Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Phastek Performance
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Technical Camaro Topics > Suspension / Brakes / Chassis


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-19-2013, 07:29 AM   #1
rjames
 
rjames's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th 2ss
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Iowa
Posts: 102
BMR Springs? 1.4"/1"

Ok I posted this in another thread but have not had anyone look at it in a while. I know BMR has a 1.4/1" kit for our cars but I can't seem to understand why anyone would want to make the "rake" more pronounced by dropping the fronts another 1/2 " rake over what it has now. If anyone could explain the benifits to me would be great. I was also wondering if anyone has done the opposite and dropped the rear 1.4" and the front 1"? Pics? In my car that would leave me 1/2" gap in the front and the rear. This to me seems the way to go but was unsure if it would make the car look like it was in launch mode due to the body lines of the car even though the gaps would be the same.
Thanks, Rob
__________________
2012 45th M6 Coupe, Stock internals,Cam/springs,ARH 1 7/8 cat delete,Flowmaster american thunder Cat back, 3:91 gears and K&N Cold air kit. 484 RWHP 454 TQ.Acs body kit,Bmr 1" springs,Vfn copo hood going on soon! Tuned by Speed Inc. Dss 3 1/2 aluminum shaft, Dss 1000hp level 4 shafts, Eaton True Track.
rjames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 07:32 AM   #2
SSRedTerror
 
Drives: 2011 Victory Red SS
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Shelby, NC
Posts: 68
Its all about that muscle car stance man, low in the front, shackled up in the rear.
SSRedTerror is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 08:43 AM   #3
Apex Motorsports
 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 25,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSRedTerror View Post
Its all about that muscle car stance man, low in the front, shackled up in the rear.
This. It is just a style thing. Not necessarily for everyone.
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 09:00 AM   #4
Kelly@PCMofNC

 
Drives: 2010 RS/SS
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 958
Just for looks, some people prefer to have rake. I like it even all around, personally. Here's mine on the 1" BMRs.

Kelly@PCMofNC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 12:16 PM   #5
blackSSRS
 
Drives: 2010 RS
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: FL
Posts: 540
Ive heard issues about lowering more than an inch. Anyone know what gets stressed or whatever it is lowering more than an inch. Looking at bmr 1.4" all around but dont want future issues. Eventually will be with 22x9 and 22x10 rear rims
blackSSRS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 01:06 PM   #6
Apex Motorsports
 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 25,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackSSRS View Post
Ive heard issues about lowering more than an inch. Anyone know what gets stressed or whatever it is lowering more than an inch. Looking at bmr 1.4" all around but dont want future issues. Eventually will be with 22x9 and 22x10 rear rims
If you go too low your factory dampers will not be able to take it. The ride will suck and they will fail. 1 inch is being extremely conservative though. We have plenty of customers running the BMR 1.4 inch springs without any problems. You just don't want to get into some of these 1.8 and 2 inch springs out there.
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 01:09 PM   #7
azw131
Team LLT
 
azw131's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 WRX (Stage 2)
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Newton, MA
Posts: 523
I have the 1.4" front/1" rear on my V6 and am very happy with it.
__________________


Mods: Bolt On's and Such, Some Cosmetic Stuff Too
azw131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 03:19 PM   #8
BMR Sales


 
BMR Sales's Avatar
 
Drives: Race Car
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Seffner, FL
Posts: 6,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjames View Post
Ok I posted this in another thread but have not had anyone look at it in a while. I know BMR has a 1.4/1" kit for our cars but I can't seem to understand why anyone would want to make the "rake" more pronounced by dropping the fronts another 1/2 " rake over what it has now. If anyone could explain the benifits to me would be great. I was also wondering if anyone has done the opposite and dropped the rear 1.4" and the front 1"? Pics? In my car that would leave me 1/2" gap in the front and the rear. This to me seems the way to go but was unsure if it would make the car look like it was in launch mode due to the body lines of the car even though the gaps would be the same.
Thanks, Rob
Measurement-wise I think you would be fine with that combination if that is the direction you want to go. I don't remember anybody that has used this combination of the top of my head but we have a lot of customers that play around with the different springs to get the exact stance they are looking for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly@PCMofNC View Post
Just for looks, some people prefer to have rake. I like it even all around, personally. Here's mine on the 1" BMRs.

Your car has an amazing stance with our BMR 1" lowering springs (SP019). Thanks for posting the picture up!

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackSSRS View Post
Ive heard issues about lowering more than an inch. Anyone know what gets stressed or whatever it is lowering more than an inch. Looking at bmr 1.4" all around but dont want future issues. Eventually will be with 22x9 and 22x10 rear rims
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apex Chase View Post
If you go too low your factory dampers will not be able to take it. The ride will suck and they will fail. 1 inch is being extremely conservative though. We have plenty of customers running the BMR 1.4 inch springs without any problems. You just don't want to get into some of these 1.8 and 2 inch springs out there.
Chase is absolutely correct, the lower the ride height is the harder the struts and shocks have to work to control everything. We have a ton of customers out there with our BMR 1.4" lowering springs (SP022) that have had them installed on the car for years without any kind of issues with their factory struts or shocks so if those are the ones you are interested in I wouldn't hesitate to use them at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by azw131 View Post
I have the 1.4" front/1" rear on my V6 and am very happy with it.
Thanks for the good words!
BMR Sales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 05:14 PM   #9
rjames
 
rjames's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 45th 2ss
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Iowa
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelly@PCMofNC View Post
Just for looks, some people prefer to have rake. I like it even all around, personally. Here's mine on the 1" BMRs.

Love this stance! I hope I can get mine this way. I have 2 1/4" gap in the rear and a 1 3/4" gap in the front. I cant see getting mine to a "level" stance using 1" springs all the way around. I want to do this soon so maybe i'll try the 1" to start then if not the way I like try the 1.4's in the rear. At least they are easier to change.
__________________
2012 45th M6 Coupe, Stock internals,Cam/springs,ARH 1 7/8 cat delete,Flowmaster american thunder Cat back, 3:91 gears and K&N Cold air kit. 484 RWHP 454 TQ.Acs body kit,Bmr 1" springs,Vfn copo hood going on soon! Tuned by Speed Inc. Dss 3 1/2 aluminum shaft, Dss 1000hp level 4 shafts, Eaton True Track.
rjames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2013, 05:32 PM   #10
blackSSRS
 
Drives: 2010 RS
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: FL
Posts: 540
Thanks chase sounds like 1.4 will be ok to use and what ill end up with! Hey kyle thanks for more input, i spoke with you earlier about picking the springs up from you. Thinking ill go with the 1.4 springs and be ok with 22s in the future from what ive seen. Ill call you end of this week or beginning of next to pick them up!
blackSSRS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2013, 08:54 AM   #11
BMR Sales


 
BMR Sales's Avatar
 
Drives: Race Car
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Seffner, FL
Posts: 6,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjames View Post
Love this stance! I hope I can get mine this way. I have 2 1/4" gap in the rear and a 1 3/4" gap in the front. I cant see getting mine to a "level" stance using 1" springs all the way around. I want to do this soon so maybe i'll try the 1" to start then if not the way I like try the 1.4's in the rear. At least they are easier to change.
You can definitely play it safe and go that route. And even if you end up swapping the rear springs out for the 1.4"s you could either sell them on here or we could work something out if you wanted to return them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackSSRS View Post
Thanks chase sounds like 1.4 will be ok to use and what ill end up with! Hey kyle thanks for more input, i spoke with you earlier about picking the springs up from you. Thinking ill go with the 1.4 springs and be ok with 22s in the future from what ive seen. Ill call you end of this week or beginning of next to pick them up!
Not a problem, just call me when you are ready to get the springs and I will make sure we get you taken care of.
BMR Sales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 10:06 PM   #12
Pro Stock John
Writer
 
Pro Stock John's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS / 1967 Camaro
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 7,216
rjames, I was asking Kyle @ BMR the exact same question. My SS has a 2.0 gap in the front and a 2.5 gap in the back.

I'm still hoping to see a leveled out car too.
__________________
PROJECT HEAVY CHEVY
Camaro Now: Mods for the Masses Part I | Part II
13.15@106 1.95 | 100% Stock
12.37@112 1.85 | + Kooks Headers/Cats + 20" 555R + CAI + BW TB + UDP + Tune
12.06@113 1.70 | + CD 3200 + 18" NT05R + RCR Intake + NE OTR + GPI Tune
11.84@115 1.59 | + 3.91s + Race Star 17x7 Fronts
10.90@125 1.47 | + GPI VVT Cam + BW Ported Heads + CD 3800

Last edited by Pro Stock John; 12-12-2013 at 04:31 PM.
Pro Stock John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2013, 04:32 PM   #13
Pro Stock John
Writer
 
Pro Stock John's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS / 1967 Camaro
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 7,216
So unless there is something about springs that I don't understand, if I am 2.5 in back and 2.0 in front, 1.4 back and 1.0 front should level my off road vehicle. I'll be in touch Kyle!

__________________
PROJECT HEAVY CHEVY
Camaro Now: Mods for the Masses Part I | Part II
13.15@106 1.95 | 100% Stock
12.37@112 1.85 | + Kooks Headers/Cats + 20" 555R + CAI + BW TB + UDP + Tune
12.06@113 1.70 | + CD 3200 + 18" NT05R + RCR Intake + NE OTR + GPI Tune
11.84@115 1.59 | + 3.91s + Race Star 17x7 Fronts
10.90@125 1.47 | + GPI VVT Cam + BW Ported Heads + CD 3800
Pro Stock John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2013, 06:12 PM   #14
Bo White


 
Bo White's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 Summit White 2SS 1LE
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Vance Alabama
Posts: 8,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apex Chase View Post
If you go too low your factory dampers will not be able to take it. The ride will suck and they will fail. 1 inch is being extremely conservative though. We have plenty of customers running the BMR 1.4 inch springs without any problems. You just don't want to get into some of these 1.8 and 2 inch springs out there.
The upper control arm front bushing gets maxed out and will fail also.
__________________
Retired wanna be cylinder head porter
2015 2SS 1LE Clutch reservoir, Vararam DRX, ported TB, TSP 2" headers, MGW shifter
Totalled:
2010 1SS Wilkes Performance/Eagle 416 shortblock, TSP custom valvetrain, PRC 260 heads, Edelbrock Pro Flo 102, th400 swap, 8" PTC 5500 stall= 535/435 at the wheels tuned Gen 3 Performance and Dyno 10.97 @ 124 full weight in 3100 DA CamaroFest X
Bo White is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.