987.2 Cayman Best Road Suspension Setup - Page 1 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

I've recently bought a 2012 Cayman 2.9 and am planning on keeping it for the longer term. Its only done 60k miles but many suspension components would benefit from an age related refresh. A lot of the cost will be labour (not something I can do myself), such that I'm wondering whether it makes sense for a road car to stay OEM or come up with an OEM+. I'm thinking Meyle for the suspension arms etc. What to do about the shocks, springs, ARB? I've got 19, 18 and 17" wheels but intending to run 17" with PS5 tyres. 1) Stock Cayman Springs and Bilstein B4 dampers. 2) Cayman R springs, Bilstein B4 dampers (does the R run B6s?) and Cayman R ARB - sensible to change the ARB? 3) Cayman R Springs, Koni Sport dampers? Anyone tried and rates anything else? Its a road car only with compliance, feel and feedback favoured over ultimate grip. Many thanks!

The B4 damper is a bit crude, the B6/B8 is far too firm for a road car imho, and even their coilvers and the ones from KW can be too much, even with custom springs. Not a Cayman gen 2, but after loads of playing around with different damper and spring set ups on the 986, 996 and 997 for me the best was Koni Special Actives with H&R springs. This combo gives you really nice compliance at lower speeds, soaking up our crappy UK roads and making the car really quite comfortable, but as you press on it really firms up, bit never getting to the point where it is too firm and the back end starts skipping around. It also lowers the car quite a bit, so the turn in feels really great too. As far as arms go, I like the Meyle stuff, the ball joints etc. feel a little chunkier than others out there. I like the geo as following for the road... Front toe in 0.03 Camber -0.45 Rear toe in 0.15 Camber -1.6 This keeps it feeling really neutral and doesn't make the back end feel like it could kick out all the time, you have to provoke it to do so. It also means it is not constantly tram lining all over the road either, it is stable and relaxing. Too many people ask for a "fast road" set up, but that often ends up with very little toe in, often a bit of toe out up front, and too much camber for the road, which is great on a track, but not very confidence inspiring on the road. I'm sure others will chip in saying something completely different. https://www.design911shop.com/porsche/cayman-987c-... https://www.design911shop.com/p/handr-lowering-spr...

One other thing, I would look at Bridgestone Sport or Conti Sport Contact 7 tyres as well, the Michelins really numb the steering, the initial turn in is just not good at all, on the Bridgestones and Contis it feels so much sharper. And any wheels size will feel OK with the Koni's. My preference would be whatever size those tyres are available in more than the size itself. I prefer 17 and 18s, but I would happily have 19s with those dampers and springs.

All very subjective, you won't get a definitive answer. I've had the Bilstein B8s, for instance, on a 987 combined with both Eibach an H&R springs and the dampers were not at all too firm for the road. However, I would say both of the lowering spring sets for the 987 clearly drop the front axle too much. This a significant problem. On 987s I've owned: 987.1 Cayman S and Boxster S standard passive 987.1 Cayman S with Bilstein B8 passive and both Eibach and H&Rs springs 987.2 Cayman S PASM 987.2 A second Cayman S with PASM with the DSC Sport control box 987.2 Second Cayman S upgraded to Bilstein B16 Damptronic and with the DSC control box I've also driven: 987R 987.1 on KW V3 987.2 on Ohlins R&T I haven't tried the Konis, but have heard generally good things. The Bilstein B16 Damptronic I probably wouldn't recommend, I don't think the damper is great. PASM as standard is too little spring and damper rate in standard and then too much damping in Sport mode. With the DSC box you can address the dampers, but obviously not the spring rate. Personally, I'd want a touch more spring rate for fast road. The B8s with the lowering springs were the best of the bunch I've actually run myself, better than the B16s with that caveat of the front axle being lowered too much with the spring kits, the B16s obviously allow you to set the ride height exactly as you prefer. There are other solutions out there like Ohlins R&T and then some more genuinely high end stuff, which when done right would be the best solution. But you need to either know what you're doing or get some very good advice. They need to be set up right. Then there's the question of how often they might need rebuilding. As far as I understand, the really fancy stuff needs frequent rebuilds to stay near their best, which is too much bother for me. Personally, were I doing another 987, I'd get one without PASM and fit the R springs and dampers, and the R rear ARB. This is not because it's the absolute best solution in every way. But because it's pretty good, an absolutely known quantity and requires relatively little know how to fit and setup. You'll just want a decent alignment afterwards. The R springs lower the car the correct amount (not a great deal, about 15mm lower than a PASM car) to retain both usability and the correct kinematics. The lowering spring kits take the struts out of their optimal operating range and the various coilover kits can be a little complicated in practice. You'll get all sorts of opinions on spring rates, etc. With the R kit you'll get something that definitely works, is low risk, sensible cost, any half decent indy will be able to fit and it won't have you going back and forth trying to get it working well and possibly ending up with something you haven't quite maximised and / or don't fully understand. Unless you really want to get deep into the details and don't mind a fair bit of back and forth getting something working, the R kit I think is the best compromise. And I'd definitely go with 17s on a 987, personally, for road driving. Much more fun. Anyway, to generalise, I'd say don't use lowering kits, use factory springs, R if you want a judicious drop and a touch more rate, then either R dampers, B4s if comfort is the most important thing, or maybe the Konis, but I can't directly comment on them. And then only go coilovers if you're up for getting into the weeds on the details.

You've two options : Cayman R springs, dampers and ARB's or custom sprung Ohlins R & T's. The Ohlins run OE top mounts, so some adjustable front coffin arms to enable you to dial some additional camber would be beneficial, as would some adjustable front castor arms. The PS4 S are numb, but with sufficient camber and castor, the turn in can be made as sharp as you want it whilst retaining civility/stability in a straight line. The Ohlins damping will far outshine the R dampers or indeed the Bilsteins. Rebuild recommended every 25-30k road miles.

I have had my 2.9 now for 6 years. Its incomparable to stock the way it rides and handles now but a complete weapon. All depends on how far you want to take it. OHLINS r&t fitted at 15.5k miles with everything else stock. Rides like a magic carpet. Can stiffen dampers to make it like rock but still compliant. At damper refurb needed after 30k (around £1.5k) I did the following; Yellow engine mount All new oem top mounts all round New coffin arms front and rear with powerflex purple centre pucks and black inners both ends. The front inners give you increased caster / camber. Cayman R arb The car feels even more connected but no harsher. Fully corner balanced its a real rocket exiting roundabouts and so stable at speed. Highly reccomend if a keeper.

Thank you very much for all of these tips. Now its time to start assembling parts and working out next steps.

Also worth noting the centre bushes on the MEYLE rear coffin arms are thought to be too soft. CTE brand for the rear arms are probably current best pattern option.

Good point. I used Meyle fronts and then CTE rears on my 997. I forgot about that. I will be honest, it was more the car was apart and ECP only had CTE rears in stock, but then read that was not a bad move.

Not much help but I was looking at a Cayman that had been to centre gravity for suspension upgrades and it had the Koni active set up with Eibach springs from memory. Something they recommended too for mostly road use.

I'm struggling a bit to find rear CTE coffin arms anywhere. I understand they are slightly different front to rear on a 987.2? The x86 cars had the same arms front and rear I believe. Anytime knows anywhere selling them at a reasonable price?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/234805166083

Following the link and checking if it fits, says no for 987.2 cars.

gsewell said: Following the link and checking if it fits, says no for 987.2 cars. That'll just be bad listing data. It's the same part for 987.1 as 987.2. And 997.1 and 997.2. IE if you go to Porsche, they will sell you the same rear coffin arm for all those cars. Actually, I think that arm is also for both front and rear on the non-GT 9x6 cars, too. Think it might be the same arm on the rear of the 981/982, as per this Design 911 listing which shows the same OE arm from Porsche for all these models: Porsche 987 Boxster -Rear Porsche Cayman -Rear Porsche 997 Gen1 -Rear Porsche 997 Gen2 -Rear Porsche 981 Boxster -Rear Porsche 981 Cayman -Rear Porsche 718 Boxster -Rear Porsche 718 Cayman -Rear https://www.design911.co.uk/p/control-arm-rear-por... It's the same arm on a zillion models.

Sorry, back to suspension (Coffin) arms. Looking at CTE's own website, they list different arms front and rear on all 987... I've found a good source of rear CTE arms, would it be unwise to order 4 of these and ask to use them on the front too?

jonindorset said: Sorry, back to suspension (Coffin) arms. Looking at CTE's own website, they list different arms front and rear on all 987... I've found a good source of rear CTE arms, would it be unwise to order 4 of these and ask to use them on the front too? Judging by this on their website, the front and rear arms contain bushes that have a slightly different shore hardness (the fronts are harder) : https://www.cteparts.tw/product_en/CS-3402 And this drawing further muddies the water because it lists the front bushes as being considerably harder than the the rear bushes on the first drawing I've linked to : https://www.cteparts.tw/product_en/CS-3431 Have a chat with Ben at String Theory, he should be able to advise you.

Front and rear arms on the 987 are not the same. They were the same on the 9x6, not so on the 9x7. I think the rear arm on the 9x7 is carried over from the 9x6, while the front axle got a new coffin arm spec for the 9x7. In any case, for 9x7, front and rear coffin arms are different. The most obvious visual difference is the central bush colour / material and the shape of the hole. 987 front: 987 rear (and 9x6 front and rear): Anyway, the front Meyle arms are thought to be fine re bush stiffness. It's the rear Meyle arms that are thought to be too soft regarding the middle bush. It may just be the middle bush insert that's different, front to rear, on the 9x7 with the rest of the arm the same. But in any case, you wouldn't want to use four rear arms, even if they could physically be fitted (I don't think they could be, I think the middle bush is quite a bit thicker on the front arm, IIRC). Edited by f6box on Friday 7th March 13:46

f6box said: Front and rear arms on the 987 are not the same. They were the same on the 9x6, not so on the 9x7. I think the rear arm on the 9x7 is carried over from the 9x6, while the front axle got a new coffin arm spec for the 9x7. In any case, for 9x7, front and rear coffin arms are different. The most obvious visual difference is the central bush colour / material and the shape of the hole. 987 front: 987 rear (and 9x6 front and rear): Anyway, the front Meyle arms are thought to be fine re bush stiffness. It's the rear Meyle arms that are thought to be too soft regarding the middle bush. It may just be the middle bush insert that's different, front to rear, on the 9x7 with the rest of the arm the same. But in any case, you wouldn't want to use four rear arms, even if they could physically be fitted (I don't think they could be, I think the middle bush is quite a bit thicker on the front arm, IIRC) . This ^ (the bit in bold specifically)

You would need to use 986/996 tuning forks to use the rear arms on the front, absolutely no point and a bit of a downgrade all round.

Thank you so much guys, really helpful. I found rear CTE arms on eBay in an ECP shop for just £103 for the pair. Not so lucky on Meyle fronts but still only £208 a pair.