Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PSA: Turner J Stock Springs are Available Again

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Group N dampers are too stiff for Jstock springs.
    Zach@Zakspeed.us

    Comment


      #17
      So spill the beans.
      john@m20guru.com
      Links:
      Transaction feedback: Here, here and here. Thanks :D

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by moatilliatta View Post
        Group N dampers are too stiff for Jstock springs.
        Maybe that is true, but the Turner J-Stock dampers were the same valving as Group N (300/300 front and 200/200 rear).

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Digitalwave View Post

          Maybe that is true, but the Turner J-Stock dampers were the same valving as Group N (300/300 front and 200/200 rear).

          I think J Stock is softer, at least in compression. Like, 300/175 or so. I can't remember what rears were offhand.

          Rippin' Proper | Youtube | Vimeo |

          Comment


            #20
            I did see someone else say that the shocks were 300/175 and 200/125, but I am not sure the source of that. On the other hand, here is a quote directly from Will Turner himself, taken from S14.net:

            Me: "Do you think the springs will still perform well with normal B8's that are revalved and bump stops cut down? Not as good as your solution modifying the entire shock but I imagine it's better than nothing no?"

            His response: "Yeah,

            If you revalue the fronts to 300/300 or 300/200 and cut the bump stop they would be great… and revalve rears to 200/200"


            Thread for reference: https://s14net.vbulletin.net/forum/s...rings-are-back

            Now since the rates are derived from Group N rates, it makes sense that they used the Group N valving. HOWEVER, the J-Stock springs are progressive, so I could certainly see using less compression damping than the linear Group N coilover springs used.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by moatilliatta View Post
              I have an alternative to the J stock rear inverted Bilsteins.

              not inverted, 1/2 shorter, same valving if anyone is interested.

              and

              another shock inverted about the same length but with monoball bottom eyelet.
              Still curious about this.
              john@m20guru.com
              Links:
              Transaction feedback: Here, here and here. Thanks :D

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by Digitalwave View Post
                I did see someone else say that the shocks were 300/175 and 200/125, but I am not sure the source of that. On the other hand, here is a quote directly from Will Turner himself, taken from S14.net:

                [/B]

                Thread for reference: https://s14net.vbulletin.net/forum/s...rings-are-back

                Now since the rates are derived from Group N rates, it makes sense that they used the Group N valving. HOWEVER, the J-Stock springs are progressive, so I could certainly see using less compression damping than the linear Group N coilover springs used.
                Here is an older thread where it was referenced on what J Stock is, which is remarkably similar to what techs at Bilstein also recommended back then. From personal account, I've driven a few E30s on-track, both with JS and Grp N dry setup shocks, and yes while similar, they are not the same. FWIW, I much preferred the J Stock spec shocks.

                https://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/s...rings-to-match

                Rippin' Proper | Youtube | Vimeo |

                Comment


                  #23
                  I have a set of the J stock Bilsteins, the fronts seemed like they had WAY too much compression damping, the rears, under damped. I tried the rears on the car, I felt sea sick after one drive, so off they went. I went back to the TC Klein revalved Koni Sports. They have far less compression damping, but more rebound damping. The rebound damping is however a little higher (and adjustable). It makes the car perfectly balanced.

                  Will
                  '59 Alfa Romeo 101.02 Giulietta Sprint
                  '69 Alfa Romeo 105.51 1750 GTV (R.I.P)
                  '69 Datsun 2000 roadster Vintage race car
                  '88 BMW M3

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X