[s-cars] Bilstien Sport Shocks with 92 Springs, anyone using this setup?

[Steve Marinello]

The '92 springs sit lower than the later springs, but I never had a 
stock car to compare to, only the Eibach/Bilstein avant.  I'd guess 20 
mm; 0.75".

LL - NY wrote:
> Jamu,
>
> If the ride height of the 92 springs is stock height for all of the springs,
> then you need
> to use Bilstein HD's. When I bought my UrS6, the PO had installed Bilstein
> Sports with
> stock S6 springs. I drove over a not visible "whoop de doo" at public road
> speeds and
> topped out the shocks. Two days later I had two leaking struts. Don't
> believe that would've
> happened if I had my Eibach's on the car or Bilstein HD's. So the overall
> length of the shock body/shaft of the Sports must be shorter than HD's
> contributing to the out of travel experience.
>
> HTH,
>
> LL - NY
>
> On 7/18/07, James Murray (QB/EMC) <james.murray at ericsson.com> wrote:
>   
>> Anyone use this combo? How does it ride.. Looking for feedback
>>
>> Or should the Bilstien Sports only be used with H&R or Eibach combo...
>>
>> Just wondering cause I remember the following: "The valving for
>> Bilstiens is EXACTLY the same between "Sport" and "Heavy Duty".  The
>> piston length on the Sport shock is shorter however, enabeling the car
>> to ride in the "sweet spot" at the appropriate ride level for a car with
>> a lowered suspension (what you want if you are going to use lowering
>> springs)."
>>
>> So are the 92 low enough for Sport shock or should the HD be used?
>>
>> /Jamu.
>> _______________________________________________
>> S-CAR-List mailing list
>> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
>> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> S-CAR-List mailing list
> S-CAR-List at audifans.com
> http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>
>
>