Vehicle & Technical > Range Rover
Do all of the RRC's sit lower at the back than the front
AndyN:
Mine sits about an inch and a half lower at the rear than at the front, is this normal as ive seen quite a few like it but it just doesnt look right.
I ve seen somewhere that you can get better rear springs that the police and commercial spec motors were fitted with but are they worth bothering with?
And if they just sag with age and should be replaced, what aftermarket spring/shocks do you guys and girls run on yours?
I'd be grateful of any advice as i'm new to all this, Andy.
Guardian.:
springs are shot mate, nice new set will sort you out.
they just sag with age, like me.
Range Rover Blues:
The back springs were designed to be soft, the rear end is supplimented by the Boge self-leveling unit but this won't do anything when the car is stationary. I think your springs are tired but does it bottom out?
Discos have heavier rear springs as they don't have the self-leveller, or the EFi had the red/whites as a heavy duty option, the standard spring should be progressive. With the red/whites I expect you will see the back end go up above standard.
Standard ride height is 790mm from floor to wheelarch eyebrow on standard 205 A/T.
Some folks think even the police spec (deisel front springs and red/white backs) are too soft and wallowy, they are definitely better with ARBs.
AndyN:
I've just nipped out and measured them and both sides of the rear are exactly level at 785mm.
maybe im imagining things!
It doesnt bottom out although over those cushion type speed humps it does seem to wobble a bit at the rear unless you go over it dead square, and it doesnt feel any more wallowy than my old shogun did. weird
Range Rover Blues:
That wobbliness over speed bumpsis beczause the back end sits on an A fram connected at the top of the axle, it raises the roll centre of the car amiking it stable in high speed corners but at the expense of lateraql stability over rough ground.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version