rear strut/lowering springs help

[2fazed]

I'm lowering my 92 RS. I bought new struts, mounts, lowering springs, and boots. Both front and rear for 90-94 323/Protege. Got the fronts on, no problem. But when I assembled the rear parts, the top mount doesn't sit on the spring. I looked on the old strut, and its the same strut size. I also had some old RS lowering springs, and they were the same as my new ones. Do they make any inserts to help make the springs sit in there against the top mount without them moving?


Here's a pic of how they look.

http://imageshack.us/g/842/strut1.jpg/

[cWs306]

Have you tried compressing it?.. try compressing it with a pair of the manual strut/spring compressors. and then install it while its compressed. the weight of the car will kill that gap. the gap is because there lowering springs, not as much coil as the stock oem sping.

[marcdh]

Err your spring should not be loose at full travel. That puts them at the same safety as cut springs. Somethings not right by the look of things - springs to short/spring perch too low/piston too long?

[2fazed]

im wondering if the springs were cut. there brand new, strange. is there anything i can do, without buying new springs?

[2fazed]

Have you tried compressing it?.. try compressing it with a pair of the manual strut/spring compressors. and then install it while its compressed. the weight of the car will kill that gap. the gap is because there lowering springs, not as much coil as the stock oem sping.

Don't need to compress them. The springs don't touch the top mount. Compressing them would make a bigger gap between the mount.

[wytbishop]

What brand of spring is it? What is the advertised lowering measurement? The problem there is that the piston is all the way out, and the spring is not long enough to even reach the perch. My only spring experience is with Eibachs, but they were roughly the same uncompressed length as stock. They lower by compressing at a different rate than stock.

I did not even need to use a compressor to install a stock rear spring so it stands to reason that any spring a lot shorter than stock is going to give you a gap like that.

[Josh]

Its the difference between a progressive rate spring and just a lowering spring. It looks like those are Eibach's on the right and the "lowering" springs on the left. They are a none progressive so they will not touch the top mount without weight being on them. That's the way they are made. they will always have a gap when fully extended. They look thick going to be a stiff ride.

[2fazed]

What brand of spring is it? What is the advertised lowering measurement? The problem there is that the piston is all the way out, and the spring is not long enough to even reach the perch. My only spring experience is with Eibachs, but they were roughly the same uncompressed length as stock. They lower by compressing at a different rate than stock.

I did not even need to use a compressor to install a stock rear spring so it stands to reason that any spring a lot shorter than stock is going to give you a gap like that.

Ok, I know if I put the struts/springs on the car, and take the car off the jacks, it will compress the mount down and go on the springs. Im just worried if I hit a bump or something, the spring will move around and wear it and the mount.

[DeadMaker]

This is NOT the correct process..It shouldn't be done like that.
You are risking your life if you drive with this situation.
Obviously there is something wrong with the spring or strut.Why did you took parts for protege?

[2fazed]

This is NOT the correct process..It shouldn't be done like that.
You are risking your life if you drive with this situation.
Obviously there is something wrong with the spring or strut.Why did you took parts for protege?

Because the 90-94 323/protege fit the 92/93 RS. And I got the springs for $50, instead of $250. Do your homework before posting. I'm trying to find ways to deal with my situation. If I was going to ride like this, I wouldn't be posting.

[2fazed]

Its the difference between a progressive rate spring and just a lowering spring. It looks like those are Eibach's on the right and the "lowering" springs on the left. They are a none progressive so they will not touch the top mount without weight being on them. That's the way they are made. they will always have a gap when fully extended. They look thick going to be a stiff ride.

If your referring to the pics, the strut assembly on the right is the oem stock. On the left is the new struts and springs I got. The lowering springs are Sprint Suspension springs. It's a local company off brand.

[wytbishop]

I'm sorry I wasn't being clear. Those springs are clearly either not meant for that strut, or really poorly designed. You're absolutely right when you hit a bump and unweight the suspension the perch will separate from the spring and possibly (probably) come down off center, damaging the perch and the spring.

They may have sent you the wrong springs. Is there a part number on them? If they have a number and the manufacturer says that spring is intended for the protege strut (which is identical to the MX-3 strut...you are correct) I would question them as to why there is a gap. There absolutely should not be.

[Josh]

OMG you guys, THEY ARE MADE THAT WAY...

They are none progressive. My Eibachs do the same thing on the front struts... when your struts are designed for a specific height of spring and you lower your car, some spring manufactures go with a non progressive spring like this one. THIS IS THE RESULT. Its not that its unsafe... Your wheel will never get that much travel unless your 4x4ing your car on a dirt road, taking jumps and catch some killer air, or jack the car up. Ground Controls are the same way...

Again the difference between a progressive rate and a none progressive rate spring. Its not that much really. That's why its good to have a shorter strut and travel when you go with shorter springs. Same reason I am using preload springs in conjunction with my Ground Controls.

If you are that worried about it you can always drill small holes in your top plate and strap the top plate to the top of the spring.

[2fazed]

I think I solved my problem. I disassembled the oem strut assembly, and put the lowering spring on it. It fit. Looks like the Mx3 rear is a couple inches smaller than the protege. Now the oem spring fit fine on the protege strut. So, I guess I found out if I'm going stock, protege is fine, if lowering, then Mx3 strut is what I need. Thanks for all the input.

[DeadMaker]

This is NOT the correct process..It shouldn't be done like that.
You are risking your life if you drive with this situation.
Obviously there is something wrong with the spring or strut.Why did you took parts for protege?

Because the 90-94 323/protege fit the 92/93 RS. And I got the springs for $50, instead of $250. Do your homework before posting. I'm trying to find ways to deal with my situation. If I was going to ride like this, I wouldn't be posting.

But you will going to ride them if you trust josh..
I know that they fit i had 323 in the past.
Before my oem springs i hade H&R with kyb.One time when i jacked up the car i noticed that the bottom of the rear spring was 1/3 out of the strut positions.
I never heard about progressive springs position but if josh says it he may be right..