Improve the handling of the 981 - X73

[daz05]

2 minutes ago, mneil said:

Beware, I had the idea of fitting just the X73 springs first to get rid of that wheel arch gap. Gareth tried but the standard shocks are too long; the springs do not fill the gap when fully extended and so would be dangerous. Lowering springs when"relaxed" are the same length as standard springs and have a special section that will easily compress. This keeps the spring in constant contact with its housing top and bottom.

Hence I went with the complete X73 kit.

Very difficult to explain 🥴 but you need the correct shocks to fit SAFELY maybe the yanks have a more relaxed view to safety. They did elect Trump after all 😂😂

Yes but I was referring to PASM shocks not the standard ones. You can't get the full x73 kit with pasm fitted. 

[Ringmaster999]

So I think we are now talking (X73 kit) about something I was considering on my 981 Boxster. I was looking at the Sports Suspension package in the Porsche Tequipment catalog. Is this indeed the X73 package. Lowers ride height by 20mm.

Is it something worth doing considering my Boxster is not a daily just a toy but probably won’t get tracked ever. Just fast A road blasts through my beloved homeland. Wales 👍 

[mneil]

1 hour ago, daz05 said:

Yes but I was referring to PASM shocks not the standard ones. You can't get the full x73 kit with pasm fitted. 

I assumed that pasm shocks when not in the lowered position would be a similar length when extended to standard, none pasm shocks, hence the safety worry.

Mine 981s came without pasm, took me a while to find one specifically to go with the X73 suspension.

17 minutes ago, Ringmaster999 said:

So I think we are now talking (X73 kit) about something I was considering on my 981 Boxster. I was looking at the Sports Suspension package in the Porsche Tequipment catalog. Is this indeed the X73 package. Lowers ride height by 20mm.

Is it something worth doing considering my Boxster is not a daily just a toy but probably won’t get tracked ever. Just fast A road blasts through my beloved homeland. Wales 👍 

As you will have read, a few on here have had it fitted. I love it, feels like running on railway lines, so planted and for me, has completely changed the handling for the better. Do tend to drive it like I stole though 😂.

 

[daz05]

@mneilpasm cars run with 10mm reduced ride height Vs standard so the drop to x73 is 10mm and not 20mm.

The theory behind it is that the 718s I think use a similar set up for pasm-s but not entirely clear on that. Plenty recommend it.

 

@Ringmaster999the feedback is in the thread I can believe full x73 could become a little fidgity on very rough surfaces based on my experience of the ARB on the rear of my car alone. However on okay and good roads you'll have a smile from ear to ear, the car feels more alive and more exciting to drive. Base the decision on your playground.

[Kev73]

1 hour ago, Ringmaster999 said:

So I think we are now talking (X73 kit) about something I was considering on my 981 Boxster. I was looking at the Sports Suspension package in the Porsche Tequipment catalog. Is this indeed the X73 package. Lowers ride height by 20mm.

Is it something worth doing considering my Boxster is not a daily just a toy but probably won’t get tracked ever. Just fast A road blasts through my beloved homeland. Wales 👍 

What part of Wales you in? I'm in Barry near Cardiff 

[Ringmaster999]

Yep Cardiff born and bread but moved to Barry in 2012

[Ringmaster999]

@temporarychickencan you remember what the full X73 kit cost.  In the Porsche Tequipment catalog RRP which includes fitting at OPC is £2620. Just wondering what the actual kit cost is.

Cheers 👍

[Patt]

I fitted complete X73 kit too.

I know the guys at Revolution have fitted Eibach springs to 981, but best call them to see if they were on a PASM car.

Also GT4/Spyder suspension has helper springs, thus that isn't as straight a swap. (I have new GT4 springs gathering dust in the shed)

[Patt]

Full kit was cheaper from Revolution, including fitting.  

I'm not at home to check full prices but recall about £1500 for the kit plus fitting and alignment.  There are many different alignments from Porsche depending on what other options you have installed !

The Sports suspension (AKA X73) dropped my car by 22mm and parked next to a PASM GTS can be seen to be slightly lower.

Not tracked it yet, but do drive "progressively" as often as possible and is my daily too 😉

[mneil]

Gareth at Rev did mine also.

Sutton Coldfield OPC was slightly cheaper but went with the guys I trust.

Did a back to back comparison at PEC not long after it was done, even the instructor was impressed! With the improvement in the handling, not my driving 😂. 

[mja986]

New 981 owner, but had a 986 and several 911s, so not new to Porsche.

Very interesting topic. Soon to have my 981 in for a geo at CG and as always will be looking for them to dial in a subtle bias for front end grip to help turn in and agility.  The settings they have typically gone for are at or only just outside Porsche standard ranges, which I’m happy with for how I use my cars plus I do want the full width of the tyres to be in contact with the road!

However, this thread reinforces that it does makes sense to assist turn in via the rear arb and not just the geo. In my GT3 days the adjustable arbs were set stiffer at the rear softer at the front for that reason.

Given my car is standard non-PASM and manual I’m assuming it will have the softest of the range of 981 rear arbs. I totally respect that Porsche know what they’re doing with spring/damper/arb relationships, but if I were to opt for a stiffer rear arb so the turn in and agility improvement is shared with the geo settings, which one would be a good choice? The conversation about the X73 bar seems to be for cars that have PASM and PDK so they had a stiffer arb to start with, perhaps a bit too much for my car?

Thanks for any views.

[michelin]

I’ve used CG for years. Chris is absolutely superb at what he does. Wouldn’t go anywhere else 👍🏽

[daz05]

5 hours ago, mja986 said:

New 981 owner, but had a 986 and several 911s, so not new to Porsche.

Very interesting topic. Soon to have my 981 in for a geo at CG and as always will be looking for them to dial in a subtle bias for front end grip to help turn in and agility.  The settings they have typically gone for are at or only just outside Porsche standard ranges, which I’m happy with for how I use my cars plus I do want the full width of the tyres to be in contact with the road!

However, this thread reinforces that it does makes sense to assist turn in via the rear arb and not just the geo. In my GT3 days the adjustable arbs were set stiffer at the rear softer at the front for that reason.

Given my car is standard non-PASM and manual I’m assuming it will have the softest of the range of 981 rear arbs. I totally respect that Porsche know what they’re doing with spring/damper/arb relationships, but if I were to opt for a stiffer rear arb so the turn in and agility improvement is shared with the geo settings, which one would be a good choice? The conversation about the X73 bar seems to be for cars that have PASM and PDK so they had a stiffer arb to start with, perhaps a bit too much for my car?

Thanks for any views.

I would recommend you try the no.14 bar, see how you get on. If it doesn't feel quite right go for the front one too or go the whole hog and get the dampers and springs if you don't mind a stiffer ride. I suspect you will be happy enough with just the bar but it's very easy for you to convert to x73 with that spec.

Your other option if you are looking for something very subtle is to order a bar from a car that had pasm and PTV. This one is still hollow but a little thicker in diameter.  I know of a guy who did the upgrade and now has one in this spec lying around. He commented with his feedback in the comments section of the video on YouTube, give him a shout.

[daz05]

On 8/20/2020 at 1:06 PM, daz05 said:

Here is a table taken from a US magazine which documented the differences.

 

https://www.planet-9.com/threads/x73-sway-bars.98295/#lg=thread-98295&slide=0

@mja986

Part no.s on previous page.

[mja986]

Thanks @daz05 👍 I checked your list of bars and part numbers against what bar rosepassion comes up with when you select car spec, transmission and options. Going for pasm and ptv with or without pdk comes up with 98133370310.

This is odd as the note you attached above differentiates between a bar for manual+ptv (21.7mm) and a bar for pdk+ptv (22.5mm), which is logical.

From part number list you put together (and the point you make above) it would make sense if the manual+ptv 21.7mm is the bar that ends in 10 and the pdk+ptv 22.5mm is the bar that ends in 12. Is this the case?

Is the 12 bar the one that the person who left feedback on your YT vid has got? If I went for a thicker bar like the 22.5mm number 12 bar or the 22mm x73 bar, does that mean new bushes? Are other new parts needed?

Lots of questions, sorry.

[daz05]

1 hour ago, mja986 said:

Thanks @daz05 👍 I checked your list of bars and part numbers against what bar rosepassion comes up with when you select car spec, transmission and options. Going for pasm and ptv with or without pdk comes up with 98133370310.

This is odd as the note you attached above differentiates between a bar for manual+ptv (21.7mm) and a bar for pdk+ptv (22.5mm), which is logical.

From part number list you put together (and the point you make above) it would make sense if the manual+ptv 21.7mm is the bar that ends in 10 and the pdk+ptv 22.5mm is the bar that ends in 12. Is this the case?

Is the 12 bar the one that the person who left feedback on your YT vid has got? If I went for a thicker bar like the 22.5mm number 12 bar or the 22mm x73 bar, does that mean new bushes? Are other new parts needed?

Lots of questions, sorry.

Hi, my car had 98133370311 fitted, it's a pdk with pasm. There does appear to be a slight discrepancy between PET and the article, this could be because of changes during the production run but chances are you may have the same bar fitted, very easy to check it's labelled on the bar.

Nevertheless, yes when PTV is added with PDK you get a slightly thicker bar 98133370312 and yes that is the bar he has available.

You can reuse your bushes on all bars with the exception of the 15.

Honestly though my advice is to grab the 14 and I'm sure you will be happy with it. 

 

[mja986]

On 11/18/2020 at 11:32 PM, daz05 said:

Hi, my car had 98133370311 fitted, it's a pdk with pasm. There does appear to be a slight discrepancy between PET and the article, this could be because of changes during the production run but chances are you may have the same bar fitted, very easy to check it's labelled on the bar.

Nevertheless, yes when PTV is added with PDK you get a slightly thicker bar 98133370312 and yes that is the bar he has available.

You can reuse your bushes on all bars with the exception of the 15.

Honestly though my advice is to grab the 14 and I'm sure you will be happy with it. 

 

Assuming the 718 bar for a standard car would be stiffer than a 981 bar for a standard car and is part number is 98133370313, would it be safe to assume it fits a 981, sits between the 12 and 14 bars in the stiffness rank and be compatible with standard bushes (i.e. not too thick)?

[daz05]

1 hour ago, mja986 said:

Assuming the 718 bar for a standard car would be stiffer than a 981 bar for a standard car and is part number is 98133370313, would it be safe to assume it fits a 981, sits between the 12 and 14 bars in the stiffness rank and be compatible with standard bushes (i.e. not too thick)?

In theory yes, that logic seems to work but I'm not sure you will feel the difference the bar will still be hollow. The 718 has more weight over the back end and stiffer dampers and springs so the AR bar would be a little stiffer. The 718 also has an additional chassis stiffener piece at the back too.

The Porsche parts system will tell you if it needs a specific bushing. They are using 996 bushes even now.

 

[mja986]

50 minutes ago, daz05 said:

In theory yes, that logic seems to work but I'm not sure you will feel the difference the bar will still be hollow. The 718 has more weight over the back end and stiffer dampers and springs so the AR bar would be a little stiffer. The 718 also has an additional chassis stiffener piece at the back too.

The Porsche parts system will tell you if it needs a specific bushing. They are using 996 bushes even now.

 

Ok, thanks, seen one for a good price 👍

[daz05]

1 hour ago, mja986 said:

Ok, thanks, seen one for a good price 👍

That bar is from a standard chassis car without pasm or PTV, suggesting it's the weakest, and 16 being the firmest.

The 14 is as we know is solid and used for 718 with pasm. The 15 is also solid and used for pasm and PTV.

Bizarrely though the 13 bar calls for the same bushings as the thickest bar, type 16, that suggests it's hollow but thicker in diameter than the others.

Bushings you would need are 2 off 997 333 792 90. Probably around £30 total from OPC.

 

[mja986]

1 hour ago, daz05 said:

That bar is from a standard chassis car without pasm or PTV, suggesting it's the weakest, and 16 being the firmest.

The 14 is as we know is solid and used for 718 with pasm. The 15 is also solid and used for pasm and PTV.

Bizarrely though the 13 bar calls for the same bushings as the thickest bar, type 16, that suggests it's hollow but thicker in diameter than the others.

Bushings you would need are 2 off 997 333 792 90. Probably around £30 total from OPC.

 

Ok, thanks @daz05 and for being so patient. I’d happily go for the 14 bar based on your review as I’d like my car to behave the way you describe yours does. I hesitate because the planet-9 table suggests it would result in my car having higher arb rate at the rear (41.7) than the front (40) when even a full x73 set up isn’t firmer at the rear!  A similar rear/front relationship as yours would need a bar rated around 37, hence my interest in the 981/12 and 718/13 bars as logic suggests they would be in that area. Does that make sense? Thanks for all the info👍

[daz05]

12 hours ago, mja986 said:

Ok, thanks @daz05 and for being so patient. I’d happily go for the 14 bar based on your review as I’d like my car to behave the way you describe yours does. I hesitate because the planet-9 table suggests it would result in my car having higher arb rate at the rear (41.7) than the front (40) when even a full x73 set up isn’t firmer at the rear!  A similar rear/front relationship as yours would need a bar rated around 37, hence my interest in the 981/12 and 718/13 bars as logic suggests they would be in that area. Does that make sense? Thanks for all the info👍

Makes sense but you need to establish what bar you have first I think but keen for you to try this and report back. Your old bushes will work with it they will be stretched by now and if you really like it replace them.

No issue with the rear being firmer imho these are set up to understeer at the limit, and you can tweak the geo to suit your set up.

Fyi the 718 tweaks make the rear stiffer relative to the front of the 981.

[mja986]

1 hour ago, daz05 said:

Makes sense but you need to establish what bar you have first I think but keen for you to try this and report back. Your old bushes will work with it they will be stretched by now and if you really like it replace them.

No issue with the rear being firmer imho these are set up to understeer at the limit, and you can tweak the geo to suit your set up.

Fyi the 718 tweaks make the rear stiffer relative to the front of the 981.

Looks like it’s the same bar most have as standard

 

 

[Ringmaster999]

Think my mind is made up. Spoke to my OPC today about retro fitting the x73 kit complete onto my Boxster. It’s got to be done. I’ll make the decision in the next week. Why not eh😂👍

[daz05]

32 minutes ago, Ringmaster999 said:

Think my mind is made up. Spoke to my OPC today about retro fitting the x73 kit complete onto my Boxster. It’s got to be done. I’ll make the decision in the next week. Why not eh😂👍

Yep why not! I would do it if I didn't have PASM.