17 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHRUF Spring Rate
Leading reported evidence
Install option
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
x74 isn't allowed in the street class because it was a dealer installed option...
Leading evidence: 'Install option' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Install option' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I've seen some guys in the non-Comp spec running around with 275 square RE71R and they are remarkably fast.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Curious what specifically you mean by for "SCCA use." Do you mean your local SCCA won't let you use them at all or you don't like where they have classed your car as a result of using non-factory springs?
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
I'm trying to get these springs approved for SCCA use since they're already on the car I'm buying and need to prove that, although more expensive they aren't better than the other ones available.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Curious what specifically you mean by for "SCCA use." Do you mean your local SCCA won't let you use them at all or you don't like where they have classed your car as a result of using non-factory springs?
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
I'm trying to get these springs approved for SCCA use since they're already on the car I'm buying and need to prove that, although more expensive they aren't better than the other ones available.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
17 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
I'm looking at Eibach Springs to do the job, but still not sure.
I've looked all over the internet and can't seem to find any information on the RUF lowering spring for the 996TT. I've found info for the H&R, TechArt, M030 and X74, but not the RUF. I understand that their info is proprietary but has no one ever found or measured that info?
I'm trying to get these springs approved for SCCA use since they're already on the car I'm buying and need to prove that, although more expensive they aren't better than the other ones available.
Spring rate is the amount of force required to compress a spring. Not what it lowers the vehicle.
Try emailing Chris for the info -
[email removed]
He was very helpful when I contacted him in regards to an order I placed.
H&R lowers the 996TT the same amount so would not the spring rates be close to the same?
I would agree with contacting Chris. He has helped me before as well.
and ... a lot of ruf stuff is just rebranded stuff from other manufacturers (and painted green. and an extra zero added to the price). i *think* you will probably find that the springs are h&r.
Eibach and H&R are related by history,, most of their products are virtually identical,,, H&R "race" are significantly different/stiffer than their sport springs.
In general, I would like to know which mild lower spring has the most close to OEM spring rate.
If I am just trying to lower the car slightly I would prefer a near OEM spring rate if OEM dampers. Historically Eibach is usually less aggressive w/ their rates vs H&R I think
So, here's what I found.
Chris reached out to RUF for me and they provided the TUV homologation documentation. That showed the following:
- Manufactured by H&R
- Same drop as H&R Sports
- Same # of coils as H&R Sports
- Coil thickness, verified via measurement of H&R sports, is same in the front and 0.5mm thinner in the rear as compared to the H&R's.
So that would suggest pretty clearly that the RUF springs are nominally 340lb front, and ~750 lb rear.
Curious what specifically you mean by for "SCCA use." Do you mean your local SCCA won't let you use them at all or you don't like where they have classed your car as a result of using non-factory springs?
For SCCA Time Trials Sport Class (lowest prep level), springs and shocks are allowed if either:
a) you can buy them from TireRack or
b) if they receive a line-item allowance
Pretty narrow criteria, and in order to get these legalized at 3x the cost of the TireRack (H&R) option I needed to prove that they didn't provide any performance benefit. Which they don't.
Ah gotcha. Those rules are way more favorable/reasonable than SCCA's autocross rules. Even the x74 suspension on a 996 c2 would bump me up to a prepared class where hoosiers are a must and cutting on the car to fit gigantic tires is allowed. x74 isn't allowed in the street class because it was a dealer installed option... I need to look into running time trials. I'm pretty much fully bored of DEs because there's no element of competition and stick to track cross or autocross b/c they're more exciting.
Jon Krolewicz runs the TT program and it's like night and day vs. AX rules. Ok, like morning and evening at least. Classing is a lot more favorable to high performance cars, any OE options are allowed in the lowest prep class, and like with my RUF spring adventure an effort to justify a modification isn't like talking to a brick wall. Admittedly it was a lot of work to get the information on these springs, but in the end it was met with a reasonable, rational interpretation of the spirit and letter of the rules.
I've got a mk3 MR2 for autocross, a big part of why I bought this car is my belief it is very favorably classed. Its biggest competition would be a current TTRS with a DSG in my opinion. Here's the full list of cars legal for this class:
Acura
NSX 1990-2005
Audi
R8 4.2 2006-2015
TT RS 2012+
Alfa-Romeo
4C
Audi
RS3 2015+
S4 2017+
BMW
M3 2007-2013
M2 Competition 2018+
1M 2011-2012
Cadillac
ATS-V
CTS-V 2009-2015
Chevrolet
Corvette Z06 2001-2005
Corvette 1984-2013, Not otherwise classed or excluded
Camaro SS, SS 1LE 2010+
Camaro Z/28 2014-2015
Chrysler
Crossfire SRT6
Dodge
Viper 1991-2002
Ford
Mustang GT, GT350 2015+
Mustang Boss 302 2012-2013
Jaguar
XKR 2007-2014
Lexus
IS-F 2007+
Lotus
Elise 2005-2008
Nissan
370Z Nismo
Porsche
911 Turbo 1997-2004
911 S/4S non Power Kit 2012-2014
Boxster/Cayman S 2014-2016
Cayman R 2011-2012
Tesla
Model 3 Performance 2018+
That looks like a really interesting class. Coming from autocross, it's awesome to see an SCCA class where the Corvettes aren't heavy/intentional overdogs and Porsche cars aren't punished simply for being Porsche. How does the M2C fair in that class? I've seen some guys in the non-Comp spec running around with 275 square RE71R and they are remarkably fast.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
