35 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHM030 vs X74 suspension
Reported or suspected cause
expossed front lip
Reported cause
No successful repair reported for this finding.
1
Identified cause
0
Suspected cause
0
Reported fixes
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 report identifying a cause
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.
Reported cause
The only problem was the expossed front lip because had C4S aerokit
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
In adding shims between the two pieces of the control arm you can easily adjust more negative camber into the suspension which all of our cars are lacking.
Leading evidence: 'expossed front lip' (1 discussions report identifying this cause; no attributable repair resolution). Across 1 matching discussions, the most frequently mentioned possible cause is 'expossed front lip' (1 discussions; 1 report identifying it and 0 suggest it). The most frequently discussed action is 'Adjust more negative camber into the suspension' (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 report identifying a cause
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.
Reported cause
The shocks in all the cars begin to wear at 60.000 km but the problem is the users don't realize about the wear because It becomes very progressively
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
I've read posts from several Rennlisters and personally know several guys who installed GT3 suspension bits on C2s and loved the results.
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
they basically used the upgraded bracing for chassis stiffness within the tub itself but nothing really changed dimension wise for anything else.
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
There some used Porsche parts you can buy, but I'll never buy a used suspension.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Adjust more negative camber into the suspension
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
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
In adding shims between the two pieces of the control arm you can easily adjust more negative camber into the suspension which all of our cars are lacking.
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.
35 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: 20261026T133652Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Many have given me comments on the need to upgrade suspension, and the M030 has been talked about. What about the X74. It is $1500 more, and it says "race" suspension and presume this means adjustability. Then again the PSS9 or PSS10.
Plan to do the work myself other than the alignment.
Given that 1) want to lower car, 2) don't require much adjustability, 3) DE maybe once twice a year, 4) an autocross or 2, the M030 may be best bang for buck.
Thanks
I have the x74 on my car and I've driven a standard US, US 030 and ROW 030 cars.
First, the x74 is a coilover, but it is not adjustable.
Here's my one sentence review of each
Standard US - High ride height, too soft
US 030 - High ride height, but stiffer
ROW 030 - Proper height and sports car stiffness. A great compromise of ride and handling. They should have delivered them all this way.
X74 - Almost a perfect ride height (I'd still like it a titch lower), but be very careful driving around if you have the aerokit (bumps and curbs will scrape if not driven with care). Suspension feels awesome and is super sharp (waaaaaay more lively than the other choices).......but (and it is a big one) it is very stiff. It suits me very well, but I suspect many may find it too harsh.
If you do a search, you'll see that this issue has been discussed in the past. I think Ray provided a nice summary, but there's a lot of details that support his summary in the Rennlist archives.
To add another dimension to your dilemma, toss the 996 GT3 suspension in the mix. You'll find the GT3 guys who upgraded their suspensions to Motons, cup car parts, etc. will offer their take-offs at attractive prices. Since the 996 GT3 isn't current, there may not be as 996 GT3 take-off parts for sale as there were a few years ago, but I'm sure you can find the parts with patience. If you decide you want to go that route and you don't have the patience, you can always buy new parts from the factory. If you're looking to track your car on a regular basis but don't want to invest in Motons, etc., it comes down to "X74 vs. GT3 suspension".
I don't understand why to purchase an used suspension.
We are talking about Porsche and the security is a prime important question.
The shocks in all the cars begin to wear at 60.000 km but the problem is the users don't realize about the wear because It becomes very progressively
There some used Porsche parts you can buy, but I'll never buy a used suspension. Besides GT3 suspension doesn't match in all 996 models. Better to go with the proper kit. GT3 chassis is very different to C2 and though is based in C4, is different too
Ray advised you very good.
juankimalo,
You present some good points that fall into 2 categories. 1) compatibility amongst the 996 variants 2) the virtues and compromises of buying new vs. used.
1) My suggestion of considering GT3 suspension parts assumes that the parts are being installed by a knowledgeable mechanic who understands Porsche suspensions and parts compatibility amongst the 996 variants. The fact that the OP is considering the X74 package implies that he owns a C2. If he doesn't own a C2 and/or doesn't understand what's compatible and what's not, I'd hope he's using a shop that does. I've read posts from several Rennlisters and personally know several guys who installed GT3 suspension bits on C2s and loved the results. As for my personal experience, I had GT3 control arms and anti-sway bars on my car and loved the results. Although I didn't go as far as installing the shocks and springs, several reputable shops have told me that the parts would match up nicely.
2) Buying used shocks may or may not make sense. I would certainly consider low mileage shocks. If I wasn’t looking to compete and didn’t place a premium on shaving the last 0.1 second off my lap times, I would certainly install take-offs from a low mileage car. I’d definitely pass on used shocks from a 80,000 mile car. But very few GT3’s have that kind of mileage. I’d guess that a lot of GT3 take-offs have less than 10k miles and very few more than 20k miles. I’d think these parts have a life expectancy of 60k-70k+ miles. If I can get a 50%+ discount on parts that are still in their prime, I’d go for it.
Everyone’s assessment of value is different. For someone who’s in the “money is no object” camp, this is a silly discussion. For someone who’s looking for value, I think it’s a worthwhile debate.
My $0.02
Dell,
Insert opinion here_____________________
I vote ($1200) ROW M030 or aftermarket; ($3000+) H&R coilovers with GT3 swaybars. IIRC the H&R 'street' coilover set-up is close spring rates to GT3, with proper shock valving. ROW M030 is by far the best bang/buck out there.
looks to me that the ROW M030 is the best all around and according to many of you best price is thru SunCoast. However, if the right price becomes available for an x74 that will fit my 03 C4, then I might go after that. Then again I think I remember seeing PSS9 for around $1700.
Thanks again...
What model do you have (it does make a difference)?
I (and I suspect others) have been assuming you have a C2. Above you say you have an '03 C4 (a model that to the best of my knowledge Porsche never produced in the US market).
What year is your car?
If it is an '03, is it a C2 or C4S? Coupe or Cab?
Livenupe, as I can see, you have the M030 suspension in your 40 th (It was a stock factory for this special model.)
And, could you explain me how did you get the GT3 control arms installed?
I thought that they could fit in a C4 but not in C2.
Thanks for the info. I can see that I was in an error, and love this post for learning.
Could explain me the improves in the handling with GT3 control arms (before and after) ?
Did you find the front train less floating?
(excuse my english.)
I didn't know that Carrera 4 MY03 was not available for US market. In europe was very common
Joaquin
Thanks Ray.
I had a look at The Essential Companion and that's ok
I read the book with interest but It's impossible to remember all the things.
Two years ago I wrote a 996 Buyers guide in spanish after a hard investigation and searching work. (sent to Loren renntech to be downloaded)
http://www.renntech.org/forums/index...&showfile=1107
I could write it better with the pile of info from Adrian's book
Yes but the option code is called X73
Lowers 2 cm from C4S RoW stock suspension
I drove one C4S with this option and It's fantastic. The only problem was the expossed front lip because had C4S aerokit
Not very harsh, not uncomfortable, I loved it.
Finally my friend decided to remove the C4S aerokit, because was too expossed to the road humps.
A good news: In Spain we have a new law: All the cities have to modify their urban humps at maximun 10 cm height (most of them pass this height)
I think you're taking Porsche's statements that the GT3 and cup cars are based on the C4 tub a bit too literally. they basically used the upgraded bracing for chassis stiffness within the tub itself but nothing really changed dimension wise for anything else. The GT3 control arms will bolt up to any model 996, boxter and even Cayman. The advantage to these arms is that they're 2 piece vs. 1 in the standard cars. In adding shims between the two pieces of the control arm you can easily adjust more negative camber into the suspension which all of our cars are lacking. Personaly I feel the lack of negative camber in the front is part of how Porsche builds understeer into these cars to rid them of the notorious handling traits of the earlier 911's.
I have a model that is unique to the USA but I do not think so.
I have a 2003 C4 Cab. More wood inside that can be used to keep a fire alive in winter.
I believe I have seen several of you or at least one witha 03 C4 Cab as well.
I wish it was a coupe, but since wife wante a Cab and if "she is happy, I am happy" the a cab it is.
See pics over another thread of MaxRod as "pic of my new ride" White with Metropol Blue and Oregon Timber inside
If it's a wide body, it's a C4S unless someone performed a conversion.
What color are your brakes? What are the size and offsets of your rear wheels (and are they stock)?
Not true. I have one of the first C4S coupes. It is a MY 2002, delivered and bought brand new in Feb 2002 in Canton, Ohio. Had to bring it back to the dealership the next Saturday, since it was a "launch car" for them and they wanted it in the show room. I conceded it for that Sat, with the strict rule that the doors stay locked.
Starting with MY 2002, there were no C4 coupes, they were all C4S coupes. There were still C4 cabs. The C4S cabs did not show up until 2005, I believe.
Anyway, back to your original question.
The X74 is quite stiff. Among the Porsche-made options, it is the lowest and stiffest. I have the equivalent, the X73, on my C4S. I have one road to work that has bad-bad-bad expansion joints. X73 makes the drive irksome. But then I go to the track. X73 makes the drive oh-so-wonderful. If your car is going to be a frequent or daily driver, and if you have bad roads, and if you don't track frequently, go with the 030.
I would sware the one that I parked next looked narrower than mine. Maybe are the wheels and the offset.
I Florida, I have not come across any bad roads to speak, and since this is a "fun" car not a daily (may become due to addiction)< I am not worry about stiffness.
I will not tell the wife that I made some "minor" changes.
Thanks to all
PS: has anyone change the front bumper to that of the C4S. I like that look better. (I wonder if she will notice)
There are hugh differences between C4 narrow body and C4S (wide body).
6 cm wider: 1,83 m vs 1,77 m
rear fenders, front and rear bumpers, rear red strip, and a few more...
There is no problem to upgrade C4S front bumper in your C4. 996 40 th gets it as stock factory.
To further the OP's original question, does any know how the spring/shock rates compare between the GT3, ROW, and X74 compare? I've seen the PCA article which lists the stock and ROW settings, but nothing on the GT3 and X74.
I meant Feb. 2002 and yes the vast majority were cabs. I could've sworn I've seen sales figures for MY02 and a few C4 coupes were brought to N.A.; of course I can't find it now.
Stock rates (linear I believe) 146 F / 203 R
M030 rates (ROW AND US) 170 F / 260 R
H&R Springs (progressive) 170-210 F / 230-260 R
GT3: 228 F (linear) / 543 (progressive)
you won't find X73/X74 rates. I tried for along time and could never came up with rates. I've riden in one and the feel felt very similar to a GT3...which in my opinion has too agressive of valving in the shocks and not enough spring rate.
Quick question: It seems like many US standard suspension 996s I have seen have a bit of a sag in the rear... could this be due to higher mileage (like above 70K miles)? The rear springs showing their age?
I searched but couldn't find anything that mentioned this.
Joaquin,
Sorry for the delayed response. I've been busy with work, travel, etc. and haven't been on the board in a few days. At any rate, it appears AudiOn19s answered most of your questions. The GT3 control arms and anti-sway bars bolt right in. And yes, the parts also fit on Boxsters and Caymans. I didn't do the work myself so I can't provide details on "how" to do it, but it's a pretty common upgrade.
As for the handling improvements, the anti-sway bars reduce body roll and eliminated front inside wheel lift during acceleration out of tight corners. The control arms allowed me to dial in -2.5 degrees of negative camber. I've heard a rumor that negative camber can be dialed in by inverting the shocks and slotting the shock mount point, but I'm not 100% sure about this option. In my opinion, this is a less desirable option.
To clear up one bit of misinformation, the stock anti-sway bars on 40th aren't exactly the same as the M030. The diameter of one of the anti-sway bars is exactly the same (I believe the rear) as the stock C2 while the other is in between the stock C2 and the M030. I'm fairly (but not totally) sure the rear is the same and the front is smaller. Hopefully, someone else can chime in.
