cups v. coilovers?

[sfwilliams@comcast.net (Scott F. Williams)]

In regards to why VW used heavier spring rates in the 16v:
> no, they did it because the 16v was "sportier". same reason for upgraded
> brakes and engine. from the factory, 8v and 16v rode different.
> not to mention there is no "optimal" ride; it's very dependant on personal
> preference and driving style/terrain.
> -Michael Abatzis

Generally speaking, the "sportier" way to go would be to upgrade the *rear*
spring rates more than the front. -not the reverse. Then again, since our
front suspensions change camber so damned much, increasing the front spring
rate can also produce more neutral handling characteristics. Hmmm, we need
an engineer to work this one out.

FWIW, the 16v rear swaybars are bigger than hose supplied with the 8v. The
end result is more neutral handling. Even if the engine weight were only
increased by an ounce, theoretically the front spring rates should be
increased correspondingly to maintain the handling balance. Anyway...
--
Scott F. Williams
NJ Scirocco nut
'99 Subaru Impreza 2.5 RS
Mazda 323 GTX turbo "assaulted" vehicle
Golf GTI 16v "rollycar"
ClubVAC: "Roads found. Drivers wanted."