[Dr Forinor]

Michelin PS4S

[crocodile110]

Originally Posted by Watsey

From personal experience over the past year or so I recommend SuperPro poly bushes for camber and caster adjustability.

The OEM compliance bushes are very soft and you will find that steering precision is massive Ely improved. Being able to add some negative camber helps to dial-out some of the understeer.

NVH is not a problem - the RFTs are a far bigger cause of that.

Have a look on SuperPro.com.au

I'll try and post some specific product links later.

EDIT :

https://superpro.com.au/find/superpr.../cid-999501545

Radius Arm To Chassis Mount Bush Kit - Caster Adjustable : SPF4306K
Control Arm Lower Inner Bush Kit - Camber Adjustable : SPF4303K

Watsey, If I end up going down the Ohlins route, what bushes would you suggest to replace for superpro ones, did you change any others apart from the camber and caster ones that you mentioned above.

Many thanks

[Watsey]

I did send you a long PM on this, but have checked my Sent messages and it's not there. Seems that it cost lost in the BimmerPost ether.

As always, it depends what you are trying to achieve.

I currently have both units on my car : camber adjustable and caster adjustable.

The camber adjustable were installed when I was trying to get a decent amount of negative camber but retaining the OEM top mounts. I don't really need these any more as the car now has Millway adjustable top mounts, but the SuperPro do give around +/- 0.5 degrees adjustment range from OEM. The most I got was -1.25 degrees (1°20'). With the Millway top mounts the car is now running -1.75° and the turn-in and mid-corner grip is SOO much better. Understeer is almost eradicated. The Millway units can go to -4.5° but that's way to much for a road car.

The caster adjustable units became necessary because there was a small amount of contact between the NSF tyre and the arch liner under big suspension inputs - this was due to the combination of reduced ride height, spacers, and 235 (rather than 225) tyres. The front arch liners are not a uniform shape in cross section - there's a raised area just inside the wheel arch that the tyre was 'just' brushing against and this has been resolved by a small adjustment to the caster angle and the fact that the additional negative camber from the Millway top mounts is tucking the top of the tyre inside the arch a little more.

Adjustable camber plates (top mounts) have proven to be a massive (and expensive) pain in the backside : both the Vorshlag units and those from Millway Motorsports have created a lot of NVH and if I was doing it again I'd probably avoid adjustable top mounts completely. Vorshlag were completely unhelpful and Millway has given conflicting responses almost to the extent that they misrepresented their product. I prefer the Millway units in terms of their engineering design but couldn't 'hand on heart' recommend them. It all comes down to the monorail bearing in the top mount, and I'm working with Center Gravity and Millway (if they respond) to find a solution.

I've been regularly reading/contributing to the suspension section on the main forum and another member/modder posted a review of an interesting adjustable bush from K-Mac which apparently gives up to -2° camber. This is an Aussie aftermarket parts manufacturer that I know of, but I opted not to try their adjustable top mount due to anecdotal experiences of poor customer service. However, a poly bush is a far simpler component that an adjustable top mount and their product looks interesting.

Here's a link to the thread :

https://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...2#post24321502

If I was doing the whole thing again this would probably me my preferred setup :

I'd still have the Ohlins R&T, because I think the dual-flow valves deal with primary and secondary inputs very well, however, do consider the front spring rates. I had to increase front spring rates from 60N/mm to 80N units as the 60s were too soft for a heavy 30d-engined car.
K-Mac camber adjustable poly bushes. The product details state the need for a “top of strut adjusters” but I can't find that item in the K-Mac online catalogue.
OEM top mounts (if I can't get a near-silent monorail bearing for my Millway mounts) - they do use rubber isolation to absorb NVH, and this does soften the damper response, but many people might not notice.

Hope that helps with your decision-making.

[Crocodile]

Originally Posted by Watsey

I did send you a long PM on this, but have checked my Sent messages and it's not there. Seems that it cost lost in the BimmerPost ether.

As always, it depends what you are trying to achieve.

I currently have both units on my car : camber adjustable and caster adjustable.

The camber adjustable were installed when I was trying to get a decent amount of negative camber but retaining the OEM top mounts. I don't really need these any more as the car now has Millway adjustable top mounts, but the SuperPro do give around +/- 0.5 degrees adjustment range from OEM. The most I got was -1.25 degrees (1°20'). With the Millway top mounts the car is now running -1.75° and the turn-in and mid-corner grip is SOO much better. Understeer is almost eradicated. The Millway units can go to -4.5° but that's way to much for a road car.

The caster adjustable units became necessary because there was a small amount of contact between the NSF tyre and the arch liner under big suspension inputs - this was due to the combination of reduced ride height, spacers, and 235 (rather than 225) tyres. The front arch liners are not a uniform shape in cross section - there's a raised area just inside the wheel arch that the tyre was 'just' brushing against and this has been resolved by a small adjustment to the caster angle and the fact that the additional negative camber from the Millway top mounts is tucking the top of the tyre inside the arch a little more.

Adjustable camber plates (top mounts) have proven to be a massive (and expensive) pain in the backside : both the Vorshlag units and those from Millway Motorsports have created a lot of NVH and if I was doing it again I'd probably avoid adjustable top mounts completely. Vorshlag were completely unhelpful and Millway has given conflicting responses almost to the extent that they misrepresented their product. I prefer the Millway units in terms of their engineering design but couldn't 'hand on heart' recommend them. It all comes down to the monorail bearing in the top mount, and I'm working with Center Gravity and Millway (if they respond) to find a solution.

I've been regularly reading/contributing to the suspension section on the main forum and another member/modder posted a review of an interesting adjustable bush from K-Mac which apparently gives up to -2° camber. This is an Aussie aftermarket parts manufacturer that I know of, but I opted not to try their adjustable top mount due to anecdotal experiences of poor customer service. However, a poly bush is a far simpler component that an adjustable top mount and their product looks interesting.

Here's a link to the thread :

https://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...2#post24321502

If I was doing the whole thing again this would probably me my preferred setup :

I'd still have the Ohlins R&T, because I think the dual-flow valves deal with primary and secondary inputs very well, however, do consider the front spring rates. I had to increase front spring rates from 60N/mm to 80N units as the 60s were too soft for a heavy 30d-engined car.
K-Mac camber adjustable poly bushes. The product details state the need for a “top of strut adjusters” but I can't find that item in the K-Mac online catalogue.
OEM top mounts (if I can't get a near-silent monorail bearing for my Millway mounts) - they do use rubber isolation to absorb NVH, and this does soften the damper response, but many people might not notice.

Hope that helps with your decision-making.

Hi Watsey, I didn’t receive a pm, I’ll clear my inbox to see if it comes through, shame thanks for making the effort to explain though, let me have a read of the above 👍

[Crocodile]

Originally Posted by Watsey

I did send you a long PM on this, but have checked my Sent messages and it's not there. Seems that it cost lost in the BimmerPost ether.

As always, it depends what you are trying to achieve.

I currently have both units on my car : camber adjustable and caster adjustable.

The camber adjustable were installed when I was trying to get a decent amount of negative camber but retaining the OEM top mounts. I don't really need these any more as the car now has Millway adjustable top mounts, but the SuperPro do give around +/- 0.5 degrees adjustment range from OEM. The most I got was -1.25 degrees (1°20'). With the Millway top mounts the car is now running -1.75° and the turn-in and mid-corner grip is SOO much better. Understeer is almost eradicated. The Millway units can go to -4.5° but that's way to much for a road car.

The caster adjustable units became necessary because there was a small amount of contact between the NSF tyre and the arch liner under big suspension inputs - this was due to the combination of reduced ride height, spacers, and 235 (rather than 225) tyres. The front arch liners are not a uniform shape in cross section - there's a raised area just inside the wheel arch that the tyre was 'just' brushing against and this has been resolved by a small adjustment to the caster angle and the fact that the additional negative camber from the Millway top mounts is tucking the top of the tyre inside the arch a little more.

Adjustable camber plates (top mounts) have proven to be a massive (and expensive) pain in the backside : both the Vorshlag units and those from Millway Motorsports have created a lot of NVH and if I was doing it again I'd probably avoid adjustable top mounts completely. Vorshlag were completely unhelpful and Millway has given conflicting responses almost to the extent that they misrepresented their product. I prefer the Millway units in terms of their engineering design but couldn't 'hand on heart' recommend them. It all comes down to the monorail bearing in the top mount, and I'm working with Center Gravity and Millway (if they respond) to find a solution.

I've been regularly reading/contributing to the suspension section on the main forum and another member/modder posted a review of an interesting adjustable bush from K-Mac which apparently gives up to -2° camber. This is an Aussie aftermarket parts manufacturer that I know of, but I opted not to try their adjustable top mount due to anecdotal experiences of poor customer service. However, a poly bush is a far simpler component that an adjustable top mount and their product looks interesting.

Here's a link to the thread :

https://f30.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...2#post24321502

If I was doing the whole thing again this would probably me my preferred setup :

I'd still have the Ohlins R&T, because I think the dual-flow valves deal with primary and secondary inputs very well, however, do consider the front spring rates. I had to increase front spring rates from 60N/mm to 80N units as the 60s were too soft for a heavy 30d-engined car.
K-Mac camber adjustable poly bushes. The product details state the need for a “top of strut adjusters” but I can't find that item in the K-Mac online catalogue.
OEM top mounts (if I can't get a near-silent monorail bearing for my Millway mounts) - they do use rubber isolation to absorb NVH, and this does soften the damper response, but many people might not notice.

Hope that helps with your decision-making.

Ok so I’ve just had a read, I really appreciate the detailed response, thanks. Top mounts was another question I had which you covered, I think I’ll avoid them for the time being as I dong want the aggravation of parts failing or wearing prematurely wearing out, in a ideal world I’m hoping for a fit and forget setup. I’m sold on the Ohlins being the best choice for me, I’ll add the poly bushes as recommend, I’ll do some reading up on the k-mac options, thanks for the tip.

Spring rates was another dilemma, my f31 is a 328i non x drive, but do occasionally trailer some dirt bikes, do you suggest I run the stiffer springs that you switched for or go even stiffer, I’ll be going throw CG for supply and fit, so after working on yours hopefully they’ll have a good idea what will work best out of the box.

[Watsey]

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Ok so I’ve just had a read, I really appreciate the detailed response, thanks. Top mounts was another question I had which you covered, I think I’ll avoid them for the time being as I dong want the aggravation of parts failing or wearing prematurely wearing out, in a ideal world I’m hoping for a fit and forget setup. I’m sold on the Ohlins being the best choice for me, I’ll add the poly bushes as recommend, I’ll do some reading up on the k-mac options, thanks for the tip.

Spring rates was another dilemma, my f31 is a 328i non x drive, but do occasionally trailer some dirt bikes, do you suggest I run the stiffer springs that you switched for or go even stiffer, I’ll be going throw CG for supply and fit, so after working on yours hopefully they’ll have a good idea what will work best out of the box.

AFAIK the Ohlins rear spring rates are the same across the range : 160N/mm. you'll have absolutely no problems hitching a trailer (most trailers have a recommended 50-75Kg nose weight) if you are running these springs : I've had my Touring seats flat and loaded to the roof with camping gear, and no problems at all.

The guys at CG will have picked up a lot of extra knowledge from installing the R&T, bushes and mounts on my car - you should be able to get a great result without some of the costly 'development' that I've had to pay for.

Good luck with it all, and let us know how it goes.

[Watsey]

One more thing, having re-read your reply : the 28i petrol engine is much lighter than a 30d unit.

One of the guys who commented on the main Forum said that Ohlins did its R&T development using a 320d.

I'd expect the standard 60N front springs to be fine on your car.

[crocodile110]

Originally Posted by Watsey

AFAIK the Ohlins rear spring rates are the same across the range : 160N/mm. you'll have absolutely no problems hitching a trailer (most trailers have a recommended 50-75Kg nose weight) if you are running these springs : I've had my Touring seats flat and loaded to the roof with camping gear, and no problems at all.

The guys at CG will have picked up a lot of extra knowledge from installing the R&T, bushes and mounts on my car - you should be able to get a great result without some of the costly 'development' that I've had to pay for.

Good luck with it all, and let us know how it goes.

Thanks, yes valid point re the 328 being lighter so the standard springs should suffice, I’m glad the trailer won’t skewer what springs I need to run.

Agreed I’m lucky they did all of the development work on your car, by now they will have mastered how to get the best from this setup.

With regards to superpro bushes, do you have any thoughts as to which ones would be beneficial to replace, in hindsight would you of upgraded others with your setup?

I’ll update on the progress as and when it’s fitted, I’ll put my order in next week with CG and return to the Uk for fitting circa April.

Thanks for your help

[Watsey]

Have a chat with Pete at CG but to (hopefully) do the job once, and once only, I'd be very tempted to go with the K-Mac camber adjustable bushes and the SuperPro caster adjustable bushes.

There's not a huge differences yhr amount of work required to fit two bushes rather than one, and you'd have to aspects of adjustment if you need it.

FaRKle! is the guy that has installed the K-Mac bushes and his car got -1.8 degrees camber. I can tell you that this feels great on the road, plus the very nice increased steering precision by removing the very soft compliance bushes.

One thing that caught my eye in FaRKle! review was that he thinks the toothed licking washers (which hold the eccentric camber bolt in place) would need to Best regards cut off if they needed to be adjusted. I don't think that's true as these locking washers are commonly used. Pete can advise.

The second thing I'd done scuds with Pete (getting a technical drawing from K-Mac would be a good idea) is how K-Mac have achieved significantly more camber adjustment from a single bush. The bush housing is obviously a fixed internal diameter, so I'd imagine that the only way to increase the eccentricity of the adjustment bolt is to place it nearer to the outer edge of the poly bush (therefore less material between the metal components which affect longevity) or to use a cranked bolt.

Do your research, but it could be quite a simple install.