[kropscamaro16]

i dont want to say i was one of the first to order these from vorshlag but i ordered mine like 4 years ago told me about 2 months and ended up showing up early went with eibach springs since they had them in stock the hyperco ones would have been 3 months out but had no issues at all with install and everything was super straight forward

[Slurpee]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

Yeah, not sure I'd give Vorshlag my business again.

MCS also knows about the spline bolt issue and apparently have not revised the hole diameter after I talked to them about it. I'd consider reaming out the shock mounting tab on the MCS strut so the splines still engage but the bolt is easier to install. You may have luck with a non-splined bolt though, idk.

Yeah I guess I will buy another bolt and grind it down. I've probably bent the one I hammered on. I am grinding it with a sander as little as possible. If I still need a ball joint press to get the bolt in, there is still plenty of contact with the strut and the splines. When I take the bolt out, I can see the indentation the strut mounting tab is making on the splines and know how much more I need to grind down. Putting a bolt in ended up being an all day process

[DaveC113]

Originally Posted by Slurpee

Yeah I guess I will buy another bolt and grind it down. I've probably bent the one I hammered on. I am grinding it with a sander as little as possible. If I still need a ball joint press to get the bolt in, there is still plenty of contact with the strut and the splines. When I take the bolt out, I can see the indentation the strut mounting tab is making on the splines and know how much more I need to grind down. Putting a bolt in ended up being an all day process

You might need the splines to engage the spindle, if so grinding them all down my not be a great idea. I removed about 25-30% of them but I already got the bolt installed once so the mounting tabs on the strut were fully indented with the splines. I used a large impact, and could tell when I was installing the bolts that the impact was using a lot of force to get the bolt seated into the mount, way more than the torque spec.

I'm not impressed that both Vorshlag and the sales guy at MCS didn't seem to take my input on this seriously.

[Slurpee]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

You might need the splines to engage the spindle, if so grinding them all down my not be a great idea. I removed about 25-30% of them but I already got the bolt installed once so the mounting tabs on the strut were fully indented with the splines. I used a large impact, and could tell when I was installing the bolts that the impact was using a lot of force to get the bolt seated into the mount, way more than the torque spec.

I'm not impressed that both Vorshlag and the sales guy at MCS didn't seem to take my input on this seriously.

I'm just removing enough splines to push the bolt in with the ball joint press. It still requires a significant amount of force to get in using a 25 in breaker bar. Much more effective than a hammer, saw this method on a mustang forum. It's just trial and error where the splines catch and where I need to sand some more off. It's the only way I can get the bolt through.

[carguy55]

Mine did take a little more force than normal to get in and I used new bolts. I think they didn't hammer in completely with my 4 lb sledge hammer but pulled the rest of the way with the torque wrench on the nut. I don't remember any issue with the bolt clearing the MCS holes. I also didn't hear any issues from the shop that did the alignment. I've done a lot of business with Vorshlag and haven't had any issues. I also see Terry at the track often as we do a lot of the same events.

[DaveC113]

Originally Posted by Slurpee

I'm just removing enough splines to push the bolt in with the ball joint press. It still requires a significant amount of force to get in using a 25 in breaker bar. Much more effective than a hammer, saw this method on a mustang forum. It's just trial and error where the splines catch and where I need to sand some more off. It's the only way I can get the bolt through.

Attachment 1154155

That hole needs tighter tolerances than you'd normally need with a non-splined bolt. The best solution is really to adjust the hole size so it takes about the same amount of force to install the bolt as the stock strut. An adjustable reamer would probably be the best solution for DIY, or just bring the strut to a machine shop. It would be nice if MCS spent $10 on the bolt and used it to spec an appropriate tolerance,

I don't think removing the splines is a good idea but it's only a bolt so no big deal if you need to replace it.

https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-Adjust...3&gad_source=1

[Slurpee]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

That hole needs tighter tolerances than you'd normally need with a non-splined bolt. The best solution is really to adjust the hole size so it takes about the same amount of force to install the bolt as the stock strut. An adjustable reamer would probably be the best solution for DIY, or just bring the strut to a machine shop. It would be nice if MCS spent $10 on the bolt and used it to spec an appropriate tolerance,

I don't think removing the splines is a good idea but it's only a bolt so no big deal if you need to replace it.

https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-Adjust...3&gad_source=1

I witnessed marked the bolt and will keep an eye out for movement. The 111lb ft + 80-95 degrees (I used 90) came out to nearly 300 lb ft, which is actually above the maximum recommended torque for a 10.9 M16.

[NG329]

Originally Posted by Checkmate1

Spring rates matter. With the ZL1/1LE - It's just not the DSSV, it's the very stiff springs (1200lbs rear) coupled with no subframe bushings that makes a world of difference.

The ZL1 was designed to Glide.

The ZL1/1LE was designed to Transmit.

Keep in mind the DSSV has aluminum dampers shaving off 23 pounds overall.

It's all the small incremental changes that make the difference.

All this to say - from experience, the MCS 2 way cannot hold a candle to the DSSV (on track). That being said, it's important is that the OP is happy.

I have to agree with this. I'm not sure there's any real benefit of MCS over the DSSV which can be had for cheap on the secondhand market now.

In spite of the stiff spring rates, I've actually gotten my DSSV to feel, dare I say, "soft" when on the limit running slicks. The high speed compression damping is a tad harsh with the DSSV, and amplified by the solid bushings you really notice it over bumps. However, on the track, especially tracks with quality pavement, it's damn near perfect. Once I realized how to play with the strut arm with the camber adjuster to dial in -3.5* of front camber, it was eye opening. Now the car rotates nicely with -3.5(F), and -2.2(R). It's to the point now where I have to dial back my steering inputs.

Racerboy Nick (Nick Yoskin) runs DSSV on his SS race car and he's very near the teens now at NJMP Thunderbolt.

I also think adjustability could be a black hole. I've seen non-racers blow an entire day at the track playing with rebound, etc., trying to find the perfect setup, instead of just driving. Personally, I'd recommend spending more time ensuring that your tires are in the optimal temperature range before even touching suspension. Just my humble $0.02

Overall, I think it's a good alternative, but I think guys are kidding themselves by thinking it's head and shoulders above the DSSV.

Just my opinion fellas.

[DaveC113]

Originally Posted by NG329

I have to agree with this. I'm not sure there's any real benefit of MCS over the DSSV which can be had for cheap on the secondhand market now.

In spite of the stiff spring rates, I've actually gotten my DSSV to feel, dare I say, "soft" when on the limit running slicks. The high speed compression damping is a tad harsh with the DSSV, and amplified by the solid bushings you really notice it over bumps. However, on the track, especially tracks with quality pavement, it's damn near perfect. Once I realized how to play with the strut arm with the camber adjuster to dial in -3.5* of front camber, it was eye opening. Now the car rotates nicely with -3.5(F), and -2.2(R). It's to the point now where I have to dial back my steering inputs.

Racerboy Nick (Nick Yoskin) runs DSSV on his SS race car and he's very near the teens now at NJMP Thunderbolt.

I also think adjustability could be a black hole. I've seen non-racers blow an entire day at the track playing with rebound, etc., trying to find the perfect setup, instead of just driving. Personally, I'd recommend spending more time ensuring that your tires are in the optimal temperature range before even touching suspension. Just my humble $0.02

Overall, I think it's a good alternative, but I think guys are kidding themselves by thinking it's head and shoulders above the DSSV.

Just my opinion fellas.

I looked into DSSV. I believe the going prices reflect their true value. They are not very reliable and not rebuildable, only available through Chevy. This limits you to the OEM spring rates as they are not adjustable. Personally, I find the adjustability to be a huge plus. For street or bumpy autox venues softening up the damping works really well, for smooth tracks you can crank up the damping. On remote res models you can adjust the nitrogen pressure. You can also use a wide range of spring rates or go progressive if you get aero. The shocks are easily rebuildable and it doesn't need to be done by MCS.

Given a smooth track, I'd agree DSSV may turn in lap times just as fast as MCS, no argument there. But for me, I spent 2x as much as used DSSV on brands new MCS for all the reasons given above and so far I think it was worth it. If I had a ZLE, I probably wouldn't spend the cash replacing DSSV, but on a non-ZLE it makes a lot more sense in my opinion.

[NG329]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

I looked into DSSV. I believe the going prices reflect their true value. They are not very reliable and not rebuildable, only available through Chevy. This limits you to the OEM spring rates as they are not adjustable. Personally, I find the adjustability to be a huge plus. For street or bumpy autox venues softening up the damping works really well, for smooth tracks you can crank up the damping. On remote res models you can adjust the nitrogen pressure. You can also use a wide range of spring rates or go progressive if you get aero. The shocks are easily rebuildable and it doesn't need to be done by MCS.

Given a smooth track, I'd agree DSSV may turn in lap times just as fast as MCS, no argument there. But for me, I spent 2x as much as used DSSV on brands new MCS for all the reasons given above and so far I think it was worth it. If I had a ZLE, I probably wouldn't spend the cash replacing DSSV, but on a non-ZLE it makes a lot more sense in my opinion.

Those are all very valid points.

The fact that Multimatic won’t release data to rebuild the DSSV is a bit discouraging. On that front, the MCS is probably better long term.

If I had an SS I’d probably go for the adjustable/rebuildable coilover setup. But I have seen DSSV go for cheap in the past online.

[Slurpee]

For those following, the ZLE suspension control module did not give me any issues even though it was from an M6 and I am in an A10. No messages on dash, and did not have the warning come on limiting speed to 85 after going over 85.


Just got back from the alignment shop and it's a world of a difference. Car feels like an absolute dart. On MCS recommended settings. I am trying -3.1 F, -2.1 R camber. 7.6 degrees of caster. 0 toe front, 1/32" toe rear. I increased rear camber from -2.4. The outside rears after Ozark didn't even look used, even though outside temp was within 10 degrees of inside temp with an IR pyrometer.

[TRZ06]

Originally Posted by Slurpee

For those following, the ZLE suspension control module did not give me any issues even though it was from an M6 and I am in an A10. No messages on dash, and did not have the warning come on limiting speed to 85 after going over 85.


Just got back from the alignment shop and it's a world of a difference. Car feels like an absolute dart. On MCS recommended settings. I am trying -3.1 F, -2.1 R camber. 7.6 degrees of caster. 0 toe front, 1/32" toe rear. I increased rear camber from -2.4. The outside rears after Ozark didn't even look used, even though outside temp was within 10 degrees of inside temp with an IR pyrometer.

What are MCS's recommended setting on the ZLE?

[Slurpee]

Originally Posted by TRZ06

What are MCS's recommended setting on the ZLE?

I meant the default recommendation for all of their 2WNR. That’s a good idea to call them if they have a setting for ZLEs though.

[ATl_1LE]

Welp, i just recently installed my mc2 remotes 2 weeks ago and didn't see this thread. I can confirm the front struts seem perfect but are few mm smaller on the top holes then oem causing the splines to be extremely tight. The bottom bolts has no issue.

My original thought was ugga them suckers in but honestly its tight enough to strip nut as seen in the screenshots in thread.

I was forced to grind down the top bolt splines a mm or so to get it small enough to bolt in. Bolted in now and all good. Only concern now is removing those bolts would require force if i wanted to adjust camber at the strut. but i don't see removing them being I've got the camber plates.