93 Rear Ride Height?

[Andy TT]

I have had the rear springs on my '93 replaced with KYB as one had broken. The rear ride height now looks far too high to me - it looks like a jacked up 70's Capri - but I can't find anything about what it should be. I've found an old post for a MkIII which has a measurement from the centre of the rear wheel to the wheelarch lip at 14" to 15" - mine is 17.5". Is the MKIII ride height similar to my '93 - I'd be very grateful if anyone who has a '93 or '94 could measure their ride height.

The springs were fitted by a highly reputable garage so I doubt there is anything wrong with their work and it looks as though the springs are at fault. Does anyone have any experience with KYB - I was told they were a supplier to Lexus - or could they be for a later model?

Any advice gratefully received as at the moment I'm looking at buying a pair from Lexus.

[Rupert Dubreaux]

Hi Andy, just measured my 94 at 14in and the 96 at 14 and 1/2in ,both are on standard mK3 16in wheels .

[steve2006]

The garage should have checked spring lengths of the old and new by comparison before they were fitted totally avoiding the problem you now have.

Did you order the springs or the garage?

[Andy TT]

I bought the springs myself - KYB from a supplier on eBay.

[alanr]

Hi Andy,

KYB have certainly been OEM suppliers of springs and shock absorbers for the LS400 but whether they were sole OEM suppliers is anybody's guess. There were four different KYB rear springs fitted as follows -

Aug 1992 to Oct 1994 - RD5979

Oct 1994 to Jul 1996 - RG6458

Aug 1996 to Jul 1997 - RG6459

Aug 1997 to Oct 2000 - RG6460

Interestingly, KYB don't give a reference to the pre 1992 cars.

I suspect that you may well have the wrong springs in your car - do you know what KYB part no. you were supplied with?

Regards,

Alan

[steve2006]

IIRC the rear springs on the October 1994 on models (series III) were longer than the earlier models so this may explain the difference in height.

[Andy TT]

The supplier said they were RD5979 but I can't see any markings on the springs so I guess they could have supplied ones for a different model by mistake. What does surprise me is just how much difference there is - the ride height is 3" too high so the spring must be much too long. The ride on the drive home from the garage was ok so it can't be that the springs are too stiff.

[alanr]

Hi,

KYB do mark their springs, but they are quite difficult to read, especially when fitted to the car. I have a brand new LS400 front spring in front of me at the moment, and it is stencilled in a dark grey paint around the third coil up from the lower end. The contrast between the stencilling and the black powder coating is very poor. On my spring here it is stencilled as follows -

KYB RG3071 45/11

RG3071 is correct for a Mk 4 front spring, and I would suspect that 45/11 refers to a manufacture date of week 45 of 2011. I am sure that I have got a couple of old Mk 4 rear springs skulking around somewhere - I will look one out over the weekend and measure the uncompressed length. I realise that it's not a useful measurement for you at this moment in time, but if you do remove a strut to investigate your springs then you will at least have something to compare it with. As far as I am aware there is precious little difference between the Mk 3 and Mk 4 rear spring. I've not owned a Mk 2 so have no great knowledge of them. I wouldn't be at all surprised if KYB weren't able to provide you with the uncompressed lengths and coil details of these springs. An email to them may well pay dividends.

Regards

Alan

[Andy TT]

Thanks - I'll check and see if I can see any marks on the rears. I have emailed KYB and asked what the uncompressed length of the correct spring should be. I have measured the unbroken spring which was removed and that is 42.5cm long - the ride height was fine on the side this was removed from with the correct distance between the tyre and the wheel arch. Even on the side with the broken spring it had only dropped marginally as the broken ends of the spring were touching. I'll certainly have to do something about it as the car looks like a 4x4 at the moment.

[alanr]

Hi Andy,

Have just measured an old Mk 4 rear spring, which has an overall uncompressed height of 405mm, an overall diameter of 140mm, and 6.5 coils top to bottom. There may have been some minor tiredness in this spring. The distance from rear hub centre to lower lip of wheel arch on my Mk 4 is 370mm on both sides - say 14.5 inches. Measured with full fuel, empty boot, standard 16 inch wheels and new springs fitted 9 months ago.

Have also just had a look at KYB's online catalogue, and the RD5979 spring is a completely different design to all later variants. The RD spring is a Type AB and has one end cropped and the other end ground flat. All subsequent springs are Type BC and have the top coil ground flat and a pigtail lower coil. On the face of it I would have to say that it would be impossible to interchange Type AB and BC, although possibly there is a gorilla out there somewhere who will lay claim to having done it. I will try and attach the relevant page from KYB's catalogue to illustrate the differences.

One thought does occur to me - the Catalogue entry for RD5979 does not distinguish which way up the spring is fitted. Clutching slightly at straws, do you think that you may have had a visitation from a "Gorilla in Training" and had the springs fitted upside down? With one cropped end against a surface designed for a ground coil face this would certainly raise the ride height quite dramatically.

Regards, Alan

[Andy TT]

Alan, many thanks for all this information - I'll check it out tomorrow. There must be an obvious answer!

[Andy TT]

I have tried to check if the springs are the correct way round but its virtually impossible to tell as the bottom is buried in the rubber insulator and the top is so far up the strut tower is impossible to see and I can't get my hands in to feel if the end is cropped or ground.

I have found the marking which confirms the spring to be RD5979 and it is 3 or so coils up from the bottom BUT [and I may really be clutching at straws her] the writing is upside down so is this suggesting the spring is too, or is it likely that when springs are marked the manufacturers don't take orientation into account - this is a question I'll have to ask KYB.

I am wondering if I should just use the car for a few days and see if the springs 'settle' but the garage which fitted them change a lot of springs and they say the height they are at now is the height they'll stay at and I can't see them settling 3" in any event.

Thanks for all the help.

[runsgrateasanut]

Andy, If you still own the Lexus, what did you finally do about this situation which is a blunder I've just fallen foul of?   

Did you use the Car for Offroading??? LOL 

Did you change the Springs