Ride Height

[LordFly]

It has come to my attention that my car sits about as high as the BTTF 3 car. It looks kind of ridiculous. I'm aware the cars were jacked up to meet US bumper regulations, but it's time to fix that and put it back how Lotus intended. Now I'm not sure where or how to measure ride height properly, but at the fenders made the most sense to me, since that's where the suspension is. I do have less than 1/4 tank of gas, but this seems a little insane:

1785117852

Does anyone have specs on what the intended height should be? And what suspension does everyone prefer to achieve correct height.

[vwdmc16]

I found the best "Stance" is about 22.75 front and 25.5" rear. Admittedly that is pretty low as possible for a decent ride on real and sometimes rough streets (IMO)

[LordFly]

Wow, that's 4" lower than I'm sitting. I have a feeling your California roads are a lot smoother than my Canadian ones. Are there "official" heights anywhere? Or specific numbers of how much the car was raised to meet the bumper regs? I believe overall car height is/was suppose to be 44", and I'm at least a good 2" over that.

I guess an adjustable suspension would be best so that I can play with ride heights a little.

[vwdmc16]

No Cali is broke and alot if the city hwys and interstates are in pretty bad shape. I recall Canada having nice roads (in the parts of Alberta that I drove atleast)

Getting adjustable rear coil overs is not hard, ride height can be changed within minutes, the front however is not readily adjustable but setups like DMCH's Eibach lowering kit gets the car right where it should be and not as low as mine.

[jmettee]

My original front fender measurements were at about that same measurement. I just finished installing Rob Grady's springs & LOVE the look. Not too low & front fenders now measure about 1.25" lower. This is the result with stock rear height (pic below). While driving, the front end "lurch & dive" when shifting is much less & the steering has a better feel.

I don't know what Lotus intended, but without looking, I think the shop manual calls for a 5.5" clearance under the front & rear frame areas for alignment. I don't know what this equivalent fender height is, but that may be close to the correct intent assuming it's based on all production suspension design geometries.

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/388533_10200854481228023_1754081580_n.jpg

[WelmoedJ]

The front of my car has 19 cm (approx. 7.5 inches) between ground and spoiler.
Haven't yet checked the rear clearance but that's usually always better than the front (more).

The contents (quantity) of the fuel tank doesn't influence that front clearance.
However that may differ if your front springs are weak.

[LordFly]

Sorry, still a little dark out, but look at the front end of my car! Feel like I'm driving the D-Rex ;)

17863

[jawn101]

Sorry, still a little dark out, but look at the front end of my car! Feel like I'm driving the D-Rex ;)

17863

Yeah, that's crazy. And I don't believe the front should be so much higher than the rear, either!

Here's how mine looked after putting in just the lowering springs at all 4 corners, no other changes.

[LordFly]

Here's how mine looked after putting in just the lowering springs at all 4 corners, no other changes.

That looks good, I like that. I don't know why my front is so high. I'm going to have to see if the PO put crazy springs in it or something.

[jawn101]

That looks good, I like that. I don't know why my front is so high. I'm going to have to see if the PO put crazy springs in it or something.

I'm betting the front is actually stock height (which I always thought looked like an offroad package :lol:) but the rear is lowered somehow.

[Jimmyvonviggle]

You must have one of those offroading DeLoreans.

I think ride height is subjected, yes sure there probably is a figure out there to how it was intended to be. But I think you should play with it until you find the height that feels right for you.

[LordFly]

So full coilover system instead of just lowing springs? Anybody have any recommendations?

[LordFly]

The KW Suspension (http://www.kw-store.com/products/kw-coilover-kit-v2-162.html) only allows at most a 1.8" drop? I think I need more than that...

[David T]

If you are going to mess with the ride height you must realign camber front and rear and toe for the front. You are also going to lose suspension travel so you may hit the upper rebound bumper. You are also going to have to be careful with dips and potholes. As far as I know there is no other official height spec that what is in the Workshop Manual. If you have ground effects you have to be very careful. On one car we almost ripped the side ground effects off just getting the car onto a hoist and we were pushing it on! You will need to get adjustable rear lower links to adjust the camber on the rear. Do not forget once you lower the car it will get even lower when you load the car up with a full tank of fuel, luggage and passengers. I challenge anyone to come up with ANY documentation that Lotus intended the car to ride lower. The myth is the car was designed to ride at a lower height but after they did that they realized they were too low to pass US requirements so they "jacked up" the suspension. I have never seen anything to confirm that. Just think about that logically. It would mean all of the springs that were purchased would have to be reworked (if possible) or scrapped and all new stock purchased. All documentation would have to be changed too. No small undertaking. Lotus was (and is) VERY familiar with US requirements, it is their largest market for their products too! Hard to believe they could make a mistake like that.
David Teitelbaum

[dustybarn]

The myth is the car was designed to ride at a lower height but after they did that they realized they were too low to pass US requirements so they "jacked up" the suspension. I have never seen anything to confirm that. Just think about that logically. It would mean all of the springs that were purchased would have to be reworked (if possible) or scrapped and all new stock purchased. All documentation would have to be changed too. No small undertaking. Lotus was (and is) VERY familiar with US requirements, it is their largest market for their products too! Hard to believe they could make a mistake like that.
David Teitelbaum

I agree that there is no evidence to suggest that the car did not meet headlight and bumper requirements without raising the ride height. IIRC I've seen documentation that it does meet the standards even at a significantly lower height. However, I think it's pretty clear that the ride height was changed at some point prior to production; photos of the Visioneering car and the fiberglass Lotus development mules all appear to show a much lower front ride height than was eventually marketed. The big question is WHY.

[jmettee]

I challenge anyone to come up with ANY documentation that Lotus intended the car to ride lower.

David Teitelbaum

David, only thing I can find & think suggests something different than what we have in our garages is 3 pages in the shop manual:

Page A:04:01: Ground clearance in front of 5.60" & 6.10" in the rear
Page H:08:01: Directs to set front cross-member height to 5.5" to set front toe
Page K:08:01: Directs to set rear cross-member height to 5.5" to set rear toe

When I last got an alignment, I recall they had to REALLY weigh the front end down to get it close to 5.50" clearance. This tells me that the front of the car at stock height is no where near the ground clearance or alignment height. Further, I don't believe it's normal to weigh a car down to achieve a height configuration for alignment.

I am not home to measure my car now, but there are not too many other parts on the car lower than the cross-members. Since the ground clearance & alignment values are relatively close, I would think that anything above this means that the car is not at the height that was intended when the manuals were written. The fact that my car needed to be lowered over 1" in the front to get near the recommended alignment height tells me something is different.

[dmc6960]

Martin Gutkowski (http://dmctalk.org/member.php?98-DCUK-Martin) used to sell front lowering springs. Many DMCTalk folks have them in their cars, including myself. They were in my opinion the best option but sadly I don't think he sells them anymore. They lower the average car's front about 2" from stock. Some cars saw a little more drop. I installed spax shocks at the same time and left the rear height the same. Its an incredible difference, and puts the car where it is supposed to be.

[dmc6960]

I can also assure you that as odd as it is, you have a completely stock suspension. Yes, it rides that high, and seems to get a little higher with age. Those other wheels you have probably dont help matters either.

I've dug up some old pictures from my suspension rebuild in spring of 2010.

Here is the original ride I drove on for 10 years...

17871

Here is the direct comparison between the stock springs and new Martin springs...

17870

And after everything was all done (a LOT more than just springs), here is the result...

17872

[mluder]

Sorry, still a little dark out, but look at the front end of my car! Feel like I'm driving the D-Rex ;)

17863

Might it also be a case of the wheels being too small?

Cheers
Steven

[mluder]

I can also assure you that as odd as it is, you have a completely stock suspension. Yes, it rides that high, and seems to get a little higher with age. Those other wheels you have probably dont help matters either.

I've dug up some old pictures from my suspension rebuild in spring of 2010.

Here is the original ride I drove on for 10 years...

17871


I have to say I think this is way higher than stock. My car's suspension is stock and it looks much more like your "after" picture here.



And after everything was all done (a LOT more than just springs), here is the result...

17872

Here's mine... (I artificially brightened the photo so you can see teh wheels relative to the fender)
17876

Cheers
Steven

[Farrar]

This is my car with Houston's Eibach springs on. I think it looks just right at this height. The handling was improved, as well, in my opinion.

Still available -- $400 at delorean.com.

17877

[jmettee]

For comparison, here is my car stock. Definitely high.
17878


Just measured the cross members for comparison to the shop manual for alignment. With PJ Grady front springs on front & stock on rear, 5.5" front & 6.25 at rear. Pretty dang close to published ground clearances now. Front was 1.25" high on stock springs.

[micmak]

Hey Devon,
There is a cheaper route also; Cut your front springs. I know some people frown at the thought of such a thing, but I did it and I have no regrets. I will probably buy new springs sooner or later, but I decided to cut mine shortly after I bought the car a few years back, just to see if I liked the stance of a lower front. I DO like it:)! It is much better. Handling is good, cornering has no negative feeling as far as I am concerned aside from a little under steer – just a little, but I got used to that right away. It is a very low-cost alternative if you plan on replacing your springs anyway. I totally recommend it. There was a BIG long thread on this on the old forum. Pity we can’t access it now because I am sure all the questions you might have would have been answered in it plus all the pros and cons to cutting. As I say, some people will not recommend it, but I’m pleased with the results. Look at these before and after pics. Obviously they are not taken at the same angle and the car looks quite different from one pic to the next, but note the space above the front wheel in both pictures.

......Mike......

17882 17883

[steve6864]

I`m, at 24.5" front and 26" rear, but ,I`m a week away from putting on slightly lower profile fronts that will drop it a bit.6864.

[Jacko]

I found the best "Stance" is about 22.75 front and 25.5" rear. Admittedly that is pretty low as possible for a decent ride on real and sometimes rough streets (IMO)Wolff, my car sits with the front fender arch at 22.5" and the rear 25.5", almost exactly the same as yours. How did you achieve that front height? I cut the front springs off to 12.75" free standing. Of course, there has been a lot of discussion about ride height and there are several opinions about it but all the 'factory' shortened springs look too tall in the front ... my $.02.
The absolute lowest part of the car is the two little loops welded to the frame in front ... for towing? Mine measures exactly 3".

17885

[SS Spoiler]

I did the cheap lowering trick back in 1988, with my frame swap. At the time it was the only option. Move the front springs to the back, and move the back springs to the front, after cutting two and a half coils off. It worked well for years, until I noticed the front was sagging more than before. With the car level, I could barely squeeze my fingers between the front tire and the fender. After hearing Dave S. [DMCMW] mention he's seen some fender damage from sharp turns on bumps, I picked up a pair of Houstons springs at Lexington DCS. Car looks and rides better now. I wonder if I had only cut one and a half coils, it would have been ok? I think Don Steger was the first to do this. Before the internet our only source of information was copies of DeLorean World, where Don was tech advisor.

Paul Cerny #2691
Kalispell, MT

[Rich]

Page H:08:01: Directs to set front cross-member height to 5.5" to set front toe
Page K:08:01: Directs to set rear cross-member height to 5.5" to set rear toe
Recommending:

A. Plan to spend ~$1000, including springs, shocks, alignment.
B. Get the Eibach front and rear spring kit from one of the D vendors. And possibly new shocks as noted below.
C. Enjoy the new ride and accompanying results.

When replacing the springs put new shocks on front and rear unless your rears are already fitted with adjustable collars (originals were not).

Set the rear ride height to match front using the collar adjustment on the shocks (front is not adjustable - the Eibachs in front will get you to the front spec). The x-members will be a bit lower than the 5.5in. book spec. Align all 4 wheels as noted by David T. As with any such mods be sure to keep suspension bushing nuts semi-tight until the suspension is carrying the car again, then tighten, so the bushings aren't pre-torqued at rest. Finally, have all 4 headlamps adjusted. While both ends are lower in this case the front drops more than the rear does. Consider getting a rear camber kit. With the rear set to the specifed ride height the camber will probably be out of spec.

Three results:

1. Your D will ride as shown in the second of these two photos.
2. Your D will have correct spring rates at both ends (unlike a front-rear swap/chop).
3. The steering/handling will improve as a result of the reduction in roll center and the tie rods becoming horizontal as originally designed by Lotus.

Photos are with empty car and full fuel.

ORIGINAL:
http://dmctalk.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=3625&d=1313372191

WITH EIBACHS and with rear ride height matched to front, as measured at F/R jacking points and at F/R crossmembers:
http://dmctalk.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=3624&d=1313372184

Finished product:
http://dmctalk.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=12859&d=1346629112

[David T]

It is not uncommon to have a spec for the height at which to set all of the other parameters. Not normally followed in practice. The logic for it goes like this, instead of requiring a full tank of gas, luggage and two adults to sit in the car during an alignment you set a height and add weight to get the car to settle to the necessary position. Camber, castor and toe can (and usually do) vary as the car moves up and down. The designers pick a particular position at which to set everything around which it can vary but at least when the car is at that height all of the adjustments will be where they are intended to be. It is kind of like how the idle mixture is set when you follow the procedure in the manual. You have to actually change the idle speed to do it. That does not mean that is where the designers originally wanted the motor to idle at. It is just a parameter you need to get to to set the other things you really want. Getting back to ride height, the prototype may have had a different height. That's why they BUILD a prototype, to finalize things like ride height, spring selection, shock rates, tires, etc. You want to get this stuff right BEFORE you commit to production and buy a boatload of springs, tires, and shocks. I will not get into an argument about esthetics. What looks good to one person can look awful to another. That is a personal preference and there is no good or bad about that. I am not against lowering the car, just know what you are doing and why. Don't say it is because that is where is is supposed to be because Lotus Engineering fu-ked up and the car had to be raised to be legal.
David Teitelbaum

[jmettee]

[QUOTE=Rich;97506]
Three results:

1. Your D will ride as shown in the second of these two photos.
2. Your D will have correct spring rates at both ends (unlike a front-rear swap/chop).
3. The steering/handling will improve as a result of the reduction in roll center and the tie rods becoming horizontal as originally designed by Lotus.

Rich: Good post, all good points, especially the last. The OEM configuration has the tie rods high at the rack & low at the knuckle. This is horrible as you brake or bounce the front end as the toe could go from positive to 0 (or worse, negative) as the tie rods go horizontal. My previous post about ground clearances AND the tie-rod geometry are enough for me to believe the lowered state is the originally-intended state for the car design. I can't see how the original high sprung height & horrible steering/tie-rod geometry could have been intended for use on a "sports car".

[LordFly]

I challenge anyone to come up with ANY documentation that Lotus intended the car to ride lower. The myth is the car was designed to ride at a lower height but after they did that they realized they were too low to pass US requirements so they "jacked up" the suspension.

David is right, I've never actually seen this documented. It just seems to be one of those things that's said so many times it becomes "fact". Now maybe this is along the same lines, but every spec listing I can find anywhere, lists overall car height at 44.9". Mine is 46.5". I'm not trying to argue the jacked up bumper regs thing (it does seem unlikely if you think about it), I'm just saying my car sits high. Yes, the wheels and tires are wrong, the fronts are 205/50s instead of 195/60s. But that would actually lower my car slightly, so if anything, with the correct wheels, it'll sit even higher! I don't know why or how, but the car has been around for 30 years, that a LONG time for people to do stupid things to it. And given the "work" done by the PO, I wouldn't be surprised if he threw in whatever set of springs he had lying around.

Again, not saying it's necessarily "wrong" where it is now, but visually, it looks very wrong. I'd like to fix it for that reason if nothing else.

[Rich]

Regarding the "design" front ride height question.

I, too, have not seen documentation showing that the front suspension specs called for it to be "jacked up" at the last minute to meet some federal headlight or bumper rules. It's a popular but unproven story to my knowledge.

On the other hand James Espey notes in his book that "The nose high appearance of many DeLoreans is the result of poor quality original coil springs..."

This is in line with LordFly's note that his car seems to have a front ride height that is even higher than he sees on other OEM-sprung DeLoreans. "Poor quality...springs" imply variation in springs vs the specs along the lines of LordFly's observation. So all of the springs might have been "tall" and their compressed height could have varied a lot. It's a consistent story, proven or not.

Secondly did Giugiaro and/or Lotus, intend the cars to come out "nose high"? Doubtful. Check the prototypes.

Finally, conventional suspension designs call for minimal change in toe when the car is near its normal ride height (near-horizontal tie rods). Go look at other cars with OEM suspensions. The few I have informally surveyed have horizontal tie rods. Given Lotus' deep expertise in suspension design it's hard to believe that our cars came out as they intended, at least in this respect. They had no control over the parts supply or acceptance after their contract ended.

Getting back to the original question James does go on to say that the Eibach spring upgrade is most likely the most popular suspension mod.

I just got a copy of Nick Sutton's book - perhaps he covers this persistent question in there somewhere. Am open to evidence from authoritative sources. Why the factory never addressed this remains a mystery.

[jawn101]

I just got a copy of Nick Sutton's book - perhaps he covers this persistent question in there somewhere. Am open to evidence from authoritative sources. Why the factory never addressed this remains a mystery.

I didn't see anything about it in there, but it was a very good book. I wonder if Nick would know more about this phenomenon! It seems right up his alley.

[Nicholas R]

I was always under the impression that the reason the ride height is so off is because the original plan was for the car to have larger rims. Maybe 15's in the front and 16's in the back? Hell prototype 1 has 16" rims in the front (and I believe 17" in the back)! I still hate that we got stuck with the 14's and 15's. :P

[LordFly]

Well my current plan is to cut the existing spring (OEM or whatever the hell is in there) to achieve the height I want, then work out how to properly achieve it from there. I just hope the temporarily cut springs don't become permanent because of laziness. After all, this is a DeLorean, not a mustang.

[jawn101]

Well my current plan is to cut the existing spring (OEM or whatever the hell is in there) to achieve the height I want, then work out how to properly achieve it from there. I just hope the temporarily cut springs don't become permanent because of laziness. After all, this is a DeLorean, not a mustang.

Just don't heat them.

http://dmctalk.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=17900&d=1365113958

Ask me how that felt to drive. :lol:

[LordFly]

How the hell did that happen?!

[jawn101]

How the hell did that happen?!

PO blowtorched them, but did it with the springs on the car and could only reach the outer half, not the half next to the tub. The car felt *completely* out of control around corners and was extremely creaky.

My personal opinion is that you're going to have to rent/buy/borrow spring compressors to remove your OEM ones to cut them. And by doing so, you change the spring rate and can compromise the material itself. Then you'll have to rent/borrow those spring compressors again. Why do the work twice? Many different kinds of new and correct lowering springs are just a click or phone call away.

Can't speak to your springs specifically of course but putting in good, straight springs made the single biggest improvement to my car's driving character of any of the work I've done. :)

[micmak]

You can compress the springs ON the car. Devon, I have a set of spring compressors that you can borrow. Or alternatively, you can buy a set in Princess Auto. I got a set when I was doing mine, and they were cheap – I can’t actually remember the price but it was something like $25 or $30! There are two and they clamp on opposite each other on the outside of the spring and you tighten them down squeezing the coils together. Piece of cake! You are welcome to borrow mine if you like. Once you squeeze them and have the pressure off, you can use a cutting disk to cut off the desired amount of the coil. I used a disk on my air compressor attachment, but I have heard of guys using a Dremel tool. Any kind of spinning power tool that can handle a cutting disk will work for you.

......Mike......

[Nicholas R]

You can compress the springs ON the car. Devon, I have a set of spring compressors that you can borrow. Or alternatively, you can buy a set in Princess Auto. I got a set when I was doing mine, and they were cheap – I can’t actually remember the price but it was something like $25 or $30! There are two and they clamp on opposite each other on the outside of the spring and you tighten them down squeezing the coils together. Piece of cake! You are welcome to borrow mine if you like. Once you squeeze them and have the pressure off, you can use a cutting disk to cut off the desired amount of the coil. I used a disk on my air compressor attachment, but I have heard of guys using a Dremel tool. Any kind of spinning power tool that can handle a cutting disk will work for you.

......Mike......

I don't know; there is a lot of stored energy in a compressed spring. Personally I wouldn't risk cutting the springs while they're compressed, let alone still on the car. If you're going to cut them at least be safe and do it while they're unloaded and on a workbench. Plus if you do it on the car you still have to remove the cut coils from around the shock.

[LordFly]

I don't know; there is a lot of stored energy in a compressed spring. Personally I wouldn't risk cutting the springs while they're compressed

I believe he means compress the bottom section to take any pressure off the top where the cutting would be done.

Not to worry though, I have access to just about any automotive tools needed. I'll do it on the hoist, shouldn't take more than a couple hours. I wouldn't mind inspecting the rest of the suspension while I've got it apart anyways.

[micmak]

If you do it right, you are perfectly safe, Nick. I did it!! If I can do it, anyone can! By the time you jack up the front of the car, the springs are quite relaxed already. You don't need to compress them all that much further to unseat them from the cradles. As regards getting the cut piece off from around the tower, you just cut a half of the coil at a time until you reach the desired height.

......Mike......

[Nicholas R]

I assumed that, lol. Cutting the compressed section would be a death wish, haha. Still I know when I'm doing suspension work, I like to have my springs compressed as short a period of time as possible. Compress->remove->decompress. Some of my paranoia comes from doing my eibach install with Harbor Freight external compressors. With a spring fully compressed I had one side break and decompress while installing a front spring. Didn't damage anything but ceriainly shook me up. Moral of the story is to ALWAYS grease the threads of the compressor tool, and maybe don't use the HF ones, lol.

EDIT: also from now on, I will always use internal spring compressors in the front instead of external. A member her in Ohio even made a custom internal spring compressor that connects to the LCA, allowing you to compress the spring and easily remove the spring and LCA together. I've helped him swap out springs and it certainly makes it easy.

[micmak]

A member her in Ohio even made a custom internal spring compressor that connects to the LCA, allowing you to compress the spring and easily remove the spring and LCA together. I've helped him swap out springs and it certainly makes it easy.

sounds like cool little invention! :)

......Mike......

[jmettee]

the time you jack up the front of the car, the springs are quite relaxed already. You don't need to compress them all that much further to unseat them from the cradles.

......Mike......
Are you sure you're talking about a Delorean? Free length of the oem springs is 14". I just about had mine tightened to coil bind to get them in/out of the perches... Probably compressed to about 8". There is still quite a bit of energy & force in those springs even when jacked with the wheels off the ground.

Now the rear springs.... Those are just about free length when the wheels are off the ground. Those are cake.

[micmak]

Are you sure you're talking about a Delorean? Free length of the oem springs is 14". I just about had mine tightened to coil bind to get them in/out of the perches... Probably compressed to about 8". There is still quite a bit of energy & force in those springs even when jacked with the wheels off the ground.

Now the rear springs.... Those are just about free length when the wheels are off the ground. Those are cake.

Im pretty sure its a DeLorean - silvery color, funny doors that open upwards. Yup its a DeLorean alright. If you were going to remove the springs, then you'd have to compress them more. But to cut them, all you need is to compress them enough to free them up from the LCAs. I have done it. Its not difficult.

.....Mike.....

[vwdmc16]

Wolff, my car sits with the front fender arch at 22.5" and the rear 25.5", almost exactly the same as yours. How did you achieve that front height?....

Yes I also cut front and rear springs, I state the exact amount in my resto thread.

[jmettee]

Im pretty sure its a DeLorean - silvery color, funny doors that open upwards. Yup its a DeLorean alright. If you were going to remove the springs, then you'd have to compress them more. But to cut them, all you need is to compress them enough to free them up from the LCAs. I have done it. Its not difficult.

.....Mike.....

Yup, sounds like a Delorean. Sure it wasn't a Merc SLS...I've seen those in silver.

I guess from changing my springs, I only know what I had to do to get them completely removed. Still, after seeing a spring compressor slip while compressed on these front springs, I am very sensitive & overly careful when working with them. I would never cut them or work on them while compressed. When the 1 compressor slipped, I was amazed at the energy release. I swear it was as fast as an airbag....didn't see it coming, didn't see it happen it was so fast. The thought of having a finger/hand in the way or worse yet, it flying into my body was quickly realized as how dangerous springs can be.

Glad yours came out OK. I would still recommend completely removing them to do any cutting/grinding for safety reasons.

[dustybarn]

Are you sure you're talking about a Delorean? Free length of the oem springs is 14". I just about had mine tightened to coil bind to get them in/out of the perches... Probably compressed to about 8". There is still quite a bit of energy & force in those springs even when jacked with the wheels off the ground.

Same here. My OEM springs were very difficult to remove, and the whole operation made me quite nervous. I replaced them with Grady springs, and they were much easier to install than the original ones were to remove. I haven't tackled the rear yet.

To give better access, I dismounted the caliper (without disconnecting the hose) and separated the upper ball joint so that I could swing the front upright down out of the way. I used a hydraulic jack under the LCA to limit the droop travel so that it was just short of kissing the frame. It was still a pain in the neck to get the springs out.

[micmak]

Yup, sounds like a Delorean. Sure it wasn't a Merc SLS...I've seen those in silver.

I guess from changing my springs, I only know what I had to do to get them completely removed. Still, after seeing a spring compressor slip while compressed on these front springs, I am very sensitive & overly careful when working with them. I would never cut them or work on them while compressed. When the 1 compressor slipped, I was amazed at the energy release. I swear it was as fast as an airbag....didn't see it coming, didn't see it happen it was so fast. The thought of having a finger/hand in the way or worse yet, it flying into my body was quickly realized as how dangerous springs can be.

Glad yours came out OK. I would still recommend completely removing them to do any cutting/grinding for safety reasons.


Actually Justin when you think about it, it is more risky and dangerous to remove them. You have to compress springs a lot more to remove them. You only need to compress a few coils to ease the tension if you want to cut them in place.
If one or both compressors slip when you are cutting in place, the spring will snap back to it’s normal position in the cradle which is ok. There is no harm done unless you are silly enough to have a finger under there where the spring normally resides.
If you remove the spring from the car and the compressor slips, you have an out of control missile potentially flying around ricocheting and bouncing off any solid object and it could literally kill you! Seriously, if a loaded spring flies out of control and hits you in the head, you could die! If you cut the spring in position on the car and it slips, it makes a slapping noise as it snaps back into place. Nothing more. So when you think about it, from a viewpoint of the energy loaded on a spring and the damage it could do, and the safety of the whole exercise, in spite of initial reactions, it is actually less dangerous to cut the spring ON the car.
It can't "go" anywhere on the car!

......Mike......

[jawn101]

Actually Justin when you think about it, it is more risky and dangerous to remove them. You have to compress springs a lot more to remove them. You only need to compress a few coils to ease the tension if you want to cut them in place.
If one or both compressors slip when you are cutting in place, the spring will snap back to it’s normal position in the cradle which is ok. There is no harm done unless you are silly enough to have a finger under there where the spring normally resides.
If you remove the spring from the car and the compressor slips, you have an out of control missile potentially flying around ricocheting and bouncing off any solid object and it could literally kill you! Seriously, if a loaded spring flies out of control and hits you in the head, you could die! If you cut the spring in position on the car and it slips, it makes a slapping noise as it snaps back into place. Nothing more. So when you think about it, from a viewpoint of the energy loaded on a spring and the damage it could do, and the safety of the whole exercise, in spite of initial reactions, it is actually less dangerous to cut the spring ON the car.
It can't "go" anywhere on the car!

......Mike......

Except you're only applying normal compression forces to remove the spring, then you release the tension once it's out to do the cutting. There's really no risk at all cutting it while removed. Cutting the metal while it's under partial compression introduces a ton of additional and unpredictable stresses on that spring.

I'm still a proponent of replacement vs cutting anyway so the whole thing is moot as far as I'm concerned - but whatever OP chooses to do he should do it safely.

[LordFly]

Not too worry guys, I will cut them when completely removed and not under any tension. And replace with proper springs once I've decided on a set/type/height/etc.

[micmak]

Except you're only applying normal compression forces to remove the spring, then you release the tension once it's out to do the cutting. There's really no risk at all cutting it while removed. Cutting the metal while it's under partial compression introduces a ton of additional and unpredictable stresses on that spring.

I'm still a proponent of replacement vs cutting anyway so the whole thing is moot as far as I'm concerned - but whatever OP chooses to do he should do it safely.

Agreed Jawn; there is no risk cutting once it is removed safely. You are standing there with the spring on a bench or in a vise or whatever. What could be easier at that point? Removing the spring seems to be scaring some people. However if you do it on the car, the part you are cutting is not compressed. You compress a few coils away from the part you are going to cut. So there is no partial compression at the cut at all. If you were to do that, you are asking for trouble. The cut part has no tension or pressure on it - if you do it right.
In a perfect world, you would not cut at all. You would replace the springs with the desired set. But it is not a perfect world, so we make do with what we have. In this case, cutting is not the perfect solution, but it IS a realistic option.

…….Mike……

[jawn101]

Agreed Jawn; there is no risk cutting once it is removed safely. You are standing there with the spring on a bench or in a vise or whatever. What could be easier at that point? Removing the spring seems to be scaring some people. However if you do it on the car, the part you are cutting is not compressed. You compress a few coils away from the part you are going to cut. So there is no partial compression at the cut at all. If you were to do that, you are asking for trouble. The cut part has no tension or pressure on it - if you do it right.
In a perfect world, you would not cut at all. You would replace the springs with the desired set. But it is not a perfect world, so we make do with what we have. In this case, cutting is not the perfect solution, but it IS a realistic option.

…….Mike……

Fair enough, that's a well rationalized statement :)

FWIW, I was also positively terrified by my compressed springs as I removed them. Especially since as you can see in the pic I posted above, the sides compressed at different rates due to the damage and the compressors were twisting very strangely as a result.

I didn't mention that I bought Hervey's springs and they are really, really good. Ride height/quality is excellent, they fit properly and were the least expensive option by far.

[micmak]

How much were Hervey's, Jawn? If you don’t mind me asking. I am not particularly unhappy with my cut springs but I would like to get a set of new ones at a nice ride height. But it makes more sense to replace shocks at the same time, and decent tires and up and up goes the overall cost. All these things are on my list!
Now you know why I cut my springs!

……..Mike……..

[jawn101]

How much were Hervey's, Jawn? If you don’t mind me asking. I am not particularly unhappy with my cut springs but I would like to get a set of new ones at a nice ride height. But it makes more sense to replace shocks at the same time, and decent tires and up and up goes the overall cost. All these things are on my list!
Now you know why I cut my springs!

……..Mike……..

Haha, yeah. I did my tires shortly before the springs but left my OEM Girlings at all 4 corners since they still had tons of life left. Now I'm not so sure about the fronts anymore, but hey.

I think I paid $249 for his springs originally, but he has raised the price a bit since then. They are $289 now (http://specialtauto.com/delorean-parts/suspension.html)

[jmettee]

I know the DMC springs are not that strong since the car is so light in the front, but they can cause significant injury. Not debating the cut in the car vs remove, but simply to illustrate how dangerous a spring can be if a compressor slips or fails:

These 2 guys plust the camera guy were LUCKY. Even when being careful, bad things can happen:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kY56ib3I-ew

[David T]

The real danger here is that the energy stored in a spring is not immediately obvious. Same with the torsion bars. Even a small amount of energy can be very dangerous when a heavy part is flying through the air. Cutting a spring is just wrong for a lot of reasons but that doesn't stop people from doing it anyway. I have seen all kinds of things done that I would never attempt, maybe because I know better. As you get older (big assumption in some cases) you usually get wiser. There are many ways to get hurt and in most cases the person knew better but took the short-cuts anyway and most of the time, if you are lucky, you get a way with it. But not every time. If you keep doing unsafe things eventually your luck will run out. Luck (good AND bad) is a finite quantity and you only get so much.
David Teitelbaum

[Jimmyvonviggle]

Has anyone considered an air ride suspension for their D? It doesn't have to be one of those electronic ones as ride tech also offers manual adjustable ones.

http://www.ridetech.com/

[Farrar]

Has anyone considered an air ride suspension for their D?

I believe there's one in Canada that has been "bagged."

17938

My dream is to have a DeLorean with "active suspension." That technology, however, remains an expensive rarity.

[jawn101]

I believe there's one in Canada that has been "bagged."

17938

My dream is to have a DeLorean with "active suspension." That technology, however, remains an expensive rarity.

Wow, I know I've seen that car before but for some reason that shot makes me wonder how he got into the parking lot in the first place!! :lol:

Farrar, any idea if that setup is adjustable or is it always that low?

[Farrar]

Farrar, any idea if that setup is adjustable or is it always that low?

It's the only pic I have of that car. I seriously doubt that it's that low always -- was probably parked and then lowered.

[pezzonovante88]

17938



Parked right next to the shopping carts. Risky.

[Farrar]

Parked right next to the shopping carts. Risky.

Even riskier: only the passenger windshield wiper installed!

(Maybe he uses Rain-X.)

[Domi]

I also cut my spring a few years back and like the height of the car.
Nevertheless, I don't think it's the best way to drive safe?
I bought a set of Eibach spring which I intend to install with Spax shock to improve the handling.
I don't know what will be the height then, but I think you can adjust the rear.
I remember a friend who had Eibach spring on a VIN close to mine, and the front was perfect, the rear a little bit to hight, but it was his choice.
We'll see in the future what it will be.

[Rich]

I bought a set of Eibach spring which I intend to install with Spax shock to improve the handling.
I don't know what will be the height then, but I think you can adjust the rear.


This is a good way to go.

Yes, with almost any of the modern rear DeLorean shocks the rear height is adjustable.

To see what an Eibach setup can look like in terms of ride height or at least the overall look of it see Post #27 in this thread. Probably like the other car you mentioned.

The crossmembers on that car are at ~5.3in. front and rear on that car. Front ht is fixed, set by the springs. Rear ht is adjustable, set by the threaded spring collars on the shocks.

[refugeefromcalif]

I've got to chime in now.
6599 is at DMC Florida getting an Eibach lowering spring and Spax shock setup installed. (Among Many other things).
I forgot to take pics of it's Ride Height before I shipped it there but, I've asked Mike Evens to take pics and email me some before and after the change in height.

Once it's back, I'll have something to compare on how it handles at high speeds lowered vs. stock.

I'm hoping it's, Mucho Better...

George

[eagle-co94]

Unless they've got scrape plates I don't think anybody with any brains would drive a car that low. Laying frame is one of the best anti-theft methods out there. If it won't roll and is flat on the ground you can't steal/tow it. I'm curious what his system looks like.

[SS Spoiler]

So thats what the're called. Back in '88 when I did my frame change and lowering, I put some quarter inch thick alum stripes besides the rockers. It made easing over speed bumps less nerve racking.

[eagle-co94]

I guess you could call them that, but I'd probably call what you made shields.

These are scrape plates:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMN5uebs0Hg

[David T]

Aluminum is too soft. It will wear out quickly and it doesn't give off a nice shower of sparks! Typically seen on Low Riders mostly in southern California. You can get a nice ticket for that!
David Teitelbaum

[thirdmanj]

Yo' DeLorean ride so high, it make da D-Rex look like a lowrider!!

[eagle-co94]

Yes, but we all know that hitting 88 in a DeLorean isn't legal either...:burnout::nono:

[LordFly]

Yo' DeLorean ride so high, it make da D-Rex look like a lowrider!!

Haha, that's what I said in Post #7 (http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?6706-Ride-Height&p=97422&viewfull=1#post97422) ;)

[thirdmanj]

Haha, that's what I said in Post #7 (http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?6706-Ride-Height&p=97422&viewfull=1#post97422) ;)

Ha ha ha! Indeed... Joke: Fail. 0 points for originality.

[dmc3130]

Haha, yeah. I did my tires shortly before the springs but left my OEM Girlings at all 4 corners since they still had tons of life left. Now I'm not so sure about the fronts anymore, but hey.

I think I paid $249 for his springs originally, but he has raised the price a bit since then. They are $289 now (http://specialtauto.com/delorean-parts/suspension.html)

Hey John,

If you want my old front shocks I'll give them to ya cheap cheap for all the help you gave me on my VOD.

[jawn101]

Hey John,

If you want my old front shocks I'll give them to ya cheap cheap for all the help you gave me on my VOD.

Well now that's an offer I can't refuse, check your email buddy :)

[ssdelorean]

Does anyone have specs on what the intended height should be?

According to an Inter-Office Memo on 04-08-81 from C. R. Brown it states that the front ride height "must be lowered so that the tire fits within the arch of the wheelwell."
See item number 15 here (http://dmctalk.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=18159&d=1365887157).
Full memo documentation in this thread (http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?6807-Memo-040881-Product-Evaluation-Summary-CRBrown&p=98896#post98896).



I challenge anyone to come up with ANY documentation that Lotus intended the car to ride lower.

I don't have any Lotus documentation but there is DeLorean Motor Company documentation written by C. R. Brown, see above links.




Regarding the "design" front ride height question.

I, too, have not seen documentation showing that the front suspension specs called for it to be "jacked up" at the last minute to meet some federal headlight or bumper rules. It's a popular but unproven story to my knowledge.

On the other hand James Espey notes in his book that "The nose high appearance of many DeLoreans is the result of poor quality original coil springs..."

>>snip<<

Secondly did Giugiaro and/or Lotus, intend the cars to come out "nose high"? Doubtful. Check the prototypes.


Yes, the prototypes, test mules, endurance testing cars, crash test cars and various advertising literature like the Craig Radio ad and the "Presenting DeLorean Brochure" cover (not a real car but a tech drawing of the car) all had lower suspension where the wheels fit within the arc of the wheelwells.
1817318174181751817618177
Some more examples can be found on pages 70-72 in "The DeLorean Story The Car, The People, The Scandle" by Nick Sutton.

I agree with James Espey's comments regarding the nose high is the result of poor quality original coil springs. Why would Lotus intensionally make a car that handles like poop with taller springs in the front? Unless you believe the other rumor that I have heard over the years - that when developing the DeLorean's suspension it began to out perform the current Esprit so Lotus purposely rose the front ride height so the DeLorean would not handle as well as their Esprit.

[jawn101]

According to an Inter-Office Memo on 04-08-81 from C. R. Brown it states that the front ride height "must be lowered so that the tire fits within the arch of the wheelwell."
See item number 15 here (http://dmctalk.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=18159&d=1365887157).
Full memo documentation in this thread (http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?6807-Memo-040881-Product-Evaluation-Summary-CRBrown&p=98896#post98896).



I don't have any Lotus documentation but there is DeLorean Motor Company documentation written by C. R. Brown, see above links.





Yes, the prototypes, test mules, endurance testing cars, crash test cars and various advertising literature like the Craig Radio ad and the "Presenting DeLorean Brochure" cover (not a real car but a tech drawing of the car) all had lower suspension where the wheels fit within the arc of the wheelwells.
1817318174181751817618177
Some more examples can be found on pages 70-72 in "The DeLorean Story The Car, The People, The Scandle" by Nick Sutton.

I agree with James Espey's comments regarding the nose high is the result of poor quality original coil springs. Why would Lotus intensionally make a car that handles like poop with taller springs in the front? Unless you believe the other rumor that I have heard over the years - that when developing the DeLorean's suspension it began to out perform the current Esprit so Lotus purposely rose the front ride height so the DeLorean would not handle as well as their Esprit.

Wow. This is one of the best posts I've ever seen. Thanks for collecting and posting all that in one spot!

[jmettee]

According to an Inter-Office Memo on 04-08-81 from C. R. Brown it states that the front ride height "must be lowered so that the tire fits within the arch of the wheelwell."

Excellent post, Shannon. Thanks for posting & answering the question about the height being higher than intended. The spring quality reason is starting to make more sense.

Followup on my car: Had an alignment yesterday & below pic is the result after adjusting. Front is "as driven" & measurement was with 3/4 tank of fuel & was about 5-1/8" at the crossmember (slightly low). All within spec except for caster. The 1.25" lowering of the front would have changed the angle of the car by a calculated .75º (decreasing the front caster as they stand more vertical as the front of the car drops. Front caster is supposed to be +3.50º to +4.00º

18190

[pezzonovante88]

Unless you believe the other rumor that I have heard over the years - that when developing the DeLorean's suspension it began to out perform the current Esprit so Lotus purposely rose the front ride height so the DeLorean would not handle as well as their Esprit.

I've never heard that one before.

[dustybarn]

Unless you believe the other rumor that I have heard over the years - that when developing the DeLorean's suspension it began to out perform the current Esprit so Lotus purposely rose the front ride height so the DeLorean would not handle as well as their Esprit.

I've heard that too, but I'm not sure I buy it. I don't think Lotus would have ever considered the D to be direct competition to the Esprit. It has about the same power as a NA Lotus, but it was always going to be somewhat heavier, and with the fuel tank up front and the engine at the rear the polar moment of inertia of the D would be much higher. By its very nature, all other things being equal, the Esprit would probably still out-handle the Delorean.

Now, I'll agree that the high ride height may have been due to out-of print springs. In that case, though, I'd have expected DMCL to raise Cain with the supplier and introduce corrected springs as a running change.