YOUR RESEARCHWhat do you think of these measurements?
1 matching discussions were examined; no attributable action/outcome evidence was detected. No consensus or repair conclusion is claimed.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Read captured repliesInsufficient extracted evidence does not mean there is no answer in the original discussions.
1 matching discussions · 9 captured posts examined · 0 partial discussions
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.
9 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
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 always thought the car rode "nose high". Saw the other thread that showed exactly where to measure it, front is 155 mm, seems within spec. Rears are 145, well below the 163. I have stock 18" tires, here's a pic of the front, rear, and a side view. What do you'all think, recommendations? front rear side __________________
Don�t know, but if you share the link to the other thread, I can measure mine and compare.
I measured mine some time ago and found super tired springs. They all measured right around 141mm. The spec I found in the manual said they should be 157+/-10mm. The funny thing is that even with the sagging springs, I think the height looks high. 137mm chassis to ground, 205/50r17 tire 141mm chassis to ground, 255/40r17 tire Next step, Ohlin's. Standard Ohlin's height should bring it down to 132 or so.
Here's a similar one for you. With stock tires (17"), does anyone know how much further the rear tire sticks out than the front? I think I figured it at around 1.5" one time but I can't remember how I did it. I want to answer this question - If the car is perfectly straight, how much closer to the wall should the rear tire be compared to the front tire? I stuff 2 cars in my garage and back the 911 in. There are about 3" of play side to side where the 911 is parked decently. Even after a year I always seem to end up on a little bit of an angle. When I first got it, I put some painters tape down the same distance from the wall where each left tire should be but I didn't take the difference in track between front and rear into account.
We should stage interventions for our friends who drive 911�s with excessive wheel gap.
Quotes source post: 17536705
https://rennlist.com/forums/996-foru...l#post17532053
Eibach - lowers 25mm https://www.fcpeuro.com/products/pro...ibach-7213-140 H&R - lowers 32mm https://www.fcpeuro.com/products/por...-r-sport-29513 Stock rear spring - https://www.pelicanparts.com/More_In...96J&DID=203589 I really don't want to lower it, I drive over 200 miles a week over crap roads and I'm worried that will harm my "daily driverness" of the car. Hm, what do you guys think?
I got to say..... we don't have many, if any, female members here, but the title to this thread can be very misleading. My Ohlins arrived last week and am just waiting for front end links and will have my OEM sport springs available for sale, if still interested. I'll shoot you a PM back once they're off.
Quotes source post: 17537027
We of a certain age don't need the car to be any lower while getting in and out.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
