Koni shock settings

[Lightweight_911]

I've just cleaned/inspected/painted the front suspension on my C including replacing the sway bar bushes & Koni shock absorbers.

I was surprised to discover that the 'old' Konis were at their 'hardest' settings on the front allied to the rears being at their softest settings & I wondered if this is a common combination ?

For information, my car is lowered ~ 1 in all round & I have been very pleased with the handling in the past.

[roy mawbey]

That's a good question. My car had original Koni's front and back until about 25 years ago when after the car had been raised off its front suspension for some weeks, the original factory ones would not work properly when lowered and the car was driven. I replaced the front ones with Spax adjustables and left them in mid position.
Ten years on the original rear ones had poor rubber bushings so bought two new Koni's in a Koni sale for the back.

I have set those also in mid position and the car has behaved really well on these settings front and back.

Mind you I don't drive that fast but the potholes in roads seem to ridden over without much trouble if its dark and I don't see them.

I would have thought your front ones being set on the hardest value with front area being the lighter it would be better softer?

That's why it's good question. I would like to know also what is the best for a 356?

Welcome along by the way, always nice to have a new 356 owner joining up here.

Roy

[Lightweight_911]

Thanks for the reply (& welcome) Roy.

I know that Mike Smith (& many others) advocate adjusting Konis to their softest settings F&R but think that's for a STD car with Factory ride height, etc so wondered if there were any alternative suggestions for a lowered car used for 'spirited' driving.

I did find another instance where someone over on the 356 Registry was using the hardest front/softest rear Koni settings combination on his lowered/modified C (S J Szabo):


http://forum.porsche356registry.org/...169dc&start=15


- so maybe it is a known/tried alternative ?

[roy mawbey]

Ah, SJ is a regular poster on here I hope he sees this post and chimes in to answer.He has driven his 356 for so many thousands of miles he must be happy with his settings.

Roy

[S.J.Szabo]

Hmmm I thought my ears were itching...

Well, Mr.Ltwt_911, I have been using those very settings for the last 125K mi. or so, on my surprisingly old but still functional adjustable shocks, and I'll tell you why.

It is all about running a swing-axle car. The operant principal is that the rear axle on them behaves best when the front roll couple is very stiff and the rear couple is very soft. This makes the front do most of the work of keeping the shiny side up in a turn, making it less likely that the rear will jack up or commit other hi-jinks in the process.

It was in pursuit of this principle that Porsche (and Corvair) softened the rear bars/springs, thus requiring the Camber Compensator, whose job was solely to carry vertical loads to compensate for the softer springs. Note that the CC did not provide any force in cornering; it only works in a straight line/at rest, while the softer springs reduced the rear roll couple.

Thus, the front shocks should be set to their stiffest setting and the rear at their softest. On the Trusty Coupe ('57 T1 A), I also run a 19mm front sway bar to enhance the stiffness of the front couple.

Now, not many understand/dig/care about this business of roll couples, so opinions will vary about settings. So I should note that the material above is one fellow's view.

As a further measure, I also run a Virtual Zbar (w/zero-force pivot) at the rear, but that's another story.

[Lightweight_911]

Thanks for chiming in 'SJ' - that's very useful information.

Andy

[roy mawbey]

SJ,

Like Andy, I also thank you for that information.Over the years I have seen all these compensators and sway bars to help with the swing axle set-up but as you as usual, so correctly added the point not many people really understand or even care to understand what really happens to the standard set up under adverse conditions that its no wonder there is some confusion on shock settings.

Its complex, and probably most important for those who race them or drive hard sometimes. I guess for those who don't, the problem of stability will arise if they make a mistake at speed going round a bend that is so much sharper than they imagined. Then suspension set ups need to be as good as possible on the car you are driving.

Andy by the way is a very good hands on guy and has built some nice cars including building a GRP 904 to a very high standard. Maybe he might enlighten us on that at some time?

Roy

[S.J.Szabo]

Very perceptive as always Mr.Mawbey. The unexpected decreasing radius turn is one of life's great small thrills. The mountain roads in N.Calif. is full of them (many with sphincter-tightening camber to the outside edge as a cherry on top) and a frequent source of delight if you're riding trailing throttle oversteer and you're chops are in shape.

When it's set up well, the 356 can be very rewarding in such situations, but a real handful if they are not.

Again, just one fellow's view, but I believe that it's a strange kind of love for a car if one doesn't enjoy driving it the way it was meant to be driven. For those who understand this theorem, the optimization of its drivability is a foregone pursuit.

Sadly, as time goes on, it seems that this has become a forgotten/foreign idea. But then, it's hard to have fun when you're sweating the value of the car all the time.

There may be a new tagline there:

Restoration sucks.