ive been searching for some lowering springs. when i look at the rate of drop. the front is always more than the rear. why? shouldnt the front be lowered less due to weight of engine in front.

 

yeah typically they will put a larger drop in the front, i havent taken the time to figure out the weights and geometry as to why they do it, however it seems to work, but the spring rates are usually different between the front and rear springs to compensate for the front being heavier

 

downforce when driving?

 

that may have something to do with it, but im sure that the engineers do it more for the lowering of the COG than anything else

 

because on most hondas the front has a larger wheel gap. so they drop the car farther in the front to make it even. look at eibach springs the drop the chassis line even, but the front most of the time has more gap.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by projectTeG &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">because on most hondas the front has a larger wheel gap. so they drop the car farther in the front to make it even. look at eibach springs the drop the chassis line even, but the front most of the time has more gap.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'd wager money that that is the reason.

However, there is nothing wrong with lowering the front a little more, and depending on the rake, can create more rotation (oversteer). Lowering the front's center of rotation more than the rear, should cause the front to try and roll more, tansfering more weight to the outside rear wheel. If its enough to matter, is not something I can answer, but I do seem to get more rotation with my car with a 1/2" rake, than level, measured from the jack points on 400/400 Ground Controls. Then again, I'm dropped 3" in the front, and probably have a center of rotation well below the pavement.