ride height

Allowing the springs to lengthen will lower the car and make the ride softer.

mrcheerful

If you compress the spring it'll be firmer and the car will ride higher

- you're compressing it from the bottom, so the length between the eyes of the damper won't be changed.

BEWARE - if you unscrew it as far as possible the car will not only ride lower but will also have softer suspension further increasing the chances of grounding.

The adjusters are for changing the spring rate - or more precisely the spring pre-load, and aren't really suitable for adjusting ride-height. That should be done elsewhere - either by shorter units or by more radical changes to the suspension geometry.

Erm... That's not how it happens. Winding up the collar won't compress the spring at all. It'll move the whole spring upwards, and the car with it. Whilst you're changing the setting with the wheel off the ground or the damper off the car, you will see the spring length change, but that means nothing - it's only happening because the damper is up against it's end-stop. Once it's loaded back up, the spring will find it's old length again.

It won't be any softer. All the weight of the car will be on the springs just as it was before the move. The only extra risk of grounding comes from the lower ride height.

The adjusters are *only* there to adjust the ride height. The pre-load that they happen to give the spring with the suspension at full-droop is irrelevant once you put the weight of the car on it's wheels and the damper moves away from it's end-stop. If you want to change the spring rate you have to change the spring.

Colin.

The message from snipped-for-privacy@aol.comNoEmails (Dave Baker) contains these words:

Fair enough.

Top posting is where you put your message above the message text you are replying to. Personally I prefer it as you can usually follow a topic thread without doing a lot of scrolling. If you then think 'What are they on about' you can scroll down and see. Then continue following the thread. Some people seem take it upon themselves to be the 'guardians' of a newsgroup though and try to dictate how things should be done. Unless it is a moderated newgroup though and the 'complainant' is the moderator they should take a walk.

Newsgroups attract all sorts (even mine) and that includes those who, maybe not achieving much else, try to make there mark in places like this.

Ignore them. They thrive on attention.

Vin

The message from "Hawkey" contains these words:

Putting your reply above the bit you're replying to. When you think about it, it goes against all common sense to reply to something that the reader hasn't yet read!

Generally (and there are exceptions) it's best to put your reply underneath the bit you're replying to.

As for blank lines - well, if you try reading a message that's a few dozen lines long but has no line-breaks in it you'll go all googlyeyed. It's probably OK for you 'cos you know what you wrote, but people often read on tired old computer monitors with tired old eyes and if you want a helpful reply, be helpful and have the occasional paragraph break.

See, that wasn't hard, was it?

Erm....pardon me for a minute, but I do think Dave was being just the slightest bit sarcastic.

Peter

Very well put. And bottom posted as well.

Peter

Well.... I did say it was a preference not a hard and fast rule. Well spotted though. :-)

Depends on the context which form makes most sense. Don't see why anyone should be flamed (do they still call it that?) over which they choose.

Darn!!! I've done it again.

Vin.

Hawkey ( snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

You presume wrong.

The BOTTOM's *this* end.

You Sure ?

Everthing seems different when your lied flat on your back with the thread up on axle stands

Kevin B

This is bottom posting. Jeremy.