I finally got my wheels and now I'm looking for a suspension mod that will drop my car enough to notice, yet still keep it relatively "close to stock" in terms of ride quality, negotiating speed bumps etc. I've practically memorized the sticky at the top of the Brakes and Suspension section, and I'm now going back and forth between the 350Z H-Techs and 350Z S-Techs. Here's my confusion: in so many threads I've searched, people have responded differently in terms of the drop they observed with S Tech's vs. H Tech's. In this thread for example, some members report 1" drop for S Tech's and some report 1" drop for H-Tech's, whereas the published numbers don't seem to line up:

Factoring in the add'l .5" drop for the Z springs that makes the S-Tech drop 1.2" Front 1.1" Rear, and the H-Tech would be .8" Front and .7" rear.

So this tells me that the S-Tech is the way to go...EXCEPT the reports for some members that the S-Techs caused camber issues that required add'l parts, and issues with speed bumps etc.

I guess I don't understand how some people can report "rides like stock, got it into alignment specs with no problem", while others with the exact same car and exact same spring report "had to get aftermarket camber bolts and arms etc. and can't go over speed bumps".

Anyone here who has either 350Z H Techs or 350Z S-Techs and cares to share their experience please reply, I would really appreciate the help.

 

Bump...

 

See below:

https://g35driver.com/forums/brakes-suspension/114240-tein-350z-h-tech-owners-please-vote.html

 

Thanks, I did see that post prior to posting myself. There's some good info on the Z H-Techs but nothing of value on the S-Techs. "Patman's" H-Tech install on stock 19's looks pretty good, with my new Ray's 19's I am actually happy with my rear but my front fender gap is more than I'd like so I think the Z H-tech should be enough to make me happy. If they aren't enough drop they are pretty cheap anyway, so I could always get the S-Techs and sell the H-Techs at a later date I guess.

 

Oh and one other thing: if you look at the "results" so far from that poll, you'll see it's 7 to 7, half the people resonding they had "no problems" getting aligned within specs and half responding that they had to alter their suspension geometry to get their cars back aligned. Yet another example as to why I'm confused!

 

The very very wide oem spec range confuses some inthat it was made wide to minimize warranty cost.

Engineers KNOW that the mid point of the range is where it should be set to balance camber wear vs braking and handling performance.

STREET Tires are designed to function best with camber at 0.5-0.75 negative.

Static sitting still alignment numbers are different from cruising at speed numbers due to bushing deflection.......why rear often has more negative camber than tire optimum.......it changes under load also rear braking is a lesser percentage of overall braking.

Think of alignment as intentional misalignment so that the numbers get actually correct at speed.

Lots of the alignment variation results from changing in bushings as the miles add and exposure to ozone hardens them.............plus a tiny bend here and there.

 

The other variation are the cars themselves. All cars are not created equal meaning that because of the tolerances in the suspension geometry some may be able to be in spec while other can't. Ideally you would like to be in the middle of the OEM alignment spec range unless you are an aggressive driver than some negetive camber is fine because you will even out the tire wear and in addition you will get better handling.

Almost certainly if you do even a some drop you will probably be in OEM spec range but bias toward negative camber.

 

When you brake the front dives and this increases negative camber 0.8 per inch [the same as intentional lowering does]...........in a panic stop a 2-3" drop occurs which adds 1.6-2.4 degrees to already negative static camber.

Since optimum for tire is -0.5 negative hopefully you can see this increases stopping distances.

Stiffer [10-30%] front lowering springs cannot reduce the dive enough to compensate for the additional static errors.

In magazine tests the alignments are set PERFECT to gain the last possible foot on braking.