctive features - lightness and compliance. It's the same with Caterhams. Their performance comes from their lightness and low c of g. We usually just stiffen the arbs at one end to dial out too much understeer.
    Richard_Hamilton
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 8025
    • Joined: 2004/10/08 11:07:01
    • Status: offline
    Richard_Hamilton PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 16:36:24 (permalink)
    Oliver

    Was yours the 3.2 CS that Porsche Centre Reading had in the showroom earlier this year? It was absolutely superb, and if it was yours I am very envious.

    Richard
    1989 3.2 Carrera Sport in Guards Red/Linen & Audi RSQ3
    Previous:
    2012 Cayman 2.9 PDK, 2006 Cayman S, 2000 996 Turbo, 1998 996 C2, 1994 993 C2
    Grant
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 807
    • Joined: 2003/04/09 13:19:09
    • Status: offline
    Grant PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 17:42:20 (permalink)

    ORIGINAL: oliver
    Grant, my interest in 911s has always been towards the lightweight, driver focused road/track cars, where less is often more. So, mainly the RSs. Porche Cars and Porsche Club tend to use my 2.7RS Sport (lightweight) and 3.2 CS for display. For track use I play with Caterhams. Eoin Sloane always describes my taste as 'catholic', whatever that means.

    Great, an RS & Club Sport plus a 996, you are spoilt for choice! I can now fully understand why you want the 996 as standard, you already have two other very focused 911's for press on days!
    Incidentally my prefence for 030 came from two 996 carrera 2's that I had (pre & post facelift) rather than my current 4wd Turbo.
    oliver
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 3140
    • Joined: 2003/09/03 22:17:15
    • Status: offline
    oliver PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers 2004/10/12 18:11:46 (permalink)
    Yes, the CS was at Reading for quite a while. It was part of the 2.7RS/3.2CS/996GT3RS display (all white and red).

    I do have a soft-spot for the earlier cars. I used to have a 356. Less than 100bhp but lots of fun. You learn to use the momentum to maintain rapid progress. Brakes required a bit of anticipation though.

    Later cars are terrific, of course, but you really can't exploit the performance on the public road. £ for £ I reckon the Boxster S is the sainest fun. Can't wait for the new one.
    Richard_Hamilton
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 8025
    • Joined: 2004/10/08 11:07:01
    • Status: offline
    Richard_Hamilton PCGB Member
    RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers/Tyre advice please 2004/11/02 15:38:58 (permalink)
    For anyone who is interested, I had the standard shockers fitted last week. The change was just what I was looking for. The ride is much less harsh, but I don't seem to have gained any unwanted body roll, probably due to the M030 springs and anti-roll bars. It feels like a nice compromise. Still well 'planted', but that bit more compliant.

    On another subject, I would like to change tyres fairly soon. PZero Rosso N4's have been recommended - is that the general concensus?

    Richard
    1989 3.2 Carrera Sport in Guards Red/Linen & Audi RSQ3
    Previous:
    2012 Cayman 2.9 PDK, 2006 Cayman S, 2000 996 Turbo, 1998 996 C2, 1994 993 C2
    was8v
    Guest of the Club
    • Total Posts : 24
    • Joined: 2008/10/13 20:09:21
    • Status: offline
    was8v Guest of the Club
    Re: RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers/Tyre advice please 2019/04/17 11:58:25 (permalink)
    Hi Richard sorry for dragging an old thread up!
     
    However I am looking to fit new suspension to my early  3.4 996. I was going to fit m030 springs (I have a set with 10k miles on) with new standard dampers as I find full m030 a bit harsh for UK roads.
     
    How did you find the combination long term?
     
    Did you run standard or m030 ARBs?
     
    Thanks. 
    Richard_Hamilton
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 8025
    • Joined: 2004/10/08 11:07:01
    • Status: offline
    Richard_Hamilton PCGB Member
    Re: RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers/Tyre advice please 2019/04/21 16:56:29 (permalink)
    Holy thread resurrection! You seem to have found my first ever post on this forum! 7971 later....

    I found the combination great long term.  I retained the M030 springs and ARBs, and fitted standard dampers.  However, if I were doing it again, I would probably go for Bilstein B6's, which I fitted to my Turbo. 

    Richard
    1989 3.2 Carrera Sport in Guards Red/Linen & Audi RSQ3
    Previous:
    2012 Cayman 2.9 PDK, 2006 Cayman S, 2000 996 Turbo, 1998 996 C2, 1994 993 C2
    minny
    PCGB Member
    • Total Posts : 500
    • Joined: 2007/10/10 12:25:29
    • Status: offline
    minny PCGB Member
    Re: RE: M030 springs & standard shock absorbers/Tyre advice please 2019/04/25 21:46:43 (permalink)
    My goodness, I clicked on this thread and thought I was hallucinating. I read the the original post and only when i looked at the OP, I realised it was Richard's first post. I recently refurbished my turbo's suspension with original springs and Bilstein B6s on Richard's advice and am really happy with the result. The primary ride is firm but not harsh and the secondary ride is no worse than on the original dampers which are closer to B4s. Interestingly, my car has 68k miles and it didn't feel too loose/worn but the new suspension along with new top mounts and suspension arms front and back has been an eye opener. I can compress the old dampers easily which shows how worn they are. 

    Is: 996 turbo Tiptronic and C63 estate
    Was: 996 Carrera Tiptronic
    Page: 12 > Showing page 1 of 2
    Jump to:

    Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members

    Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions

    Disclaimer

    The opinions expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the Club, who shall have no liability in respect of them or the accuracy of the content. The Club assumes no responsibility for any effects arising from errors or omissions.

    Porsche Club Great Britain gives no warranties, guarantees or assurances and makes no representations or recommendations regarding any goods or services advertised on this site. It is the responsibility of visitors to satisfy themselves that goods and/or services supplied by any advertiser are bona fide and in no instance can the Porsche Club Great Britain be held responsible.

    When responding to advertisements please ensure that you satisfy yourself of any applicable call charges on numbers not prefixed by usual "landline" STD Codes. Information can be obtained from the operator or the white pages. Before giving out ANY information regarding cars, or any other items for sale, please satisfy yourself that any potential purchaser is bona fide.

    Directors of the Board of Porsche Club GB, Club Office Staff, Register Secretaries and Regional Organisers are often requested by Club members to provide information on matters connected with their cars and other matters referred to in the Club Rules. Such information, advice and assistance provided by such persons is given in good faith and is based on the personal experience and knowledge of the individual concerned.

    Neither Porsche Club GB, nor any of the aforementioned, shall be under any liability in respect of any such information, advice or assistance given to members. Members are advised to consult qualified specialists for information, advice and assistance on matters connected with their cars at all times.

    © 2019 APG vNext Commercial Version 4.6