Which way to go...BC or GC?????

[immajackuup]

so pretty!!!

[nando]

Stop looking like an arse just because you dont understand how the product works.

Spring height adjustments result in preload only as you are adjusting the bottom spring hat upwards towards the top hat, it doesnt change ride height at all. Inside the strut the threaded section is basically just a tube around the outside of the shock, so when you wind the WHOLE strut into the bottom section that is welded to the stub axle, you dont actually move or reposition where the piston is sitting inside the shock. You could wind it all the way to the bottom of its travel and its still sitting in the same place as you arent actually compressing the shock OR the spring. You are essentially winding the stub axle up into the strut body, so shortening the distance of the tube between the shock and the bottom of the stub axle.

no, I get how it works. You guys are missing the other half of travel - droop!

Answer me one question: is the rod on the front struts of BC coilovers shorter than stock? is it shorter than the Koni that GC uses? YES? Then it has less travel! end of discussion!

BC uses a neat trick to keep your compression travel while slamming the car, but it won't have more travel than a properly setup coilover from anyone else (nobody changes their ride height every day). But it still has less overall travel (including droop). It has to, because the insert is shorter!

I love the comments of some random drifter using them so they must be good. hahaha. if you want to buy them - fine! they're a good value, that's for sure. Don't kid yourself that they're the end-all-be-all just because they're cheap and drifters use them..

[B-well]

i have and will have ground controls on every e30 i own.

-The quality of parts is amazing
-Made in the USA (struts in holland by koni)
-Lifetime warranty on non moving parts
-1 year warranty on EVERYTHING even on excessive wear by extreme usage
-Customer service is second to none. they help you with spring rates, shock tuning and anything else you can ask them about suspension
-Also, the method of strut tube modification is simpler and strokger as you are not welding to cast parts.

thats my 2cents.

if you were closer i would give you a ride in one of my cars

[Madhatter]

They arent any different in height than shorter sport shocks, so no, they arent. I love all the comments from someone saying they are so shit when they havent used them personally and ignore the people who do use them. Who said they are the best thing money can buy? id buy (and have made) a set of teins if I wanted to spend nearly double the price, I wouldnt even bother looking at bilstein because, frankly, the quality is shit these days compared to what it used to be and the warranty isnt worth the paper it was written with. Have you tried getting a set of bilstein inserts repaired under their lifetime warranty? have you found out just how long a lifetime is and what it really covers?

Nobody is kidding themselves in saying that these compare to spending big bucks, people running them are saying they are good value, its the other people ranting about how they are so terrible that are so narrow minded. If you look outside of the US, you'll see they are pretty popular elsewhere where they have been available for quite some time (its just taken awhile to filter down to the US).

[FLG]

Well written.

Bottom line if your pre load is correct you've got much bigger problems if you mange to bottom out a set of bc's

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

[nando]

They arent any different in height than shorter sport shocks, so no, they arent.

that wasn't the question. Are they shorter than stock length inserts? Yes? Then they have less travel than stock.

if they're the same length as a standard short body koni, then they don't have a travel advantage there, either.

[immajackuup]

gc are over price

[Madhatter]

that wasn't the question. Are they shorter than stock length inserts? Yes? Then they have less travel than stock.

if they're the same length as a standard short body koni, then they don't have a travel advantage there, either.

Actually, it was the question, because you said it is impossible to lower a vehicle without reducing suspension travel, when infact it is. Yes its such a flawed design because GC kits dont use shorter sport shocks at all right? now you are splitting hairs because you were wrong and trying to find something to prove your point. Pretty much every other coilover kit you can buy uses a shock of a similar length, including the GC kits with short bodies konis. What do you suggest? running a full length standard damper on lowered springs? How much bump travel do you have now the strut is compressed as it sits static on a lowered spring? I can tell you its not going to be much.

I notice you dont focus on the good points though, such as them running a 53mm strut body to be able to run a larger piston and utilise more fluid to limit it getting hot under heavy use (and thinning out the oil); or running a needle bearing on the upper spring hat which allow the top mount to rotate without twisting the spring (or binding) like others. Or the pillow ball upper mounts with camber adjustments.

The travel advantage is you can lower the ride height without changing the amount of travel the damper offers. This is what you were saying is impossible before, now you are going into vs short bodies, etc, which is just crap because the statement made (the one you said impossible) was that they still maintain the full amount of travel when lowering the vehicle compared to other setups which will reduce the amount of bump travel. Making the lower mount adjustable to raise up the axle to lower the vehicle rather than using spring heights is far superior to any other method. You'll see touring cars with the same thing, the axle is raised allowing them to run a full length spring, maintaining good suspension travel in both directions, yet being able to lower the vehicle to such extremes that undertrays are sending sparks flying when they hit rough sections of the track. The shock absorber still maintains perfect bump/rebound split even though its an inch off the ground. Is the damper going to be shorter than a stock oem one? of course, but its still going to maintain a similar percentage of bump/rebound travel and offer significantly more suspension travel overall vs oem struts on lowered springs.

In short. Ill take a set of BC coilovers vs anybody on here with bilstein or koni dampers (even non shortened ones) on lowered springs when comparing the amount of suspension travel available. The "better" shock isnt going to be the winner, I can assure you.

[immajackuup]

Actually, it was the question, because you said it is impossible to lower a vehicle without reducing suspension travel, when infact it is. Yes its such a flawed design because GC kits dont use shorter sport shocks at all right? now you are splitting hairs because you were wrong and trying to find something to prove your point. Pretty much every other coilover kit you can buy uses a shock of a similar length, including the GC kits with short bodies konis. What do you suggest? running a full length standard damper on lowered springs? How much bump travel do you have now the strut is compressed as it sits static on a lowered spring? I can tell you its not going to be much.

I notice you dont focus on the good points though, such as them running a 53mm strut body to be able to run a larger piston and utilise more fluid to limit it getting hot under heavy use (and thinning out the oil); or running a needle bearing on the upper spring hat which allow the top mount to rotate without twisting the spring (or binding) like others. Or the pillow ball upper mounts with camber adjustments.

The travel advantage is you can lower the ride height without changing the amount of travel the damper offers. This is what you were saying is impossible before, now you are going into vs short bodies, etc, which is just crap because the statement made (the one you said impossible) was that they still maintain the full amount of travel when lowering the vehicle compared to other setups which will reduce the amount of bump travel. Making the lower mount adjustable to raise up the axle to lower the vehicle rather than using spring heights is far superior to any other method. You'll see touring cars with the same thing, the axle is raised allowing them to run a full length spring, maintaining good suspension travel in both directions, yet being able to lower the vehicle to such extremes that undertrays are sending sparks flying when they hit rough sections of the track. The shock absorber still maintains perfect bump/rebound split even though its an inch off the ground. Is the damper going to be shorter than a stock oem one? of course, but its still going to maintain a similar percentage of bump/rebound travel and offer significantly more suspension travel overall vs oem struts on lowered springs.

In short. Ill take a set of BC coilovers vs anybody on here with bilstein or koni dampers (even non shortened ones) on lowered springs when comparing the amount of suspension travel available. The "better" shock isnt going to be the winner, I can assure you.

:up:
been trying to tell nando but he never listen lol

nando,why all japanese high end coilover kits similar to bc???

[nando]

Actually, it was the question, because you said it is impossible to lower a vehicle without reducing suspension travel, when infact it is. Yes its such a flawed design because GC kits dont use shorter sport shocks at all right? now you are splitting hairs because you were wrong and trying to find something to prove your point. Pretty much every other coilover kit you can buy uses a shock of a similar length, including the GC kits with short bodies konis. What do you suggest? running a full length standard damper on lowered springs? How much bump travel do you have now the strut is compressed as it sits static on a lowered spring? I can tell you its not going to be much.

BUT YOU DID LOSE TRAVEL!

if the insert is 3" shorter, you have 3" less travel than stock! travel includes compression and droop, it's not one or the other. you can't remove 5-6" out of a strut and keep the same amount of total strut travel. it's simply an impossiblity.

Also, GC uses whatever strut inserts you want. you can use stock ones if you really want to, or you can use inserts that are 6" shorter or anything you can think of that will fit. saying GC doesn't use shorter "sport" shocks is absolute nonsense, because that's up to the end user.

I notice you dont focus on the good points though, such as them running a 53mm strut body to be able to run a larger piston and utilise more fluid to limit it getting hot under heavy use (and thinning out the oil); or running a needle bearing on the upper spring hat which allow the top mount to rotate without twisting the spring (or binding) like others. Or the pillow ball upper mounts with camber adjustments.

that's nice. who here has over 100,000 miles on a set of BC coilovers? also, there's definitely nothing special about the camber plates. where are those bearings made?

The travel advantage is you can lower the ride height without changing the amount of travel the damper offers. This is what you were saying is impossible before, now you are going into vs short bodies, etc, which is just crap because the statement made (the one you said impossible) was that they still maintain the full amount of travel when lowering the vehicle compared to other setups which will reduce the amount of bump travel. Making the lower mount adjustable to raise up the axle to lower the vehicle rather than using spring heights is far superior to any other method. You'll see touring cars with the same thing, the axle is raised allowing them to run a full length spring, maintaining good suspension travel in both directions, yet being able to lower the vehicle to such extremes that undertrays are sending sparks flying when they hit rough sections of the track. The shock absorber still maintains perfect bump/rebound split even though its an inch off the ground. Is the damper going to be shorter than a stock oem one? of course, but its still going to maintain a similar percentage of bump/rebound travel and offer significantly more suspension travel overall vs oem struts on lowered springs.

BUT YOU DID CHANGE THE TRAVEL!! the inserts are shorter. shorter inserts have less total travel!

How long are the stock struts? How long are the BC struts? What is the first one minus the second? That's how much travel you lost. You just don't realize it because the only travel you understand is compression.

I'm saying once you've put a custom kit together, you don't change the ride height every day, or ever. You set it where it needs to be, and that's that. Nobody with a brain is going to take a GC kit that has stock inserts and try to dump the car 3". So select the right length dampers and build it correctly, this isn't an issue. It's not better just because it's adjustable.

Just like all the multi-adjustable BS shocks. For the most part, it's crap. Unless you're a pro-race team that can analyze the data and really fine tune your suspension, you're pissing into the dark. Set it so the suspension doesn't oscillate over bumps and you're done.

There are TWO advantages to a "coilover" setup on an E30. One is the selection of any spring rate you want, in a common size that is cheap and easy to find. The second is corner balancing the car. Corner balancing is the only real reason to need the adjustable height - otherwise, it's mostly pointless. If all you want is a dumped car you don't need adjusters. just go with the shortest possible insert and be done with it.

In short. Ill take a set of BC coilovers vs anybody on here with bilstein or koni dampers (even non shortened ones) on lowered springs when comparing the amount of suspension travel available. The "better" shock isnt going to be the winner, I can assure you.

I don't even know what you're talking about here. you can use basically any insert you want to that will fit into an E30 housing, including ones that are much, much shorter than stock. They all lose travel - unless you managed to make an insert that was 6" shorter, and created a black hole that the extra 6" of rod could magically vanish into when the shock is fully compressed..

[FLG]

Nando,

Honestly i didnt measure the difference but i can assure you unless your jumping the damn car your NOT going to be able to bottom out the BC coilovers.

I dont know why you have such a problem with BC coilovers, they work well, their less expensive then GC, and you can lower them, raise them, or completely dump them without loosing travel

Yes its impossible to have 2 identical length inserts and have one sit lower than the other without loosing travel, im sure the BC insert is shorter than the stock insert..how much i dont know but again your not going to be bottoming out the BC insert.

I think the big miscommunication here is Nando is saying

"You cant lower a car without loosing shock travel VS stock"

And yes hes correct on that. The BC insert needs to be shorter. I dont think hes arguing on the point that you can lower the car with BC coilovers and not loose travel.

[3rotore30]

lol, Nando has sand in his vagina!

[nando]

Nando,

Honestly i didnt measure the difference but i can assure you unless your jumping the damn car your NOT going to be able to bottom out the BC coilovers.

I dont know why you have such a problem with BC coilovers, they work well, their less expensive then GC, and you can lower them, raise them, or completely dump them without loosing travel

Yes its impossible to have 2 identical length inserts and have one sit lower than the other without loosing travel, im sure the BC insert is shorter than the stock insert..how much i dont know but again your not going to be bottoming out the BC insert.

I think the big miscommunication here is Nando is saying

"You cant lower a car without loosing shock travel VS stock"

And yes hes correct on that. The BC insert needs to be shorter. I dont think hes arguing on the point that you can lower the car with BC coilovers and not loose travel.

I never said anything about BC bottoming out! I'm just saying it's nonsense to think that any coilover, be it GC or BC, doesn't lose travel over the original stock design, or that GC somehow has less travel because people can't understand how you set them up properly.

Their argument was EXACTLY that BC's don't lose travel and GC does. Nonsense. ;)

[nando]

lol, Nando has sand in his vagina!

This is the most intelligent argument in this whole thread! Oh wait... ;)

thanks for wasting our bandwith.. :p

[M-technik-3]

Maybe we should have this discussion in say 4 years? Actuall have some one bench test the BC shock and the GC insert of choice and see how much dampening ability has been lost in 4 years.

Other than that I think this argument is going No where but in circles.