Chevy SSR Forum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
643 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
When I was looking for advice about lowering my 04, as usual, everyone was very forthcoming with suggestions and photos. However, all the images were taken after the fact which was a little difficult to visualize. Especially when we're talking about only 1" and 1.6" - it doesn't sound like much. So, I thought it might be helpful to submit before and after photos together to provide a better appreciation for how much of a difference there really is.

Well worth the money from not only an asthetic perspective, but also in handling and performance!
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,553 Posts
What brand of springs did you use? How does it ride verses stock? Looks good :cool
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,783 Posts
Looks Identical

I lowered mine using Eibachs and I got the same result. Love the ride and handling and the looks are killer. I thought the ride was going to be harsh but it isn't as harsh as my wife's 04 BMW X5 with the Sport Suspension.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
lowering Springs

Mike,

did you do the work yourself? I was thinking of only lowering the rear what do you think?

Thanks,
Tom
 

·
Supporting SSR Hobbyist
Joined
·
10,198 Posts
Tom,

Have not touched it yet. I am considering just lowering the rear, as I think the front wheel well clearance is OK and the front ground clearance is as low as I would want to go in Phoenix with all the parking curbs.

I will do both myself, since I have been turning wrenches for a long time. The rears are a no brainer, but the fronts need a spring compressor. If you do the front, a new alignment is a must. I've also heard that the 1" lowering on the front takes the camber alignment to the limit. That may just be isolated to one brand of spring though.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
643 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Springtime in Winter!

I used Eibach springs. Couldn't find anyone to do only the back because they said it would throw-off the anti-lock break sensors and traction control by changing the wieght distribution of the vehicle. The fronts lowered 1" and the backs 1.6", so the stance is more even.

It does ride stiffer, but not as bouncy... if that makes sense! It handles like it's on rails! Huge improvement! When going over bumps there is no body roll, but it does jump.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
643 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
In addition...

No problem with the Cross Camber, but the Cross Caster I'm having trouble with. It tracks straight but am told I will experience more wear on the inside front tires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
sheldon young said:
No problem with the Cross Camber, but the Cross Caster I'm having trouble with. It tracks straight but am told I will experience more wear on the inside front tires.
you say you are having problems with the cross caster, well caster won't cause any tire wear because caster is the forward/rearward inclination of the tire, but camber will cause tire wear as camber is the tilting of the tire in and out as viewed from the front of the vehicle.
do you have a printout of your alignment specs? if so let me see what the numbers are and I can tell you if it will be a concern.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,588 Posts
lowering just rear

Mike in AZ said:
How would it look if you only put in the rear lowering springs?

RUSS04 lowered his in just the rear. I have seen it and it looks good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
Hope this helps. Rear Only, No Issues. Eibach Springs the backs 1.6" ONLY.

Before


After


I did not like the California Rake look, high in the back lower in the front, looks pretty level now. Hope this helps.
Rear Wheel pretty much fills the well now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
643 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
Here are the Specs Wingrider-Hope You Can Help!

Front Left Camber -1.1
Front Left Caster 7.2
Front Toe 0.02
Front SAI 12.1
Included Angle 11.0

Front Right Camber -1.4
Front Right Caster 3.4
Front Toe 0.02
Front SAI 12.1
Included Angle 10.7

Front Cross Camber 0.3
Front Cross Caster 3.8
Total Toe 0.04

Rear Left Camber -0.6
Rear Left Toe 0.14

Rear Right Camber -0.1
Rear Right Toe 0.19

Rear Total Toe 0.33
Rear Thrust Angle -0.03
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
sheldon young said:
Front Left Camber -1.1
Front Left Caster 7.2
Front Toe 0.02
Front SAI 12.1
Included Angle 11.0

Front Right Camber -1.4
Front Right Caster 3.4
Front Toe 0.02
Front SAI 12.1
Included Angle 10.7

Front Cross Camber 0.3
Front Cross Caster 3.8
Total Toe 0.04

Rear Left Camber -0.6
Rear Left Toe 0.14

Rear Right Camber -0.1
Rear Right Toe 0.19

Rear Total Toe 0.33
Rear Thrust Angle -0.03
After looking at your alignment reading here is what I see, your cross camber is ok but the individual left and right are out slightly. the camber shouldn't be more than -1.0 and I would like to see it closer to -.75. if you you can, at least change the right camber. the left camber even thought it is out, I don't think it will be a problem.
As for the caster,what a mess. with these setting you should have a really hard pull to the right. the caster should be no more than +.30. the right at +3.4 is out but if it can't be changed don't worry about it because caster won't cause tire wear. now for the left caster, if the reading of +7.2 is right it is way out of specs.
that needs to be brought down to +3.0. idealy you want less positive caster on the left side to compensate for the crown of the road, because a vehicle will pull to the side with the least amount of positive caster.
I hope this helps
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
Lower Rear Only

Royalshowing,

thanks for the photos! thats what I need to see.

So a pretty un eventfull swap? all is fine no issues like mentioned in earlier posts on rear only swaps.

Thanks,

Tom
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
31,689 Posts
Royalshowing said:
I did not like the California Rake look, high in the back lower in the front, looks pretty level now.
On Monster Garage, Jesse James actually said something about that high rear stance being an "east coast" thing. He implied that the "left" coast thing is to have the rear of your car litterally dragging its a$$ on the pavement.

Butt, now that I've seen an 'after' shot of a rear-only drop, I'm tempted to do the same.

(sorry for the slightly intentional puns! :jester )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
ssr71 said:
On Monster Garage, Jesse James actually said something about that high rear stance being an "east coast" thing. He implied that the "left" coast thing is to have the rear of your car litterally dragging its a$$ on the pavement.

Butt, now that I've seen an 'after' shot of a rear-only drop, I'm tempted to do the same.

(sorry for the slightly intentional puns! :jester )
That is funny, I am Sixty and when I was a teenager-The way the SSR sits from the Factory was Called "A California Rack", meaning like a rack(when held) the rear is higher than the front. I know guys that lifted the rears as much as 4" and lowered the fronts about 2". When you hit the brakes, sparks would fly from the front bumper. LOL.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top