Quote:
Originally Posted by Rybar
I do have a G-Link in my car now was upgraded last year.
|
Sorry, I looked at your feature page and it said leafs.
I haven't run mine down to see how much clearance is available at the frame rail when the differential touches the floorpan, maybe I will just for grins. Doesn't matter to me though, mine sits where I want it for the speedbumps I have to go over to drop my son off at school daily.
One of the issues is that many of us, me included, have run our cars at much less than the 3 inches of bump travel that suspension designers like to see. Alston is obviously going to design to reasonable ride standard (3"), and I bet the DSE Q-link has a similar design height. However, just like when we were running leafs, we are free to go lower depending on our personal needs. The problem is that the kit as sold didn't really leave much adjustment room to go lower, whereas the DSE design apparently lets you adjust lower. It is still not clear whether a lower ride height Q-link has any more meaningful travel, ie are we talking 1/4-1/2" or something more? You can't just measure from the axle to the frame and call it good, because I bet DSE's also bottoms before hitting the frame. Hitting the frame directly with the axle on a hard bump would surely bend it. Shorter springs are the easy answer, and there is nothing wrong with them as long as the user knows that they are limited in travel and still has bumpstops. I would still like to see a Q-link and a G-link bottomed, I doubt there is much difference.
The floor cutout of a Q-link is an advantage running tailpipes, but because the coilovers don't drop near as far as a leaf, it is actually pretty easy to run the pipes under the rear without them hanging low. I suspect one of the original reasons DSE went with the raised shock crossmember, was that to get the travel needed, you end up with a shock as long as they are. You can raise it into the floor, or lower it down below the axle. Lowering it down can potentially limit your rim size, ie a 15 rim on a g-link at its lowest adjustment may have the bottom of the shock below the rim. Illegal to run at an SCCA autocross that way. It is all tradeoffs, DSE and Alston took different routes, but arrive at virtually the same place.
The other issue is that I believe a 335 18 is not a tall enough tire, especially for a 67-8, because there is no way to tuck the front tire enough, unless it is short, which ends up eating ground clearance. The front of a 67-8 needs a 25.5 " tall tire. The problem is the lack of very many sizes in the range we need them. A 345 19 @ 27.2"is almost too tall, a 325 19 @ 26.7"might be the best.
Like I said, everyone gets to pick what is important to them. I have a one owner car that I didn't want to cut the floor out of, nor destroy the rear seat structure . It is bolt ons to make it original again, and it would take a concours judge to see the wide inner tubs. Handles well, reasonably priced and pretty easy to install. If I wanted it lower, I would have no qualms getting shorter springs.