Because of a broken front spring my 2007 2.0 Icon has had two new springs fitted but I think that the ride height is now wrong. I know you measure from the centre of the wheel hub to the wheel arch but I don’t know what the measurement should be. Can anyone tell me the ride height on standard springs please?
I can’t tell you the ride height but if it seems wrong as in too high you have the classic twisted bush syndrome.
If so the suspension bolts need to be loosened off and the car needs to be sat on the ground before tightening.
Also bounce up and down on the wings and drive the car forwards and backwards to allow the suspension to settle before tightening.
Same here mate,2006 nc front spring went.Changed both and the front looks odd,however after the change one of the front struts developed a bleed.I just thought the rest is poss due to go.So ive ordered a Tein Flex Z coilover kit,front strut brace,4 new Avons.The guys at AK Automotive are going to do the fit & set the ride height followed with a Hunter 4 wheel alignment.Cars11 yrs old so trying to keep the old suspension in check is just a money pit.
Mine is 355R 385F if that helps. Stock springs, in a level garage with handbrake off. Mk3.75 with soft top and 17" factory wheels. There is a spare wheel in the boot which may push the back down very slightly, and the tank has just been filled with Esso’s finest dead dinosaurs.
1 Like
Hi,
Mine was 380 at front and 369 rear on stock sport springs and shocks when i measured before fitting lowering springs.
2007 NC 2.0 Zsport
Stewart
The ride height on my NC is 375mm at the front, and 360mm at the rear.
It’s odd how these measurements seem to vary a little (judging by other quoted heights in this thread), even with so-called ‘standard’ springs etc.
The springs fitted vary from 3 to 3.5 (3.75 seems to be the same as 3.5) and are also different between soft-tops, PRHTs and factory 16" or 17" wheels, looking at MX5Parts website. I’ve updated my post to reflect the exact type.
I would also expect the fuel level to have an effect - a full load of fuel weighs about the same as half a person, and it’s over the back axle.
My car is of the era when it was quoted as looking like a 4x4 and it certainly looks it now. I know the later cars were modified so they lost the look but mine now definitely has it and the ride height measured from hub centre to the lip of the wheel arch is 400 mm. I have tried everywhere to find out the correct measurement from parts suppliers to the web all without success. I should say thanks to everyone who has tried to help.
I would say that is definitely wrong as you have already identified.
I recall when investigating if I was going to fit the lowering springs that the Standard 2.0 setup should be between 375 and 380mm at front and would drop to 345-350 with the -30mm eibach springs.
I believe the rear as standard was 360-370 depending on fuel load and if anything in boot etc.
Mine certainly looked 4x4 even at 380 so 400 must look very high indeed.
Hope you get it sorted.
Stewart
Interesting to know what the standard 2.0 measurements should be as i was going to ask the question.I’m around 340mm all round with 40mm H&R springs so sounds about right.
It would also be interesting to know the ‘standard’ setting difference between the mk.3 and the mk.3.5. The common consensus from previous threads on this subject seem to indicate the belief that the mk.3.5 models did sit lower than the mk.3, but I’ve yet to see any definitive figures on the subject.
^^^ Only this
Chassis Upgrades
- The front suspension geometry was revised by altering the ball joints’ vertical pivot position, lowering the height of the front roll centre by 26 mm
- Decreased fluctuations in vertical load on the outer wheel when cornering so that roll movement caused by steering input is now more linear
- New suspension tuning for even more precise reaction to steering input
- Yaw and roll feel more natural for a higher quality ride
- Tyre pressure monitoring system now available in most markets
- Dynamic stability control (DSC) now standard in most markets
Taken from this site, some good info here. http://www.roadster.blog/2013/08/the-2009-roadsters-facelift.html