[Billy_BMW]

Originally Posted by cookiesowns

Do you have the files for the JRZ's? The stock dampers leave much to be desired on the M2C...

Coming from an OG M2 with MPS... i really want better.

Very much like the fast blow off valve system they have.

Any reason you disliked the MPS for daily/fast road use? Contemplating them vs KW V3.

[Bee Pee]

Originally Posted by Billy_BMW

Any reason you disliked the MPS for daily/fast road use? Contemplating them vs KW V3.

Billy - FWIW on my OG m2 - OEM MPS is ideal for DD/FR/TD use, esp when combined with -0.5 camber correction front hub carriers. BP

[Billy_BMW]

Originally Posted by Bee Pee

Billy - FWIW on my OG m2 - OEM MPS is ideal for DD/FR/TD use, esp when combined with -0.5 camber correction front hub carriers. BP

Thanks Dave. I’ve yet to find a bad review of the MPS. I am tempted by the V3’s however as the spring rate is slightly firmer and progressive up front. They also have a greater lowering range over the MPS. There’s also a sale on V3’s and they’re drawing me in! 🤣

[Bee Pee]

Originally Posted by Billy_BMW

Thanks Dave. I’ve yet to find a bad review of the MPS. I am tempted by the V3’s however as the spring rate is slightly firmer and progressive up front. They also have a greater lowering range over the MPS. There’s also a sale on V3’s and they’re drawing me in! ��

BB,

FWIW - I wouldn't want my MPS much lower - although there's still room to go lower both F&R. Now the 18"'s are on, it'll go up to Center Gravity for full setup/fettling

[cookiesowns]

Originally Posted by Billy_BMW

Any reason you disliked the MPS for daily/fast road use? Contemplating them vs KW V3.

Didn’t mean to word it as so. I meant that given that I had an OG M2 with MPS, the M2C stock suspension leaves much more to be desired.

MPS is really good for the price. Fact that you get to keep your car warranty is great too.

[Billy_BMW]

Originally Posted by Bee Pee

BB,

FWIW - I wouldn't want my MPS much lower - although there's still room to go lower both F&R. Now the 18"'s are on, it'll go up to Center Gravity for full setup/fettling

Understood. Car looks great with 18’s 👌🏽

[Billy_BMW]

Originally Posted by cookiesowns

Didn’t mean to word it as so. I meant that given that I had an OG M2 with MPS, the M2C stock suspension leaves much more to be desired.

MPS is really good for the price. Fact that you get to keep your car warranty is great too.

Ah, that makes sense. I guess what I meant was, if you’ve already had MPS on OG M2, what would stop you from running them on M2C?

And agreed on M2C stock suspension - manages to be both jarring and poorly damped with such low spring rates! BMW’s insistence on using long bumpstops prevents a well-engineered damper from working properly. Trimming them is also not an option as the damper then struggles to cope with standard valving.

[cookiesowns]

Originally Posted by Billy_BMW

Ah, that makes sense. I guess what I meant was, if you’ve already had MPS on OG M2, what would stop you from running them on M2C?

And agreed on M2C stock suspension - manages to be both jarring and poorly damped with such low spring rates! BMW’s insistence on using long bumpstops prevents a well-engineered damper from working properly. Trimming them is also not an option as the damper then struggles to cope with standard valving.

I always want better... that's why. I had some minor gripes about the MPS, mainly to do with the spring diameter and hard to adjust rebound settings.

I really would like to play with a 3 way setup, with high/low speed compression adjustments but tough to stomach 5K+ on a Kw Clubsport 3-way, or 6K+ JRZ 3way

[Billy_BMW]

Originally Posted by cookiesowns

I always want better... that's why. I had some minor gripes about the MPS, mainly to do with the spring diameter and hard to adjust rebound settings.

I really would like to play with a 3 way setup, with high/low speed compression adjustments but tough to stomach 5K+ on a Kw Clubsport 3-way, or 6K+ JRZ 3way

Fair enough. I suppose in my view, you have to ask if more adjustability translates to a better damper. It can certainly result in a more expensive damper but then the law of diminishing returns applies the higher the chain you go. Motorsport use always requires more adjustability as every millisecond counts, but you have to ask whether separate high and low speed adjustability would translate to tangible differences on the road.

Once you start investing in very expensive high-end suspension, then you do wonder if you’d started with a better platform instead (e.g a Porsche etc). Similar I suppose to people paying thousands for Akra exhausts, when arguably cheaper alternatives sound better. But that’s horses for courses.

I’d also add that many people aren’t versed in understanding how compression/rebound works; and how lowering 50mm isn’t exactly going to translate to a better ride or handling compromise.

Just my thoughts but I do support your thinking. Would love to have the opportunity to experience high-end suspension to see if it’s worth the expense

[M Fifty]

Hmmm... so I've been experimenting. Less Rebound over the stock MPS setting does feel good (and leads to a more 'active' dynamic at lower speeds than previously). I've looked at the graphs though and the suggested settings to replicate stock really don't feel anywhere near? Yes, the spring rates are higher, but???

[M Fifty]

Next: 18s to match the M4 GTS I tried round the Brands Hatch indy circuit last summer...

[EUCSIP]

Originally Posted by jetbill

BMW M Performance Suspension (KW V3 ish..)

Dampers, both front and rear appear to have identical valve characteristics...hence only three settings were dyno'd by the shop here in Tampa, refer to the third image below illustrating nearly identical...
For those comparing MPS vs Stock M2 dampers it looks like you could possibly dial in a similar stock damper profile using the MPS?!
Front :
Compression between 1-3 from full soft or 9-11 from hard.
Rebound around 12 -14 from full soft or 6-8 from hard.
Rear :
Compression around 6 from full soft or 6 from full hard.
Rebound between 14-16 from full soft or 4-6 from full hard.

This varies a bit as all dampers have 20 clicks of rebound adjustment but front vary between 11-13 (driver vs passenger) and rears vary between 14-16 (driver vs passenger) on compression which drives me a little nuts.

BMW recommends from full hard (closed)
Street F C6/R9 ; R C6/R12
Track F C4/R7 ; R C4/R10

My current setup, I've tried both street and track setting (as well as about 100 other variations) at Sebring and both work well, I've tried numerous spring rates with this setup and have finalized at 250/685 lb/in rates replacing the front larger dia spring with a 2.5" Eibach for more Camber adjustment (stock MPS spring interferes with chassis at 3 degrees). GC front plates and Dinan bars , front full stiff rear full soft.

What was the length of the Eibach 2.5 spring? Interested in going this route too. Perchance do you know the length of the MPS rear spring as I may change that out too for a shorter spring with TC Kline adjusters.
Thanks much!

[jetbill]

Originally Posted by EUCSIP

What was the length of the Eibach 2.5 spring? Interested in going this route along. Perchance do you know the length of the MPS rear spring?
Thanks much!

Front was 8" ERS Eibach 250#.
Rear MPS was 10" I believe.

[EUCSIP]

Thanks much

[jetbill]

EDITED first post to include a cross link to my final setup using stock M3 EDC electronic shocks with DSC Sport completely configurable active suspension controller based off G force.

Dyno plots for stock EDC shocks posted in this link as well with an overlay of the stock M2 shocks in the same graphs!
DSC Sport , Active System Retro-fit https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1603360

[M Fifty]

Originally Posted by jetbill

BMW M Performance Suspension (KW V3 ish..)

For those comparing MPS vs Stock M2 dampers it looks like you could possibly dial in a similar stock damper profile using the MPS?!
Front :
Compression between 1-3 from full soft or 9-11 from hard.
Rebound around 12 -14 from full soft or 6-8 from hard.
Rear :
Compression around 6 from full soft or 6 from full hard.
Rebound between 14-16 from full soft or 4-6 from full hard.

This varies a bit as all dampers have 20 clicks of rebound adjustment but front vary between 11-13 (driver vs passenger) and rears vary between 14-16 (driver vs passenger) on compression which drives me a little nuts.

BMW recommends from full hard (closed)
Street F C6/R9 ; R C6/R12
Track F C4/R7 ; R C4/R10

Jetbill, I've just been looking at the official installation instructions for the MPS again, and in addition to giving Compression and Rebound settings from full hard (closed), it says that the maximum effective adjustment range is 0-12 for Compression and 0-16 on Rebound.

Looking at the plots, they all appear to be measured from some point beyond the maximum effective adjustment range?

[jetbill]

Originally Posted by cookiesowns

Do you have the files for the JRZ's? The stock dampers leave much to be desired on the M2C...

Coming from an OG M2 with MPS... i really want better.

Very much like the fast blow off valve system they have.

Yea this was the one thing that was a bit frustrating with both the MPS and the KW clubsports I had were not only did the setting ranges greater or less than published they were off front left to right in some cases. Going back to my notes on the MPS The fronts had a max compression on the driver side of 11 and 14 on the passenger. Rebound is published at 16 but went to 20 on one side and 21 on the other.

Rear compression was 14 and 16 driver and passenger , compression was 20...which again a bit more than published.

Good luck with them, hopefully your set matches left to right. Happy Easter.

[M Fifty]

Originally Posted by cookiesowns

I always want better... that's why. I had some minor gripes about the MPS, mainly to do with the spring diameter and hard to adjust rebound settings.

Rebound is at the top on front and rear? Getting to the rear compression adjusters is the pain, while preventing the fronts from seizing is getting irritating.

[M Fifty]

Originally Posted by jetbill

Yea this was the one thing that was a bit frustrating with both the MPS and the KW clubsports I had were not only did the setting ranges greater or less than published they were off front left to right in some cases. Going back to my notes on the MPS The fronts had a max compression on the driver side of 11 and 14 on the passenger. Rebound is published at 16 but went to 20 on one side and 21 on the other.

Rear compression was 14 and 16 driver and passenger , compression was 20...which again a bit more than published.

Good luck with them, hopefully your set matches left to right. Happy Easter.

They might continue to click round, but do they actually do anything after the stated 12 and 16 clicks?

[jetbill]

Originally Posted by M Fifty

They might continue to click round, but do they actually do anything after the stated 12 and 16 clicks?

For the most part they do , if you have a look at the graphs for compression 12 to 14 but for rebound not so much. The number designations in the dynos are from full soft. Keep this in mind as the adjustment in the MPS are indicated from full hard.

[cookiesowns]

Originally Posted by M Fifty

Rebound is at the top on front and rear? Getting to the rear compression adjusters is the pain, while preventing the fronts from seizing is getting irritating.

yeah, top in the rear is annoying. The rear compression i can get to without removing the wheel, but the top i can't.

[M Fifty]

I have arms a Gibbon would be proud of so the rear rebound is doable without removing the wheel...