That's just being mean.
That's just being mean.
Type Q wrote:Keith wrote: Anyone in California complaining about the roads needs to go visit Michigan.Exactly. Anyone who thinks Nor Cal "winter" is cold needs to spend December or January in Michigan as well.
Drive around in Arcata for a few hours. If your alignment's still good, you get a cookie.
And California winters in general aren't bad. I grew up at ~4500' in the North Sierras, so I did get to shovel my 4-6' of snow. Before you "pshaw" at that, remember that the water content of Sierra Cement is about 10x what it is for snow in the rest of country. That crap is HEAVY. But no, it was never paticularly cold, I think the coldest I ever saw was -20F one night out snowmobiling.
The first time I drove through Detroit, I didn't think my wheels were going to make it through. You can't believe how bad it is until you drive it. On the long tow from Colorado to Newfoundland, the best roads were in Ontario and the worst were in Michigan and Quebec - made for a nice contrast. None of the parts of California I've visited have ever made me think I was going to rip an axle off my trailer.
I spent the first 30 years of my life in Michigan. If you ever wondered why the stuff coming out of Detroit was soft and uninspired, driving around Michigan provides some insight. With a few exceptions, the roads are frost-heaved and pothole ridden. They are also straight as can possibly be built. (It's almost like one of the design objectives of every MDOT project was to put every driver to sleep.) The mainstream Olds, Buick, or LTD of yesteryear was well suited to it.
AGX shocks with Illumina springs seems to be the best compromise for street/light racing duty. I ran a set of stiffer springs with AGX on my 95M and it was way too similar to my 94R. Great for running around town or quick runs to the Dragon but way too stiff for long trips ie Florida or Georgia. As they say, YMMV.
A quick question about the Konis... Keith you mention the Koni sports sitting up high on a 96 (even on the lowest perch setting). What's the reason for this? I've got Koni sports on my 93 (middle perch on front and lowest perch on rear) and it still sits a little jacked up in the rear, but not too bad. I was hoping to just swap over the shocks and springs to my 96 and put my stock 96 setup on my 93. It sounds like this might be a bad idea. Just wanted to know why. I'm guessing the spring rates may have changed, but I don't know how much...
I hope this isn't a threadjack. I figured it was close enough on topic to leave in this thread.
The ride height of the 1996-97 models comes from the springs - mostly length, not rate if I understand right. The lower perch on the Konis will drop them by the same 3/4" they'll drop any Miata, but since those cars sit so high to begin with 3/4" isn't much.
Measure the height of the frame rails. I think you'll find the "jacked up" look is mostly the shape of the rear fender.
You'll need to log in to post.
