Lowering - yay or hell no
- Thread starter Lseme
- Start date
FDR
Dedicated LVC Member
If you want to lower the car, your entire suspension - control arms, ball joints, boots - must be in check and stay in check because lowering an LS with it's sporty suspension multiplies the wear on those parts.
You must have some hockey puck stocks.
You must have some hockey puck stocks.
hite337
Hite Performance
Front camber bolts. You dont 'need' them but some alignment guys are not good enough to align the front without them. Then you will need an alignment of course.
jjcool00
Dedicated LVC Member
A. Search, tons of people have lowered and there's a lot of info on here about it.
B. I wouldn't do it if I could go back and have my choice again. Besides appearance and MAYBE a slight handling difference it's frustrating not being able to go to a few of my buddies places because the complex they live in is speed bump riddled. Or the gym. Any yes, I'm well aware of the one wheel trick. Doesn't work when the speed bump is 4" off the ground. Or when you look down leaving the gas station and for some reason it has a super steep decline ramp leaving and cringe slowly inching over it.
Just my .02
B. I wouldn't do it if I could go back and have my choice again. Besides appearance and MAYBE a slight handling difference it's frustrating not being able to go to a few of my buddies places because the complex they live in is speed bump riddled. Or the gym. Any yes, I'm well aware of the one wheel trick. Doesn't work when the speed bump is 4" off the ground. Or when you look down leaving the gas station and for some reason it has a super steep decline ramp leaving and cringe slowly inching over it.
Just my .02
Innocent Fool
LVC Member
I just never understood the point of lowering.
IMHO these cars are already lower than most. What would be the point of lowering it more?
It would be nice to get a jack under it if you have to change a tire never mind speed bumps and pot holes.
IMHO these cars are already lower than most. What would be the point of lowering it more?
It would be nice to get a jack under it if you have to change a tire never mind speed bumps and pot holes.
elephantrider
Dedicated LVC Member
i have zero issue with getting a jack under mine, and its low.
love the attitude it gives the ls, but i echo joe's sentiment about
some of the speed bumps. it is a p.i.t.a. sometimes. i wouldnt
change it though.
love the attitude it gives the ls, but i echo joe's sentiment about
some of the speed bumps. it is a p.i.t.a. sometimes. i wouldnt
change it though.
the lower center of gravity gives the driver significantly more control of the vehicle and reduces flex by a lot. once you drive a lowered vehicle you will get it... especially at highway speeds and beyond.
i drove two lowered pickups which were basically motor on wheels and it was a lot easier to drive bc it was so low. the only thing you had to worry about was the ass end coming loose but you could feel it starting to slip before it would even happen bc of the increased feedback caused by the lower center of gravity. wide tires on a low car make for a good combo too.
i wouldnt do it to my beater ls, but i could see why someone might want to lower one. just dont forget to factor in the cost of the low profile jack.
Jesus A Rodriguez
Active LVC Member
Been wanting to lower my LS too. Also wanted to put some spacers to have the tires stick out more for a aggressive look. I just don't know where to start or what to look for.
This....
I have had two LSes lowered on Eibachs; a 2000 and my old '06. There were speed mountains at a mall that my mother-in-law needed to visit that I couldn't climb over without scrapping. Once the front cleared I was sitting on the stupid thing. She also had trouble getting in and out of the car. The slight improvement in handling and premature wear of the upper ball joints weren't worth it to me.
Jonathon Crocker (from some F1 driver's tream named Michael Schumacher), the LSes suspension designer said the LS needed to be 3/4" lower for optimum handling. Back in the day when Lincoln cared the suits had an outing for LLSOC in Irvine. They set up an autocross course for us and had 3 racers (I don't remember their names) drive with us to help us master the course. The then VP of marketing, Jim Rogers had a manual LS that he lowered an inch. When Jonathon finished a trip around the course in Jim's car he yelled at him "What did you do to my car?? It's tail-happy!"
Those were the days......
I have no desire or intention to lower my BMW....
1LoudLS
Dedicated LVC Member
I cant stress this enough... and they wont be cheap...
but the two things you absolutely must remember is "HUB CENTRIC" and "WHEEL CENTRIC"
any spacer you use must be BOTH! then you need to find out how much farther out you want the wheel to stick and make sure it wont rub. then call a place and order them.
1LoudLS
Dedicated LVC Member
cammerfe
Dedicated LVC Member
Huh?
There's a lot of wishful thinking about that statement, with nothing from a physics/engineering direction to support it, as applied to the Lincoln LS. The generality 'flex' requires the question, "What flex are you referring to?" There's no height above the pavement component in an examination of chassis deflection ('flex'), for example.
If you're talking about the difference between an LS driving down the highway with 18 inches between the pavement and the rocker panels as opposed to a stock height LS situation, your comment may have some merit. But a stock-height LS at highway speed is unlikely to have significantly less handling than one that's been lowered an inch.
At significantly higher speeds, lowering by some small amount ONLY IN THE FRONT will help with airflow under the car. The belly-pan on my '02 LS Sport/ ECTA land speed record holder---E/F CC class---provides me with rock-steady handling at speeds over 150 MPH. And I have stock height springs on my car.
Somewhere up above in this thread is a statement that ideally for handling, the car should be 3/4ths of an inch lower. But doing it properly takes enough effort that the only justification is really just for the looks of it, not from any objective 'handling' basis.
KS
There's a lot of wishful thinking about that statement, with nothing from a physics/engineering direction to support it, as applied to the Lincoln LS. The generality 'flex' requires the question, "What flex are you referring to?" There's no height above the pavement component in an examination of chassis deflection ('flex'), for example.
If you're talking about the difference between an LS driving down the highway with 18 inches between the pavement and the rocker panels as opposed to a stock height LS situation, your comment may have some merit. But a stock-height LS at highway speed is unlikely to have significantly less handling than one that's been lowered an inch.
At significantly higher speeds, lowering by some small amount ONLY IN THE FRONT will help with airflow under the car. The belly-pan on my '02 LS Sport/ ECTA land speed record holder---E/F CC class---provides me with rock-steady handling at speeds over 150 MPH. And I have stock height springs on my car.
Somewhere up above in this thread is a statement that ideally for handling, the car should be 3/4ths of an inch lower. But doing it properly takes enough effort that the only justification is really just for the looks of it, not from any objective 'handling' basis.
KS
i was talking about lowering any vehicle in general bc the question/conversation wasnt exactly ls specific. you removed that from the rest of the context of the post, which wasnt fully enveloped in 'LS only'. i was generally talking abt the extremes of a lowered truck vs. a raised truck <or a truck that sits high stock> when i made that comment, which is fundamentally correct <maybe spare some sort of scientific terminology which 99.9% of readers here are not going to fully understand anyways (self included) >. ive never lowered an ls, nor would i, for <basically> the reason you mention: theres limited improvement capability in performance and 'looks'... and it comes at the expense of untold $$ and lots of time/work to do it right so it aint worth it IMO.
i went on to talk abt lowered trucks, and i actually forgot to type abt my experience with a stock height ram 1500 after driving lowered trucks for a few yrs... the 1500 constantly felt like it was 'flexing' and/or on 3 wheels when doing what amounted to routine manuevers in a lowered truck <or an LS, or any other vehicle with a low center of gravity vs a vehicle with a higher center of gravity>.. friend of mine has a newer ram 2500 that is on tires that jumped the roof height on it by about 5inches and then did something suspension-wise to raise it some more after that... when driving that truck you can feel the twisting/flexing forces on it when you take it around a moderate curve at like 45mph bc its so top heavy and the center of gravity is awkwardly high
myfirstls
Active LVC Member
I agree. I put Eibach kit and KYB shock and I have nothing but regret. Any bump, my bottom scrape against whatever that's causing the bump. Speed bumps, going into or coming out from parking structure, just to mane a few.
I kept my stock springs, and I'm putting them back on soon.
If you really want to lower it by using Eibach kit, get a real shocks for LS. Don't go KYB path as the shocks are way too soft for the application, IMO. BTW, mine came with sports shock (that's what's called, I think), but due to it's cost, I went with KYB and like I mentioned before, regret it big time.
jwct7
Active LVC Member
Couldn't agree more........
What you said eleventy-billion times more.