Originally Posted by speed21

16mm shims on the GT3 LFCA's? That's quite a lot for a turbo. The 2.5 camber setting is a good compromise for track and street although on the limit for the street tires to still wear reasonably well but did they look at the top strut mounts to get some of that neg? Going by what i was told your'e really better off taking the stock top strut mounts out, knock the studs out and turn the mounts around, refit the studs and that will get you enough adjustment from the top for 2 to 2.5 and then go easy on the shims down low for the finals.

Originally Posted by speed21

Don't mean to be alarmist here but the C2s and turbo are two different front ends. I had the same set up on my last c2s as what you are using now, achieved much the same way, but to do that on the turbo is not ideal due to the driveshafts....even the guys at porsche told me that and they set a lot of cars up for their own DE's. There is only so much movement in the velocity joints and at full lock and under track conditions it may be problematic. As i said, the correct way is to get more of that neg from the top so things aren't at the limit on the lower end (driveshafts). 16mm is a lot on the bottom plus you have altered the ride height as well which changes the game more again. Are you using 996 or 997 gt3 arms?

Originally Posted by speed21

Slawek you are one guy that knows exactly what i am talking about from your own experiences. Excessively shimming out LFCA's on a 997tt is fraught with problems. And when you look at how many sad stories have been told just here on 6 alone, all associated to "experts" that have had their hands in some of these bilstein issues makes you ask yourself just how much do some of these experts really know. And, just how few have evidently taken the necessary steps to find out the technical ramifications associated to this particular exercise. Having a car look great is one thing but having it stay reliable and in one piece is another. Investigating the association of the drive shaft velocity joint extension limits to the front diff and seal failure, and, the association of neg camber induced by shimminmg gt3 lfcas on a 997tt with the Porsche technicians revealed some very interesting things indeed. Shimming out from the bottom is possible but there are definite limits and it should not to be taken lightly for the sake of a look. There are ways to set these cars up to achieve 2.5 neg and it is evident that a lot of that neg is far better coming from the top than mainly from shimming the bottom. Turning the top strut mounts around will relieve the need for all that shimming on the bottom . That's a trick they use. The other way is to buy some adjustable top mounts but at 2.5 that's not necessary if you do the mount trick. That way only a very small amount of shims need to be used on the bottom, sharing the change more proportionately between top and bottom without extending what little joint limit is most likely left after that 30mm lowering exercise. If you find you need to position the front wheels back out at the top of the gaurd then you're better off using wheel spacers to do that rather than refraining from moving the top of the strut in at the tower.

Originally Posted by slawek

Once again Paul you are correct with your observations and information input.
Over past two years I went through three different sway bars in front -stock,Eibach H&R and back to stock and three different sets of lowering links -Bilsteins, AP's and Tarret .
My first Eibach springs suspension + excessive camber settings on my car, put way to much stress on front axles , sway bar bushings and steering column .After forty minutes of driving on track I needed to stop do to the front axle leakage.I've change bushing on sway bar twice.
It took me over a year to set Bilstein suspension on my car in the way that is everyday drivable, predictable and controllable on the track.We can set this car as low as the GT3RS but this doesn't mine it will drive as one.997 Turbo is four wheel drive and very sensitive in the front.
Doc I'm hoping you are not planing to track your car with the wheel specters on .I still love your car tho,

Originally Posted by Doc GTO

Ok. I made some calls and talked to Tom at TPC Racing who tracks TT cars all the time. He suggested that I go with the adjustable camber plates on top to dial in more there and reduce the shim size on the bottom. The camber specs I have is where I need to be static, but he was worried about the dynamic changes under load where it could stress the CVs, like you guys mentioned. Thanks for the info and the parts are ordered to rectify.

Originally Posted by AlexM

Paul is a fantastic asset to this community. He is one of very few people that keep this whole thing technically credible. Remember, when sales people say something - it's a claim. When a credible independent party says the same thing - it's a fact.