Is lower always better?
Why is there so much obsession with the looks that a suspension creates, seemingly without regard to the performance? Lower does not always mean better performance. In fact, there is a sweet spot between stock and "dropped to the ground" that handily outperforms either.
Does anyone consider performance first, then asthetics?
Am I missing something?
This is probably a flame magnet, but I really think there is an obsession with the amount that various springs, cup kits and other devices lower the car.
Why is there so much obsession with the looks that a suspension creates, seemingly without regard to the performance? Lower does not always mean better performance. In fact, there is a sweet spot between stock and "dropped to the ground" that handily outperforms either.
Does anyone consider performance first, then asthetics?
Am I missing something?
i would never put a different suspension on my car for aesthetic reasons... that even SOUNDS ridiculous. that's like saying you've added a rear locking differential for looks.
Why is it about having the lowest car? To look cool to your friends?
Must be, because it sure would not perform well, perhaps worse than stock.
I guess I just don't get it. Too old or too serious about real performance. Maybe I just don't give a rip what others think.
I will stop trying to understand and focus my effort elsewhere.
Trending Topics
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Large diameter wheels are even more for looks. Race cars need big wheels so that they can run larger brakes, this gives them a performace advantage that offsets the added unsprung weight and power lost to spinning heavier wheels.
- BT
now people also buy a car for looks. if the c230 looked like a 2 door toyota echo would anyone buy it if it had the same performance as the c230?
nothings wrong with doing a good performance mod if it makes your car look better 2.






