BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,099 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just got off the phone with Jay from Ground Control. They now make adjustable camber plates that work with stock springs & OEM style pieces. They are the same price as the others. They replace the entire upper mount and don't cause any ride height problems. I'm inclined to think they are the beest on the market for the M5 at this time. GC also carries the Koni shocks and struts with a good price for the e39 M5 (albeit currently on back order) that would work with these new plates.

The GC complete coil-over package still uses the unique springs and upper mount. They would set me back about an extra $1200. Per GC, the ride hieght lowering and stiffness is conservative. The springs are rated at 350/315 f/r. That sounds not much over stock.

I intend to stick with factory wheel and tire sizes for the street and use 17x8 and R-compound Kuhmos at the track.

If I would stick with the stock spring setup, would I still be wanting more at the track? If I go for the full monty, would I then end up with a stiff daily ride?

All opinions welcome. I need to decide soon since the next track day is February 7th.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,997 Posts
Richard in NC said:
Just got off the phone with Jay from Ground Control. They now make adjustable camber plates that work with stock springs & OEM style pieces. They are the same price as the others. They replace the entire upper mount and don't cause any ride height problems. I'm inclined to think they are the beest on the market for the M5 at this time. GC also carries the Koni shocks and struts with a good price for the e39 M5 (albeit currently on back order) that would work with these new plates.

The GC complete coil-over package still uses the unique springs and upper mount. They would set me back about an extra $1200. Per GC, the ride hieght lowering and stiffness is conservative. The springs are rated at 350/315 f/r. That sounds not much over stock.

I intend to stick with factory wheel and tire sizes for the street and use 17x8 and R-compound Kuhmos at the track.

If I would stick with the stock spring setup, would I still be wanting more at the track? If I go for the full monty, would I then end up with a stiff daily ride?

All opinions welcome. I need to decide soon since the next track day is February 7th.
Yes you'd want more for the track, and no for the road unless your sensitive you'd be fine. I say hold off though, till the PSS9's come out and sombody gets those, with the massive adjustment they have you could set it up both ways to each extreame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,533 Posts
Richard,

Did Jay specifically answer the question with regard to increased front ride height with the stock setup and his camber plates? I'm pretty sure that at least 1/4" to 3/8" is the increase with the Dinan and Kmac plates respectively.

Thanks,
Chuck
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,099 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
CSBM5;
Correct, no increaase in ride height with stock springs. They replace the upper mount allowing it to fit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,353 Posts
They replace the entire upper mount and don't cause any ride height problems.
Music to my ears if true. This is just what I wanted, as I want more neg. camber but to keep the stock springs w/o increasing the ride height. :15:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,533 Posts
Same here! That is just what I'm looking for as long as it works out that way. I'm not sure how they accomplish the adjustability without increasing the thickness of the upper mount (i.e. I've looked carefully at Redshift's GC setup), but perhaps they found some room in the redesigned uppper mount. :M5thumbs:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,997 Posts
chunpng said:
Jayson,

You mean the PSS9s are actually NOT available for the E39 yet? :(

CP
I dont' think so, I think their done testing and all, just not selling yet, I'm not positive but that was the last i knew but that has been a few weeks, I say email um ask maybe they are now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,997 Posts
ONe other option is the KW v2 or v3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,679 Posts
I'd go the GC coilover route with adj. camber plates. You'll have the performance you want on the track--with linear spring rates, and I don't believe it'll be too harsh for the street. It is, after all, a two ton sedan, and not an E30 M3, so even with a more stout suspension I don't believe you'll experience it as harsh.

It's hard to beat the level of adjustability and customizability of the GC setup, for what seems to be a pretty fair price.

I bought my KW v2 setup for $1655 in a group buy on the board about 50K miles ago, and it seems to be getting tired. I am on the verge of going the GC route as the replacement, and it appears that will be cheaper still.

-Dave
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
10,455 Posts
GC replaces the entire OE strut mount, dinan and kmac are plates that sandwitch in above the oe strut top mount, which is why they increase ride height.
THis is interesting, those of us with dinan suspensions could go this route too, if additional camber adjustment was desired.... do i hear a group buy comming? :eek:h:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,625 Posts
Mike,

Intersting idea, and I think it's a good one. By buying the new adjustable GC camber plates you would further reduce ride height on your Dinan suspension. The subtle drop with the Dinan plates is nice, but a slightly lower stance would be even better, in my opinion. Not to mention the increased adjustability for the GC camber plates. How hard and time consuming is it to adjust camber plates? I ask because it seems the fixed Dinan units are at an optimal setting for street driving with some light track use. I wouldn't want to run around town with a bunch more camber dialed in, because of tire wear issues. What do you think?

Also, check your For Sale thread about your headlights, if you havent recently.

Travis
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Richard in NC said:
Just got off the phone with Jay from Ground Control. They now make adjustable camber plates that work with stock springs & OEM style pieces. They are the same price as the others. They replace the entire upper mount and don't cause any ride height problems. I'm inclined to think they are the beest on the market for the M5 at this time. GC also carries the Koni shocks and struts with a good price for the e39 M5 (albeit currently on back order) that would work with these new plates.

The GC complete coil-over package still uses the unique springs and upper mount. They would set me back about an extra $1200. Per GC, the ride hieght lowering and stiffness is conservative. The springs are rated at 350/315 f/r. That sounds not much over stock.

I intend to stick with factory wheel and tire sizes for the street and use 17x8 and R-compound Kuhmos at the track.

If I would stick with the stock spring setup, would I still be wanting more at the track? If I go for the full monty, would I then end up with a stiff daily ride?

All opinions welcome. I need to decide soon since the next track day is February 7th.
Thanks for researching the rumored GC OEM-fit plates.

Now question #2 for Jay....does this OEM-fit plate work with GC kit? If not, why? I am guessing the jounce travel was increased for the full GC plate, but it probably couldn't be improved on the OEM-fit unit. I am also guessing the interface they added to work with the OEM spring perch turntable may interfere with the GC kit upper perch. Knowing these things is good (lol).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
mottati said:
GC replaces the entire OE strut mount, dinan and kmac are plates that sandwitch in above the oe strut top mount, which is why they increase ride height.
THis is interesting, those of us with dinan suspensions could go this route too, if additional camber adjustment was desired.... do i hear a group buy comming? :eek:h:
Actually Mike, the KMAC height problem is not due to sandwiching. The whole strut mount is replaced, but it's design height is 7/16" deeper (taller).

This may have been done to keep the huge OEM spring & perch from physically contacting the strut tower when the camber and caster is altered from OEM. There is not much room in the tower to drop the strut assembly towards the motor, if the 6.5" OEM-ish diameter springs are retained. If so, it will be interesting to hear what caster/camber adjustability limitations are exhibited by this new GC plate for OEM springs. It may not offer the alignment flexibility range of the GC kit setup. This is one of many hidden issues that need researched. This is question #3 for Jay (lol).
Back to KMAC....the bottom of the hardened steel sleeve that the strut rod slides into is exactly 7/16" lower than the BMW OEM plate. The end result is the same as Dinan adapter sandwiching though (loss of jounce). Just trying to help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Jayson said:
Yes you'd want more for the track, and no for the road unless your sensitive you'd be fine. I say hold off though, till the PSS9's come out and sombody gets those, with the massive adjustment they have you could set it up both ways to each extreame.
Jayson,

FYI, the Bilstein PSS9 M5 kit is being sold now as Shox site shows them at $1400. When I contacted Bilstein in mid December & posted about this new kit, they told me they were already shipping this product. For on-line reference, just look up '97-'02 540i...the M5 kit is the same part# according to Bilstein.

http://www.bilstein.com/html/applications/pss9/index.htm
http://www.shox.com/appguide/shoxshop/productsdisplay.php
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,176 Posts
Lscman said:
Jayson,

FYI, the Bilstein PSS9 M5 kit is being sold now. When I contacted Bilstein in mid December & posted about this new kit, they told me they were already shipping this product. For on-line reference, just look up '97-'02 540i...the M5 kit is the same part# according to Bilstein.

http://www.bilstein.com/html/applications/pss9/index.htm
http://www.shox.com/appguide/shoxshop/productsdisplay.php
LSCMAN: From Bilstein's website:

E39 8cyl. Incl. M5 96-02 GM5-A455-H0

Now that the PSS9 is available, which would you choose (PSS9, H&R, etc.)and why?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,353 Posts
If so, it will be interesting to hear what caster/camber adjustability limitations are exhibited by this new GC plate for OEM springs. It may not offer the alignment flexibility range of the GC kit setup.
That would be my guess, too, but my primary goal was slightly more neg. camber w/o increased ride height w/stock springs for the street, so a more limited range of adjustment would not be that big a deal to me. It would concern me more if I tracked more often, however, but if I did that, more likely than not I'd go with replacement springs or a full coil-over kit anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
canysmc said:
LSCMAN: From Bilstein's website:

E39 8cyl. Incl. M5 96-02 GM5-A455-H0

Now that the PSS9 is available, which would you choose (PSS9, H&R, etc.)and why?
Kinda summarized in recent threads.....

Each system has different pros and cons when it comes to ride height, camber adjustability, track handling and ride quality. The intended use & characteristics/preferences will define the winner for each consumer.

There are still some key questions that need answered with respect to GC strut plate compatibility with PSS9. Quick, adjustable alignment is a key ingredient for track duty. GC's kit sure does offer that...plus to a degree, user-selectable spring rates. Dialing in 1-2 degrees of ADDITIONAL neg camber with an allen wrench can easily cut a second off lap times. Such a setting does not work on street, so Dinan plates are not a winner. I can not recommend a suspension system for track that does not allow generous camber adjustability. As such, GC remains the no-brainer choice for track.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,515 Posts
Need4Spd said:
That would be my guess, too, but my primary goal was slightly more neg. camber w/o increased ride height w/stock springs for the street, so a more limited range of adjustment would not be that big a deal to me. It would concern me more if I tracked more often, however, but if I did that, more likely than not I'd go with replacement springs or a full coil-over kit anyway.
Yea...assuming the new plates offer more than 1/2" movement towards neg camber (lol). A 1/4 degree won't help much. It may help to look at an OEM M5 to see how close the perch and spring assy is to the tower at various steering wheel positions. This will show what GC can do without ride height changes. I have no feel for how much room there is for movement with the big springs..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,997 Posts
I do think the Pss9 is prob the best overall system, but it does require the ability and patience to tune it as well since rebound and compression are adjustable along with height of course it could and likely will take time to get your taste down.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top