7Cars Forum

Seeking to acquire BC coilovers. Seeking insights on individuals' experiences with regular and/or very low BC coilovers. What is the rationale for purchasing the standard versions when the extreme low is offered at the same price? Does severe low immediately need a bigger minimum drop? Why not set it at an extremely low level instead of maximizing it, but retaining the option for little adjustments? Should this be comprehensible, I find it amusing.

BC coilovers are substandard. Refrain from squandering your finances.

I concur with it. All BC coilovers are subpar and cater to enthusiasts seeking to lower their vehicles by four inches. BC dampers often have problems, which is why drop-in cartridges are used to address these issues, particularly when subjected to rigorous usage on the street or track. Their riding quality is abysmal. Avoid BC dampers.

ST XTA (one-way adjustable) or ST XTA Plus (three-way adjustable) dampers, produced by KW, significantly outperform BC dampers. ISC represents a superior entry-level damper compared to BC coilovers.

BC Racing is substandard. They are not designed for the chassis. They are intended to be hurled and impact any vehicle. The riding quality will be subpar. If you need or want coilovers, I would suggest any of the following brands:

- KW - Bilstein - ST (sub-brand of KW)

I opted for Macht Schnell lowering springs in conjunction with spacers. The fitting with the 666M wheels was excellent.

The XTA, priced at around $1500, is likely the premier entry-level damper using KW valve technology, while the XTA PLUS, available for around $2500, is an excellent value for 3-way introduction dampers.

The Bilstein B6 and B8 (fixed, non-damptronic) combined with springs will be positioned between the two ST configurations. The B16 and KW V3 will be much more expensive than the other ST and ISC dampers. The optimal choice is contingent upon your overarching objective. Nonetheless, it is impossible to identify settings that underperform compared to BC setups unless your objective is to position the jack pads or chassis directly on the road surface. Individuals who believe that BC dampers provide satisfactory ride quality lack understanding of what an appropriate damper configuration should include.

I am using MCS 2WR dampers with front and rear spring rates of 700/1100 lbf/in (rear detached), 100 psi nitrogen gas pressure in the reservoirs, and street-oriented rebound and compression damper settings, resulting in an exceptional street ride quality.

I value the additional perspective. For my next F80, I would want to install a set of coilovers; however, I believe it may be excessive given the vehicle and my intended use. What is your opinion on the KW HAS kit versus the BMW M HAS kit?

The Ohlins R&T is an excellent option, particularly because to its 3DM adjustable spring rates and bespoke valving. The cost is around $3200 to $3300. By using the suitable damping setting (disregarding Ohlins' suggested configuration, since it approaches critical damping), you will get an exceptional street ride devoid of roughness. I own a set of R&T on my R56 Cooper S, and it constitutes an excellent street configuration.

The HAS configurations will function adequately if the specified ride height changes are adhered to. A 10 mm drop at both the front and rear preserves the original forward rake. When individuals adjust a HAS configuration to achieve a one-finger space between the front tire and fender, as well as a similar one-finger gap at the rear, they inadvertently lower the front more than the rear, resulting in a vehicle with a pronounced forward rake. Lowering the front compared to the OEM rear alters the car's balance towards oversteer. Fortunately, the severe rake configuration, although exhibiting balanced oversteer, is insufficient by itself to induce rear-end instability in every turn. I advocate a maximum of 15 mm drops for both the front and back. In a corner-balanced f8x, the distance between the front tire and fender is greater than that of the rear. When measuring from the center of the rear jack pad on the chassis to the center of the front jack pad on the outside chassis, the height differential should indicate that the front is lower by 3/8” to 1/2”. Initially, adjust the rear ride height to a range of 10-15 mm, with 10 mm being optimal and 15 mm as the maximum. Subsequently, establish the front decreased height between 0.375 and 0.50 inches, measured from the chassis side of the center of the rear jack pad to the chassis side of the center of the front jack pad. This approach almost achieves corner balancing for the f8x, excluding the cross-axis modifications required to equalize LF + RR with RF + LR. I consider this to be the most advantageous aspect of a HAS configuration.

Severe lows will be imposed at their maximum levels. They are mostly intended for those with lowered, stanced, and static vehicles.

Avoid excessively low settings if you choose for BCs or any coilover brand that provides them, unless you are only interested in static stanced configurations. Otherwise, your drivability will be compromised.