To Lower or Not to Lower?

[optronix]

Cone autox is great too I am sorry, didn't mean to be an asswipe lol. Was more on the I can actually get a time reference out of this since the course does not change. I will say this and so out of topic, my problem with traditional auto x is not working but the little runs you get. 5/6 runs to be there all day is too much for me on my weekend. This lime rock autox program (and tons of people that come to this also do traditional auto x) you get probably 30-45 min, sometimes an hour of seat time (seriously its crazy), and you are there for 4 hours its really nice.

Also I am running the DSC with the springs settings which I know you helped develop with DCS and +R feels amazing so good job on that! Clearly am upgrade to the ITS module, I was worried I just spent a bunch of money for not really much of an upgrade than the ITS but this feels even better

Hey just happy to do my part lol. It was great just having the opportunity to chat it up with Tom at DSC (and @Maya@DSC was super friendly as well)! I think I've mentioned before I had a DSC on my 991.2 with "SPASM" e.g., Sports PASM- Porsche's more sporty version of their active suspension, which basically adds 10mm lower ride height and higher spring rates. It's great but was pretty rough on the street, and like the Type R, Sport+ mode was basically unusable- until the DSC. It was such a dramatic difference I started petitioning for it as soon as I got my DE5 so it was a no-brainer to get one for this platform. So far I have not been disappointed but to your point, have yet to get it out to a real motorsports application yet... in fact just put on my summer tires yesterday so still have yet to put this thing through the actual paces.

I do also agree that sometimes the time-in-seat calculation can be pretty absurd. For a typical event with my local PCA chapter, I get there around 7:30am and leave around 3:00pm... and get a grand total of about 7-8 minutes actually driving the car lololol. If you look at it that way it's a wonder anyone does it.

The appeal to me though in addition to all the aforementioned stuff, is that you get a different bar set each and every event. Different drivers, different cars, different course, different conditions... It's a challenge just to see who can adjust and adapt and that part is actually pretty thrilling to me.

But as a true benchmark to evaluate different settings? Not very scientific at all, I fully agree there. More of a "butt dyno" perspective. Having a static lap time to reference is far more compelling from a genuine "evidence gathering" perspective.

Sponsored

 

[Jack90210]

I'll add to this conversation with my own experiences of driving a lot of different cars, and also listening to people describe what they like about how cars handle relative to the way that they drive and interact with the car. It's always interesting because the vast majority of street drivers aren't good at interpreting feedback from the car, IMO.

A lot of sports-car types of drivers enjoy certain kinds of "sporty-feeling" inputs, but mods that further those inputs may detract from how a car *actually performs* as it approaches its limits, or may simply have nothing to do with performance (artificially "heavy" steering comes to mind). At the same time, there are certain aesthetic inclinations that reinforce those ideas about what inputs are good (e.g. "lowered cars corner better, so a stiff ride will always outperform a softer one") and also work against the goal of bettering the actual performance of the vehicle.

The hard part is to spend a lot of time, ideally with multiple vehicles, paying careful attention to how a car responds to inputs and perhaps even getting to experience how mods change those responses, and realizing that what looks best, or what works well on other cars, etc., can make things worse. Sometimes this is hard to realize if the wallet has already been cracked open and/or the car looks "better."

This is a long way of saying that I appreciate those who bring such experience to the table when they say, hey, this car is quite good out of the box, it could easily be made worse by common mods without a focused and holistic approach to improvement.

 

[ChampionshipWhiteFL5]

If I wasn't putting 18" wheels on the car, I would keep it stock. The 19's with 275/35 rubber fill the gap well. But the 18's will leave a gap again, so will drop .8 with J's Racing springs next week.

 

[ralden93]

Im currently at -2.8 in the front with the LBJ and -2.0 in the rear on a 275 35 18. I have a track day April 23rd and autox event the 26th. I am lowered on eibach sportlines so this is going to be the ultimate test if I'm going to keep the car lowered. I'm leaning towards putting the oem springs on again if I dont like how it handles and if I rub. Part of me misses not having a lowered car, but I love how it looks lowered

@mattrose4 Bro, any update on your track day with this set up?

 

[mattrose4]

@mattrose4 Bro, any update on your track day with this set up?

Track day went GREAT! No rubbing what so ever and car felt super gripped up! I did an autocross event as well a couple days after and same thing

 

[ralden93]

Track day went GREAT! No rubbing what so ever and car felt super gripped up! I did an autocross event as well a couple days after and same thing

@mattrose4 what wheel (and wheel size) and tire did you use?

 

[mattrose4]

@mattrose4 what wheel (and wheel size) and tire did you use?

wheel is 18x10.5 +47
APEX vs-5rs
Tire is 275 35 18 re71-rs
I do have LBJ as well so I'm at -2.9 in the front

 

[optronix]

wheel is 18x10.5 +47
APEX vs-5rs
Tire is 275 35 18 re71-rs
I do have LBJ as well so I'm at -2.9 in the front

This basically confirms that the FL5 has more room than the DE5. Any DE5 guys out there, pay attention.

Only data point left for full validation is for someone to chime in with 275 RZs. I do think they're substantially wider than the RS but "I think" isn't science lol.

 

[MooMoo]

This basically confirms that the FL5 has more room than the DE5. Any DE5 guys out there, pay attention.

Only data point left for full validation is for someone to chime in with 275 RZs. I do think they're substantially wider than the RS but "I think" isn't science lol.

the RZs are indeed wider, confirmed from a few friends that switched from RS to RZ

 

[optronix]

the RZs are indeed wider, confirmed from a few friends that switched from RS to RZ

There is still evidence that even 275 RS will rub on the DE5 though. I don't believe this car has much camber- mine does and still rubs with the RZ.

 

[MooMoo]

There is still evidence that even 275 RS will rub on the DE5 though. I don't believe this car has much camber- mine does and still rubs with the RZ.

yeah interesting that the DE has different clearances.

Sponsored