7 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCH2000 Cab 4 body roll
Leading reported evidence
Replace design
Suggestion or failed attempt
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 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'd read here that the H&R fronts are not adjustable so maybe they changed the design?
Leading evidence: 'Replace design' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace design' (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 · Original poster
If I am wrong about the H&R sways flattening out the cornering without having to replace all the shocks and springs then the RoW is my next step.
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.
7 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.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T181445Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
I spend a lot of time in highway traffic and rarely get to break triple-digit speeds, so top-end is not an issue. The car needs to accelerate much more quickly and feel more balanced in turns without mods requiring pulling the engine out and without resorting to the jarring, ultra-stiff ride of a track car.
After reading everything here regarding the 996 C4 suspension, I've decided to start with the sway bars and ignore spring and shock upgrades for now. Understeer is currently acceptable probably due to AWD and PSM. My ride seems stiff enough for the speeds I drive, I just need flatter cornering.
I have stock 17" wheels and am aware that I could go to 18"s and a shorter front tire and get some benefits, but I think I might get a bigger bang for my buck with sway bar mods. I also intend to have the alignment checked, but feel I should wait until after I upgrade the sway bar(s).
My stock sway bars on the 2000 C4 are 23mm(F) x 18.5mm(R). The RoW 030 bars seem only slightly better, while the adjustable GT3 bars at nearly the same price are 26.8mm x 20.7mm. The H&R'sare even beefier at 26mm x 23mm ($269 front, $232 rear, tirerack.com) and, like the GT3's, are both adjustable according to the product description. I'd read here that the H&R fronts are not adjustable so maybe they changed the design? The additional cost for the H&R front is, I'm assuming, because it includes new end links. I'll confirm that before I buy.
Now I can only do one project at a time, so I am thinking of adding the H&R rear bar first.
Big Question:
That will give me a 23mm front sway bar and a 23mm rear sway bar! I feel this might give me a tendency to spin out, yes? I'd imagine that my AWD and PSM would make this less of a concern, but I am curious to see what kind of a ride I will have. Predictions?
Also, I've read that the stiffness of a sway bar is determined by the square of the diameter... so I think that would make the H&R rear bar over 100% stiffer than the GT3 rear bar. Too much? Maybe I should go with the H&R front and the GT3 rear?
OK, nobody had any suggestions so I have ordered the rear H&R (26 x 24) sway bar. I'm putting in the B&M SSK this weekend and next weekend is booked so I probably won't get around to installing it until mid-November... that leaves plenty of time for (help?) comments.
Anybody at all??
vette.......you should really consider the RoWM030 for your car. Much better and just a little bit more than the $500 for the sways only.
The RoWM030 kit is ~ $1K shipped from several vendors and includes better sways (F&R) and shocks and springs.
I did consider it (and that is a great article about it that you provided the link to, thanks) and also PSS9's. But I am basically lazy and cheap.
If I am wrong about the H&R sways flattening out the cornering without having to replace all the shocks and springs then the RoW is my next step.
Sorry to chime in late on a few things. H&R rear is adjustable, front is not. Front and rear do NOT include sway bar endlinks. I have driven a car (coupe though) with factory fronts and H&R rears. I did not like the feel at all. But it was a very short ride, so my opinion is not 100% set in stone. I always replace them in pairs as to not disrupt the handling of the car. Marc
Marc,
Bummer about the endlinks. I'll have to ask the vendor (summitracing.com) why they are charging $50 more for the front. They will need to update their product description to reflect the fronts not being adjustable too.
Do you recall why you did not like the feel of the H&R's?
Summit racing might be including new endlinks, but H&R does not. But the front is definately not adjustable. I love the H&R's, but when done as a pair. Keep in mind that I have also been doing this on cars that allready have upgraded suspensions. I have never installed sway bars only? I know that it might not be what you want to hear, but a full suspension is really the way to go. You wont be dissapointed.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.