An epilogue (long overdue).
I finally replaced these in summer of 2017 with stock Volvo branded Sachs and new Lesjofors (OEM) front springs (green equivalent). I got proper ride height and handling back. The rear ride height is also eventually affected when you use the Bilsteins. It feels right and good again to be rid of these defective Bilsteins.
I can't believe they are still selling these. They have NOT been fixed. I'm sure they could be great struts if they weren't made with faulty specs.
Never again.
Bilstein Touring strut spring seat too high?
- erikv11
- Posts: 11800
- Joined: 25 July 2009
- Year and Model: 850, V70, S60R, XC70
- Location: Iowa
- Has thanked: 292 times
- Been thanked: 765 times
That rear shock doesn't change ride height, that's not possible with this coil spring setup unless you go to an adjustable air shock or something similar. The coil springs dictate ride height, there is no perch on the rear shock.
The fronts have definitely been fixed, last year I put them on my 95 R and while I didn't measure them, they didn't change the ride height any in the front. I would definitely notice the 1/2 inch change - I did when I installed Bilstein struts back in 2002, for example.
The fronts have definitely been fixed, last year I put them on my 95 R and while I didn't measure them, they didn't change the ride height any in the front. I would definitely notice the 1/2 inch change - I did when I installed Bilstein struts back in 2002, for example.
'95 854 T-5R, Motronic 4.4, 185k
'98 V70, T5 tune-injectors-turbo, LPT engine, 304k, daily driver
'06 S60 R, 197k
'07 XC70, black, 205k
'07 XC70, willow green, 212k
'99 Camry V6
153k
gone: '96 NA 850 210k, '98 NA V70 182k, '98 S70 NA 225k, '96 855 NA 169k
'98 V70, T5 tune-injectors-turbo, LPT engine, 304k, daily driver
'06 S60 R, 197k
'07 XC70, black, 205k
'07 XC70, willow green, 212k
'99 Camry V6
gone: '96 NA 850 210k, '98 NA V70 182k, '98 S70 NA 225k, '96 855 NA 169k
- wizechatmgr
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: 12 January 2017
- Year and Model: 1999 V70 XC AWD 2.4T
- Location: Albany, NY area
- Has thanked: 45 times
- Been thanked: 126 times
- Contact:
Could this be a Nivomat vs "regular" suspension issue? Maybe a different strut for a different spring color?
Wisdom requires knowledge as a prerequisite, but knowledge can be developed due to a lack of wisdom.
In order to learn how to fix something, you must first learn how to break it.
1999 V70 XC AWD 2.4 T -- ~231k miles
1998 V70 2.4 NA -- ~184k miles
In order to learn how to fix something, you must first learn how to break it.
1999 V70 XC AWD 2.4 T -- ~231k miles
1998 V70 2.4 NA -- ~184k miles
- v-45magna
- Posts: 57
- Joined: 15 October 2013
- Year and Model: 99 S70 GLT
- Location: DFW
- Has thanked: 2 times
Springs absolutely do set ride height, you are correct. If you put on longer or shorter springs, spring with higher or lower rates (stronger and weaker). It is absolute and physical.
Take a moment and think about this. With a stronger or weaker spring, longer or shorter, when the strut upper mount secured, the strut is the same measured free length. With this strut and that lower perch being 1/2" higher (I measured the difference to the original), the spring is compressed an extra 1/2". Assuming the spring is the same one in both examples (it was the original), the spring rate goes WAY up, so the front end sits higher. Not a half an inch, but higher, and much stiffer. The rear springs on these already have a propensity to sag so this isn't helping that issue at all. That is the correlation between front and rear. The rear is way simpler as it is not bound in it length by anything but the simple weight of the vehicle with bias to the rear of it.
It's much easier to miss than you think.
Take a moment and think about this. With a stronger or weaker spring, longer or shorter, when the strut upper mount secured, the strut is the same measured free length. With this strut and that lower perch being 1/2" higher (I measured the difference to the original), the spring is compressed an extra 1/2". Assuming the spring is the same one in both examples (it was the original), the spring rate goes WAY up, so the front end sits higher. Not a half an inch, but higher, and much stiffer. The rear springs on these already have a propensity to sag so this isn't helping that issue at all. That is the correlation between front and rear. The rear is way simpler as it is not bound in it length by anything but the simple weight of the vehicle with bias to the rear of it.
It's much easier to miss than you think.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 2 Replies
- 781 Views
-
Last post by coodoo99
-
- 6 Replies
- 1267 Views
-
Last post by shiloh51933






