auszookers.com
https://www.auszookers.com/forum/

is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
https://www.auszookers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=38325		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  GV6 [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:50 pm ]
Post subject:  is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
is an auto heavier than a manual? Re: 2003 SQ625 GV
Author:  Chop [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
Yes it should be.
Author:  GV6 [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
any info on what the weight difference is ?

This might be why the advertised lift of my GV (auto) never came to fruition.

Maybe I need XL7 front springs to account for the extra weight of the auto ??
Author:  Scrawny [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
Surely the weight difference wouldn't be enough to cause that?
Author:  atari4x4 [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
Scrawn wrote:
Surely the weight difference wouldn't be enough to cause that?


+ being a fair way back you wouldn't think it would make that much difference.

got any accessories fitted under the bonnet like dual batteries etc, front bar?
Author:  Scrawny [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
atari4x4 wrote:
got any accessories fitted under the bonnet like dual batteries etc, front bar?


Heavy drawer system and fridge would weigh the back down too. I'd be skeptical of the 'kit' if none of these accessories are fitted
Author:  Chop [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
Its not that much difference in weight to make your lift not what it was cracked up to be, none of the manufacturers make springs for auto or manual.

I have dobinson in mine and it sits down a bit in the front, sagged from when i installed them. No gv springs are 2" like most other cars, so when they sag a little it definetly makes them seem worse. You might get nearly that in difference from shagged old original springs. I'm hopefully getting rid of the front dip, with the dobinson 80kg front springs for when i put the front bar and winch on.
My rears are still fine, even with alot of daily towing.
Author:  Gwagensteve [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
Difference would be less than 10KG I think.

Wheel rate on your front springs is around 160lb/" per side, So it would take 320lb to drop the car 1". 10kg would therefore drop the car about 1.75mm. Even If I'm wildly wrong about the weight difference and it's 30kg (Which it isn't) - that's still only 5mm of "sag"

But it's not even that much, because the extra weight isn't solely borne by the front springs.

I can't imagine the weight of the auto is the problem.

Steve.
Author:  atari4x4 [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
just looked at his previous posts.... says he's running Ironman springs, wonder if that's got anything to do with it. :?
Author:  GV6 [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
Did get some lift (approx 30mm??), but it's difficult to tell without knowing what the standard height should be, mine may have been sagged already, so 30mm could have been 20mm or worse ??

When measuring from the lower wheel rim (of 16" wheel) to the underside of the mudguard (at front) I got the following measurements -

before spring lift = 675mm (not sure if this was sagged already, it looked standard and no mention of suspension replacement in the service book)

after spring lift = 705mm ( ironman part No SUZ-015B, supposed to be 35mm lift).

1 year after spring lift = 685mm (now 10mm higher than pre-lift, I'm not impressed).


Consequently the car is going back to the place that did the job to see if they'll do a warranty fix....

if they will replace under warranty, ironman make a spring which is same rate and 20mm longer (for the XL7 - part No SUZ-017B), which might level the car out a bit since the rear got about 55mm lift which has now sagged to about 40mm lift. I will likely put some polyair helpers in the rear to assist with load carrying.

Not sure how much heavier the auto is but it could be a contributing factor ?

Anybody got wheel rim to guard measurements to compare with ?
Author:  atari4x4 [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
eyebrow heights are listed in the attached pdf, i've extracted just the suzuki section as the whole document is too large to upload.

i read in one of your posts that you're measuring from bottom of the rim to wheel arch, all these measurements are from centre of hub.
Author:  Chop [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
Didn't macdaddy put in xl7 springs upfront and it was too high?
Author:  atari4x4 [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
they were probably fitted incorrectly, just like his 2nd set were.
Author:  GV6 [ Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: is an auto heavier than a manual? 2003GV
atari4x4 wrote:
eyebrow heights are listed in the attached pdf, i've extracted just the suzuki section as the whole document is too large to upload.

i read in one of your posts that you're measuring from bottom of the rim to wheel arch, all these measurements are from centre of hub.


Thanks Atari,

I have 465mm on drivers side and 470mm on pass side which would be approx 12-17mm > std at present. So no where near 35mm lift.

I have no heavy accessories on front, only auto trans cooler, maybe 2.5kg wet. No extra weight at back during measurements, except tow bar.

I'm not that keen on ironman after using them (like other past cliental), but if they'll replace under warranty it might give me another year before they need attention again without shelling out more $.

Steve, wheel rate may be a fair bit higher (which makes my argument of auto weight either more significant or less arguable :) ; by my measurement I have approx 1.6:1 ratio of spring to wheel rate, the ironman springs 015B and 017B are rated approx 502lb / inch (=313lb/" wheel rate)

Dobinson -042 springs are rated at 574 lb/inch (=358lb/" wheel rate which is significantly stiffer, and as I cant afford a bull bar yet to get some front weight these may be a bit stiff for my liking).

Chop, I agree, with the spring to wheel ratio a small change in spring makes a big difference to the resultant height.

Oh well, car goes back tomorrow, will see what they reckon, by my calcs the ironman -017B springs would be 61mm higher than std at wheel, is that too high, what eyebrow height do others without diff drop brackets have ?
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 9:30 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/