Re: H&R vs. Eibach

[ejfluhr@austin.ibm.com (Fluhr)]

>I wa very dissapointed with the Eibach ProKit springs with Boge turbo (4kq).
>They are O.K. for ride quality but were not as firm as I thought they
>would be.  Too bad they don't make SportLine for the 4kq.
>BTW do progressive springs supposed to have a few coils closer
>together (usually towards the top of the spring)?  My do not and I
>noticed another set of Pro's did (Ur-q's).
>Clarification of this would be apriciated.

It was my understanding that the Eibach springs are linear for the
CGT(front)/4Kq, which explains the constant coil spacing.  The
progressive-rate H&R springs for the CGT/4Kq have the end coils more
closely spaced, as expected.  Perhaps the Eibach kit for the urquattro
is progressive rate.  The rear Eibach springs on the CGT appear to be
progressive, probably because of the low weight in the back of that car.

I have Eibach springs on my Coupe and my brother has H&R springs on
his Coupe.  I have to say that the Eibach seem to offer better performance
than the H&R, at the expense of ride quality.  The H&R feel very
comfortable on rough roads, and stiffen up well for performance
driving.

If you want ultimate performance and are not as concerned with ride
quality, the coil-over setup is probably the way to go.

Later,
Eric
'85 Coupe GT
---
Eric J. Fluhr                                Email:  ejfluhr@austin.ibm.com
630FP Logic/Circuit Design                   Phone:  (512) 838-7589
IBM Server Group                             Austin, TX