F6 Rear Springs Advice

[ms700]

where's saleen when you need him, and his arse-pec jokes.....

[tab]

lol

Surely there's gonna be more than one bite!

[R-SPEC]

The F6 above looked low enough to my eye, but I guess we all have different tastes (or it could have been the angle of the photo). Like most others here, I went for the 'level sill' effect by using KFFL-57 and KFRL-68SSL King Springs front and rear respectively. The front looks good, but the rear has settled too much for my liking (the top of the tyre is just beginning to disappear under the guard - and I'm not a fan of the 'dumped' look). This spring combo is what King Springs recommended in their catalogue for XR series cars (the current catalogue has changed part number names a little).

They also recommended using KFRL-68SL springs on the rear of non-XRs, and in hindsight I think this would have been the best option for me. The SSLs meant I had to cut off some of my bump stop, which indicates to me that it's too low. I may well remove my SSLs and replace them with SLs in the near future - this will still be lower than normal XR height with a firmer spring rate to boot, but not as low as it currently is.

It's just the back I want to change. The front looks great (even if it is a gimmick). I only want it to sit as the front does. Looking at arch height, the tyre is in line with the top of the arch, and the back sits a little higher. All I want to do is equal them out, so it looks like the a pair of SLs for the rear is the way to go for me then.

Thanks for your help bugster

[bugster70]

No worries mate, that would be my inclination too. Remember also that it'll take a while for the springs to settle - I was initially happy with the ride height of the SSLs, but after they settled it was too low for me. Anyway, good luck and let me know how you go!

[cobrav8]

I have an XR6T BA mk2 - standard springs in front and SSL rears. Here is a photo - shows the ass down a bit, but to be honest it is more level than this photo shows.

[NVYDF6]

lol

Surely there's gonna be more than one bite!

[Adam]

The F6 above looked low enough to my eye, but I guess we all have different tastes (or it could have been the angle of the photo). Like most others here, I went for the 'level sill' effect by using KFFL-57 and KFRL-68SSL King Springs front and rear respectively. The front looks good, but the rear has settled too much for my liking (the top of the tyre is just beginning to disappear under the guard - and I'm not a fan of the 'dumped' look). This spring combo is what King Springs recommended in their catalogue for XR series cars (the current catalogue has changed part number names a little).

They also recommended using KFRL-68SL springs on the rear of non-XRs, and in hindsight I think this would have been the best option for me. The SSLs meant I had to cut off some of my bump stop, which indicates to me that it's too low. I may well remove my SSLs and replace them with SLs in the near future - this will still be lower than normal XR height with a firmer spring rate to boot, but not as low as it currently is.

Since you R-Spec owners have BF MkII's you can forget about all of the above. He's talking about a BA.

[bugster70]

Since you R-Spec owners have BF MkII's you can forget about all of the above. He's talking about a BA.

Not necessarily. Can't speak 100% for any differences between an XR6T and an F6, but according to the King Springs catalogue, spring applications are the same for both BA and BF vehicles. I would imagine they would be the same for FPV equivalents too?

[senna_T]

there is a difference bugster, Jman recently had SL's but in his BF, the springs were actually the BA part and the front of his ute was almost touching the ground! It was mentioned somewhere else that BF2 is different again I'm pretty sure

[bugster70]

I stand corrected, thanks for the clarification senna. Someone ought to alert King Springs to this oversight in their catalogue then!