Looking For Pics Of Slightly Lowered 205's

[Pugnut 9 1 Cars]

after returning an excessively lowered at the front back to standard it just doesnt look right . the back sits and handles nice and must be lowered ever so slightly lowered. i'm looking to lower the front slightly but would like to see some pics first . i guess its something like 25-30mm drop springs i'm looking for although how you can be so precise on such a variable item is beyond me !

 

any pics ?

 

cheers, Al

[richsmells 2]

Mine's a 1.6 so sits slightly differently at the front. I'm using skip brown "road speed" springs which give a 35mm drop i think, although I also have group n top mount rubbers which aparrently raise it again by 5mm or so since they're harder.

 

The beam's lowered one spline.

 

Edited October 25, 2007 by richsmells

[SamGTi 0]

Mine's on -25mm Spax springs but again with Group N top mounts.

 

[brianthemagical 1]

i've got gmax springs, bout £40, progressive, 3 year guarantee, 20mm ish. there is about 20mm arch cleanence, which is good for me but i'll and get a pic.

[j_turnell 134 3 Cars]

eibach progressive springs, on standard dampers. 309 rear lowered 2 splines around 35mm on konis.

 

 

[GLPoomobile 958]

OK, this is my previous 1.6 when it was on standard 1.6 suspension

[swordfish210 20]

 

thats -40mm Eibach progressive springs on Bilstein OE dampers on the front (standard mounts) and standard 1.6 gti rear beam but with Koni Yellow dampers. Just remember that mines a TU engine so -40mm springs is about a -30mm drop

[GLPoomobile 958]

and behind it is my old 1.9. This was on Eibach springs with standard top mount rubbers and the beam was lowered to suit by Anthony (although I always felt it looked very slightly lower at the back. Eibach 7001 IIRC are listed as 35mm lower, but when compared to others that quote that reduction I've always thought the Eibachs seemed a little lower, possibly 40mm.

 

EDIT: Swordfish's picture sort of proves that Eibachs are in the region of 40mm drop

Edited October 26, 2007 by GLPoomobile

[GLPoomobile 958]

And here is the 1.6 again. This time it has the Eibach 7001 springs BUT with BBM Group N top mount rubbers. Remeber the front wheels stick out a bit more due to 1.6 hubs. Also got 1.9 beam on from the GG 1.9 pictured above.....

[GLPoomobile 958]

Finally we have my MI which has a Koni kit on it. I'm assuming they are Koni yellows (as the dampers are yellow). Not sure if this would be a 25mm or 35mm drop as don't know anything about the kit. Standard top mount rubbers. Again, 1.6 hubs so wheels protrude slightly. 1.6 beam lowered to match.....

[swordfish210 20]

GL has wayyyyyyyy to many 205's

[Baz 421]

Eibach springs (i think) meant to be 30mm but i'm sure it's lower! Rear beam obviously lowered too match.

Edited October 26, 2007 by BazGTMi

[tom_m 0]

Eibach springs (i think) meant to be 30mm but i'm sure it's lower! Rear beam obviously lowered too match.

 

that looks more like -50 baz!

[Baz 421]

that looks more like -50 baz!

 

Yup, 'tis pretty low as you know!

 

Probably not the fairest pic to use as it's on a bit of a slope! here's another;

[pacey205 2]

Heres mine, front is on sprintlines with eibach springs, GrpN top mounts and 309 wishbones, rear is still standard at the moment.

 

[GLPoomobile 958]

GL has wayyyyyyyy to many 205's

 

Nah, just too many pictures of 205s!

 

 

Eibach springs (i think) meant to be 30mm but i'm sure it's lower! mellow.gif Rear beam obviously lowered too match.

 

That's running 1.6 hubs isn't it Baz? If so, it's an optical illusion that it's that low. I'd say it looks about as low as my GG 1.9 did on those springs and with standard top mount rubbers. At that height the wishbones are near as damnit perfectly horizontal, so you certainly wouldn't want to go any lower.

[Baz 421]

That's running 1.6 hubs isn't it Baz? If so, it's an optical illusion that it's that low. I'd say it looks about as low as my GG 1.9 did on those springs and with standard top mount rubbers. At that height the wishbones are near as damnit perfectly horizontal, so you certainly wouldn't want to go any lower.

 

It is yes! The front is ok tbh, but the rear could do with coming up a little really. It does handle fairly well though, as a road car anyway. In the dry it's fairly progressive, sticks well and any slide is very neutral, neither over nor understeers (unless provoked with Lif off!) In the wet however, it's a bit skitty though!

Edited October 26, 2007 by BazGTMi

[Alastairh 47]

Don't forget, some of these cars are 8 valve and 16 valve, so a smidgen more weight on the front

 

Car looks good though Baz

[Baz 421]

Don't forget, some of these cars are 8 valve and 16 valve, so a smidgen more weight on the front

 

Car looks good though Baz

 

Ah yes good point there! A few more kg's would drop it a bit more!

 

Cheers! Not sure i want to sell it after using it again for a bit... The Goodwood wheels go soo well, can't decide if better than the old skool cross spokes tho...

[GLPoomobile 958]

Agree about the goodwoods Baz, but those cross spokes also look the dogs bollocks on that 205!

[Pugnut 9 1 Cars]

i have a funny feeling i have been supplied the wrong springs . as a standard 1.9 , everything standard in fact with new springs i can clearly get my hand sideways between the top of the tyre and the wheel arch . I have pretty big hands and i bet most people could get their whole hand in there . if i were to fit any of the above springs it would equate to roughly an 80mm drop i reckon!!

 

anyway some nice pics there but i think the eibachs look a little low

 

anybody got any pics of a standard car with standard springs?

 

cheers, Al

[Edp 67 3 Cars]

1.6 at standard height

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/ewP205/HREG3.jpg

 

1.9 lowered 25mm

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/ewP205/P1000527.jpg

[pacey205 2]

Well heres one of mine with standard suspension for comparison Al, I used to be able to get a hand inbetween tyre an arch though when it was standard.

 

 

Michael

[Pugnut 9 1 Cars]

Well heres one of mine with standard suspension for comparison Al, I used to be able to get a hand inbetween tyre an arch though when it was standard.

 

 

Michael

 

thanks Michael , if mine was sitting like that i'de be well chuffed . trouble is it must be twice that . I'll give it a hundred miles or so and see if they settle in a bit more , but i feel the 10mm or so you usually get wont do anything .

 

trouble is although all the pictured lowered ones above look great but i really want a standard ride approximately what yours is , but unfortunately i've ended up with the front pointing in the sky ! maybe its a set of well worn in front standard springs i should invest in.

 

cheers, All

[pacey205 2]

That does sound a bit odd then, is there any possibility they are disel springs maybe as I assume they are stiffer to cope with the iron block, could be wrong though. I have to say though I love mine how it is now, it is noticeably stiffer but the sprintline/eibach combo does a remarkable job of soaking up the bumps and its not crashy in the slightest. I do now despise the plethora of bloody speed bumps round my way even more though.

 

If you want a set of stadard springs your welcome to mine although Im not particuarly close so dont know how much postage would work out at.

 

Michael