News

photos of a lowered 348

Discussion in '348/355' started by NYJETSFAN, Jan 10, 2004.

  1. NYJETSFAN

    NYJETSFAN Formula 3

    May 11, 2001
    1,093
    Kalifornia
    Full Name:
    Jr
    any pics of a lowered 348 out there?

    thanks all...
     
  2. fatbillybob

    fatbillybob F1 World Champ
    Owner Consultant

    Aug 10, 2002
    16,630
    socal
    No pics of my whole car but here is the front
     
  3. fatbillybob

    fatbillybob F1 World Champ
    Owner Consultant

    Aug 10, 2002
    16,630
    socal
    here is the rear while setting the ride height notice the slip plates
     
  4. ernie

    ernie Two Time F1 World Champ
    Owner Lifetime Rossa

    Nov 19, 2001
    21,820
    The Brickyard
    Full Name:
    The Bad Guy
    Oh yeah billbob's car is on the floor. You can barely get your finger between the rear tire and fender.
     
  5. Noelrp

    Noelrp Formula Junior

    Aug 30, 2001
    630
    SSF
    Full Name:
    Noel
  6. NYJETSFAN

    NYJETSFAN Formula 3

    May 11, 2001
    1,093
    Kalifornia
    Full Name:
    Jr
    thanks for the pics,

    kinda thinking about lowering my a bit plus adding 355 wheels, but can make up my mind......
     
  7. Bmyth-FDC

    Bmyth-FDC F1 Rookie

    Oct 4, 2002
    2,742
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Byron
    Arie,
    I think the 348 looks very aggressive when lowered, but just as Noel mentioned, it makes it very unfriendly for big dips and steep driveways! The fiberglass front end is at high risk for chipping and destruction. :)

    I put a carbon fiber front lip on mine, which helps a little, but I still scrape everywhere.

    Byron

    Here is another picture of my car:
     
  8. prova

    prova Rookie

    Nov 2, 2003
    45
    Full Name:
    Gonzo
    #8 prova, Jan 11, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
  9. Mitch Alsup

    Mitch Alsup F1 Veteran

    Nov 4, 2003
    6,333
    What is it with lowering? These cars start out at 4.2" of ground clearance where as most sports cars start with 6.0"! They have already been lowered 1.8" farther than you can lower many cars without suspension (ahem) issues. Even without lowering, they scrape on the ground regularly.

    Want the wheels to fill the wheel wells? Put larger tires on them and then reset to original ground clearnace! OR, put springs with greater tesnion so that you are not forever scraping off the ground under normal driving circumstances.

    {{This is not addressed only to 348's but to all who think race car low is the right way to 'look'. 'Look' is for rice-ers, go is for drivers!}}
     
  10. Bmyth-FDC

    Bmyth-FDC F1 Rookie

    Oct 4, 2002
    2,742
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Byron

    Mitch,
    My car was not lowered for "look" - the setup that I have for my challenge car is leftover from its racing days. I happen to believe in go, but why not accomplish that with some show, too? :) Luckily, I don't experience scraping from regular driving, as I do have some pretty stiff springs - however, I do run into everyday issues with steep driveways and big dips.

    Btw, I don't believe 4.2" is correct. On the stock 348 setup, there is at least 5.5" of clearance in the front, perhaps more. I agree, they do scrape regularly even without lowering, which is the exact reason for my admonishment.

    Good luck ARIE... and don't over-do the car with all kinds of aftermarket wheels, etc... Other than speedlines, I would probably only consider BBS or HRE. Just my opinion. Wheel spacers might also help fill the wheel wells.

    Byron
     
  11. Garretto

    Garretto F1 Rookie

    Sep 3, 2003
    3,920
    Bilbao, Spain
    Full Name:
    Rodolfo Di Pietro
    Mitch,

    I do care about the looks. Not that I don't care about go. But if I didn't care for the looks I wouldn't probably be into Ferraris.

    Anyway, most of the times race car low means race car go (or at least I would set my car like that), so...
     
  12. worth it

    worth it Formula Junior

    Oct 31, 2002
    299
    North Carolina
    Full Name:
    David C.
    #12 worth it, Jan 12, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    Arie and others,

    Just my .02 - I would not lower the car but I am all for changing the wheels. Lowering will change many of the cars characteristics and as stated earlier, make it very harsh for regular driving.

    Below is my 348 Spider with 360 factory wheels - I think it gave the car a great look. Not much clearance but enough to not be a problem.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  13. worth it

    worth it Formula Junior

    Oct 31, 2002
    299
    North Carolina
    Full Name:
    David C.
    #13 worth it, Jan 12, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
  14. kenyon

    kenyon F1 Rookie

    Oct 7, 2002
    2,836
    East Yorkshire
    Full Name:
    Justin Kenyon
    Worthit,

    What rear tyres on you running on with those 360 wheels ?
    Have got spacers on the rear of your car ?
     
  15. RacerX_GTO

    RacerX_GTO F1 World Champ

    Nov 2, 2003
    11,562
    Oregon
    Full Name:
    Gabe V.
    Hey BillyBob, is there an advantage driving on two lug bolts per wheel? Just an observation.


    - Gabe
     
  16. worth it

    worth it Formula Junior

    Oct 31, 2002
    299
    North Carolina
    Full Name:
    David C.
    Kenyon,

    Front tires are 215/45/18
    Rear tires are 275/40/18


    They came of a new 360. No spacers used. All I needed was new lugs for the rear wheels. Since my car is a Spider it already had the factory improvement done on the rear spacing.
     
  17. Mitch Alsup

    Mitch Alsup F1 Veteran

    Nov 4, 2003
    6,333
    Ground clearance is measured by finding the lowest point of the chassis and comparing that point to the flat road surface under it. The nose of the car is not the lowest point of the chassis. On the F355/348 the lowest point is a small lip just under and behind the lower front control arms.

    My F355 was reset to factory ride height. The Nose of the car is sitting at 5.7-5.8", However, the lip just insides the lower control arm at the front of the car that sits only 4.26" (new tires) above flat road surfaces. Clearance at the rear is closer to 5.5"
     
  18. Bmyth-FDC

    Bmyth-FDC F1 Rookie

    Oct 4, 2002
    2,742
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Byron
    That's a good point - thanks for the clarification. I should probably go and double check to see what my actual ground clearance is, then!
    Byron
     
  19. Hubert

    Hubert F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2002
    2,642
    The Left Coast
    my ride height was determined by the cornerweighting; getting the car balanced determined where it sat. if i wanted it lower, we'd have to recornerweight, but then that brought on the dynamic problem of increased camber (past the neccessary range) and the limitation of sus travel (keep in mind, i'm no where near the bump stops). how low you can do is entirely determined by you sus setup; on high end (moton, jrz and the higher end japanese componnents (jic - magic, et al.) the spring perch is adj on top and bottom to allow for retained travel, even at minimal height setting. the addition of camber plates allows for proper camber tuning even if the determined ride height pushed it past the desired measurement.
    low ride height isn't a look, it is function, but a "slammed" car without any tunning (i.e., proper cornerweighting , alignment and set crossweights) is a liability. ride height is also fundamental to aero cars where undertrays, etc. benefit and reduced ride height lessens drag (these points are moot at our collective level -- even then, most of us won't go beyond shimming our rear wings, and that'll be the extent of aero tuning at the club level).
    also, the notion of using larger tires (i.e., greater sidewall profile) to fill the wheel wells is an erroneous notion as greater sidewall will introduce greater suspension slop, and dampen the feel of the car through the stearing wheel, and through your ass.
    both the 575 and 360, in my opinion, are compromised re: sus setup b/c they're street cars. it's plain to see (if you watch a 550/575) on track, that the car exhibits a lot of roll and dive, both of which could be dialed out (to a point) by adjusting the cofg via ride height.
    i've left aside the discussion re: spring rates and anti-roll bars becuase it delves into to roll center heights and such, but you shuld all look it up.
     
  20. fatbillybob

    fatbillybob F1 World Champ
    Owner Consultant

    Aug 10, 2002
    16,630
    socal
    Hubert is right but for the average ugly Joe who drives by himself then has his 300 lb girlfriend in the car corner weights don't matter. Basically the car will be set up fine for the street if you set ride heights per the manual at all 4 corners then dial down an inch or so with proper motion ratio. That keeps chassis rake correct as Ferrari intended for street use. Then you need to reset camber and toe and that's fine for street use. With 348/55's you don't even run into bump ster problems. These suspensions are hugely tuneable.

    Racer X I have 2 bolts because I'm racing and want to be light....Just kidding. Actually, I was setting the lowest ride heigth possible with my combo from the factory basline settings. Notice the car is sitting on slip plates. Then the car when to the alignment shop where I sat in the car with all my car for 3 hours while a super alignment guy about as picky as me dialed in my car. He was 1 pound off on the corner cross weight. I told him that was good enough I'll take a pee before I get in the car on the weekend and the car will be perfectly balanced! If you are going for the lowest CG you can do this then increase height at the coil overs to get the weight right at the corners. As a result you will have the lowest chassis height for that chassis rake but all balanced. Then it is time for alignment settings...
     

Share This Page