I wanted to improve the stance and drivability of my 17’ 911 C2. Like anyone, I researched the options and believed that the KW HAS kit provided the best options. I knew I would the C2 wasn’t going to be tracked so coilovers were a bit overkill but the car would benefit from a better overall stance and suspension. Thinking that springs alone wouldn’t provide the adjustability needed, I chose the next best thing. I chose a shop near where I live that was an authorized dealer/installer. After 3 days, I got the C2 back and the stance wasn’t where I thought it should be and asked the owner some questions. Why isn’t the front lower? I was told that the front suspension was bottomed out and no further adjustment could be made. The KW webpage promises anywhere from 0.6” to 1.4” adjustment . These kits aren’t cheap so expectations are high. On my C2, I only got 0.37” ! Thus begins the search for answers. Contacting KW was the next step. I did so via the website and within a few days, I got a response. Not a very encouraging or helpful one but nonetheless a response. After jumping through some hoops for KW, like measuring distances from hub to fender, from knuckle bolt to spring perch and so on. I was told that the engineers in Germany said that ‘everything’ was within spec. One particular measurement they used was the knuckle bolt to spring perch. Mine measured 130mm, however, the install manual listed 135mm as the minimum. I never got an answer as to why or how that was within tolerance. I repeatedly asked why the product description listed 0.6” to 1.4” adjustment when that never happened on my C2. Again, no answer from KW. So now I have a very expensive suspension system that doesn’t work as advertised. Anyone considering KW may want to take a second look elsewhere.
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHKW HAS Kit Troubles
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 · 1 captured posts examined · 1 partial discussions
Coverage and how to read this overview
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.
1 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
- Planet-9: 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: 20261026T105141Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
