u13 bluebird springs q

[Nissan_U13]

hi guys, :)

a few months ago i had to get my rear springs change on my 92 nissan bluebird (king springs ; it became lose)
i have changed them to dobinson C45-135V. quite pleased them. it even dropped the ride height (possible a inch more).

Since the rear springs have been changed, the front one's remain the same ("low" springs) .
so the ride height is not even. the front is higher, and the rear is lower.
ride height difference image (http://homepages.slingshot.co.nz/~rhohilshohil/digitalimages/943sideshot3.jpg)
another shot front right (http://homepages.slingshot.co.nz/~rhohilshohil/images/oops146.jpg)
i was thinking of getting "low" dobinson for the front. but i;m trying to decide to get "low" or "superlow" 's in the front.
Meaning it will reduce the gap on the front guard.

sorry for the big write up.
sugguestion welcome.

ash

[Dave]

I like the look and stance of your car how it is. It looks to be level going by the door sill. I wouldn't worry about guard gap unless it's for looks. Personally I like a larger gap at the front than the back on most cars. Having the front too low can cause problems going over speed bumps, going up driveways, going into multilevel car parks and so on, not to mention extra wear and tear on the components.

I'd leave it or try out the lows if you really want to go lower. Superlows would probably make the tyrre be inside the guard.

[Wojtek]

as Dave said....
... it ***looks*** really good. Standard suspension guard height is about 10-15mm higher in the front. Apart from that, I don't think there are superlow springs for your car anyway.

Wojtek.

[Nissan_U13]

sweet. thanks fellas
:)