My turn.
I installed the coil-overs on my freshly rebuilt 222E (2.8 18v). I needed to re-adjust them twice to find the good balance, the ride is comfortable. So far I did not push the car too much because I'm still breaking in the engine (250km), so I can't judge how the rear is good. But it's definitely not worse than what I had before. The front is sharper than before.
It's easy to install, well made, strong.
The main advantage is the freedom to adjust all the parameters.
The main problem is the maximal front ride: it's too low. It's about both springs and the strut length, the overall range. This is the problem if you want to have an every day car, not just a show off toy driven 500km/year on flat streets on sunny days. Worse if you want to be 4 persons in the car.
Explanations.
The 200 front is low. I managed to have 9.5cm of clearance between the engine frame and the ground. It's not a lot. 400 versions are 2cm higher. I've never understood where is the difference between the versions. On modern routes made for suv and 4wd trucks/tractors you need more. Not to mention some underground park places. The stock exhaust was too low on speed bumps, so I modified (welded) the front part of the exhaust to have it 1cm higher, at 1cm from the body (like what was made on Ghibli and Qp4).
The problem area is near the gearbox, this is where the exhaust is usually smashed.
On the rear it's all fine, you can adjust as low or high as you want (until the wheel camber gets too high/low). The rear of 200 versions is too light and there is no anti-roll bar, so I want it to be as low as possible (to minimize the body roll). For the same reasons you can't make it too stiff, it won't stay on an average route with bumps.
400 and ghibli have heavier rears, they won't be as problematic to adjust.
My shock adjustment is 12 clicks on front and rear, instead of suggested 15 front and 14 rear. However I rebuilt and modified the front of the body around the engine (it was all rusted and smashed) and the engine frame, so it's much stronger than before. I guess with a stock car it may feel differently.
So far I kept the default caster which is like stock.
One of the huge benefits is to be able to balance both sides of the car. Mine has had at least two accidents and was repaired in the usual way: as they could with a big hammer and torch. So the car is not symetrical. Really not. But none of these cars was straight even brand new. So being able to make it parallel to the ground, with the same dynamics on both sides, is appreciated.
An advise: don't make the front too stiff if your car is stock. The front of all versions, except for qp4 (that was made of a better steal and was slightly redesigned by FIAT), is weak. The weakness is around the strut "towers" (the body bends) and exactly where is the rear of the engine frame (the body cracks in this area).
I installed the coil-overs on my freshly rebuilt 222E (2.8 18v). I needed to re-adjust them twice to find the good balance, the ride is comfortable. So far I did not push the car too much because I'm still breaking in the engine (250km), so I can't judge how the rear is good. But it's definitely not worse than what I had before. The front is sharper than before.
It's easy to install, well made, strong.
The main advantage is the freedom to adjust all the parameters.
The main problem is the maximal front ride: it's too low. It's about both springs and the strut length, the overall range. This is the problem if you want to have an every day car, not just a show off toy driven 500km/year on flat streets on sunny days. Worse if you want to be 4 persons in the car.
Explanations.
The 200 front is low. I managed to have 9.5cm of clearance between the engine frame and the ground. It's not a lot. 400 versions are 2cm higher. I've never understood where is the difference between the versions. On modern routes made for suv and 4wd trucks/tractors you need more. Not to mention some underground park places. The stock exhaust was too low on speed bumps, so I modified (welded) the front part of the exhaust to have it 1cm higher, at 1cm from the body (like what was made on Ghibli and Qp4).
The problem area is near the gearbox, this is where the exhaust is usually smashed.
On the rear it's all fine, you can adjust as low or high as you want (until the wheel camber gets too high/low). The rear of 200 versions is too light and there is no anti-roll bar, so I want it to be as low as possible (to minimize the body roll). For the same reasons you can't make it too stiff, it won't stay on an average route with bumps.
400 and ghibli have heavier rears, they won't be as problematic to adjust.
My shock adjustment is 12 clicks on front and rear, instead of suggested 15 front and 14 rear. However I rebuilt and modified the front of the body around the engine (it was all rusted and smashed) and the engine frame, so it's much stronger than before. I guess with a stock car it may feel differently.
So far I kept the default caster which is like stock.
One of the huge benefits is to be able to balance both sides of the car. Mine has had at least two accidents and was repaired in the usual way: as they could with a big hammer and torch. So the car is not symetrical. Really not. But none of these cars was straight even brand new. So being able to make it parallel to the ground, with the same dynamics on both sides, is appreciated.
An advise: don't make the front too stiff if your car is stock. The front of all versions, except for qp4 (that was made of a better steal and was slightly redesigned by FIAT), is weak. The weakness is around the strut "towers" (the body bends) and exactly where is the rear of the engine frame (the body cracks in this area).
Last edited:
.
