View Single Post
Old 02-15-2013, 12:58 PM   #5 (permalink)
320touring
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: scotland
Posts: 1,429

The Mistress - '88 Bmw 320i Touring SE
Team m8
Last 3: 27.17 mpg (US)

Germany Beadle - '91 Mercedes 300td (estate, N/A)
90 day: 24.63 mpg (US)

The Bloodylingo - '05 Citroen Berlingo Multispace Desire
90 day: 39.77 mpg (US)

Shanner Scaab - '03 Saab 9-5 estate Vector
90 day: 26.19 mpg (US)

Clio 182 - '05 Renault Clio RS 182 182
90 day: 31.73 mpg (US)
Thanks: 89
Thanked 89 Times in 74 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Varn View Post
My Jetta was lowered with a similar setup. It rides terrible but gives good mileage. I can not quantify the change as it was like this when I got the car.
Thanks-at least this suggest there wont be a disadvantage

Quote:
Originally Posted by justme1969 View Post
In the post "fast n furious movie" world of automotive resale direct advantage to you and raises value. You will get better economy but it probbably wont be so amazing that you will be reimbursed the project cost ever.
It may make ride harsher as mentioned above andhas penalties with ground clearance and perhaps tire clearance.
But it looks cool and I say why not if its near same cost!
Especially if you are sure the parts are required no matter what.
Believe you me, if waterbeds had wheels and engines they'd handle and ride better!

as you say, its not really an "improvement", more a maintenance issue



Quote:
Originally Posted by PaleMelanesian View Post
Ironic that you used the word impact when talking about lowering a car.
good spot

Bumpstops add unnecessary weight
__________________
My Blog on cars- Fu'Gutty Cars
http://fuguttycars.wordpress.com/

US MPG for my Renault Clio 182


---------------------------------------------------
  Reply With Quote