twin_snails

iTrader: (2)

John, any chance you can do a 'chop and draw a horizontal line at the top of the rear fender so we can see just how much higher the front fender is with respect to the rear? That could explain a lot of why we're seeing that.

I will say this...when I was running on my 19's completely stock with no drop, the rear looked like it was lowered, even though it wasn't. I didn't mind because I thought it looked better, but there was that front gap.

twin_snails

iTrader: (2)

I'm very interested in how this turns out John. I am thinking I will probably do the same thing.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Huh?

What we should all be measuring is the height of the side sill corners, and get a member with OEM springs to do the same. Wait, not the side-sills directly, but the sheetmetal edging behind it.

Someone come over and measure my car. It's cold out.

Wait, here's an interesting perspective. If I take one of those pictures, and cut the front half of the front wheel, then superimpose it onto the front half of the back wheel... Haha, wow. Granted, there's a distortion because of point-of-view between the two, but still, look at that.

twin_snails

iTrader: (2)

This is what I was talking about. I got off my lazy perch and fired up my laptop and Photoshop.

The front fender is definitely cutout higher than the rear, giving the illusion of an uneven drop. I can't say whether the car is 100% level from your camera angle, unless tripod + horizon meter on the camera plus some way of sticking a level on a flat surface of the car, and the equivalent of a giant t-square setup to ensure the lens angle is 100% perpendicular to the car... if we're going to split hairs to that level of measurement precision.

However, with my long history of being in graphic design and an eye sharp enough to spot un-eveness between two graphic elements on screen down to 1 pixel, I trust my eye.

I added the lower line to show the bottom of the door being even down the length of the car.

Your 'chop reflects the same as what mine does.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Over the years, I've been told (to where I'm somewhat believing it), that I have an extremely critical eye for design. I'm in software development, and I see how things line up to the pixel. Been like that for decades.

So yeah, most definitely the rear curvature is more flat than the front. I mean, just look at them.

Here's an idea. If I take two identical, perfect circles, and touch them to the top of each fender, notice how the gap in the rear widens more progressively away from that point of contact, more so than the front does. In other words, the front is more of a circle than the oblong shape of the rear wheel-well.

And when there is an inconsistent design between the front and rear wheel-well, there is no right or wrong on height. It's a valid choice to be OEM level (assuming whatever passes for "level" at OEM height), just like it's a valid preference to have the top wheel gap uniform front to back.

G37Xtreme

When did Infiniti start putting the fuel fill on the front of the car. I must have me one of these new models.

twin_snails

iTrader: (2)

Interesting. It appears there is more than one optical illusion playing tricks here. And the effect is augmented even further because, at least on RWD Sports, the rear tires are larger.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Well, wider, yes. But I'm assuming the sidewall height is identical front to rear.

Mine are in my basement. I suppose I could go downstairs and measure them. Here... walk with me.

twin_snails

iTrader: (2)

Hehe, ok...I'll take a walk with ya!

The rear...assuming we're talking about your Vossen's actually has a shorter sidewall at 3.8" versus 3.9" on the fronts using 275/35 for rear and 245/40 for front.

Interesting...

Yadayada

I'm glad this could all be brought to light! The picture of Rochester's car shows exactly what I belived it would. The front fender is indeed cut higher than the rear. In the end, it's not the Swift Springs we should blame. It's the Infiniti engineers haha

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Fronts: 19x8.5", 245/40ZR19
Rears: 19x10.0", 275/35ZR19

Both front and rears are at 33lbs preassure, and sitting on end on the floor. By eyeballing the tread surface to where it becomes parallel(ish) to the viewing angle, and measuring from the lip to that point, I just measured an exact 80mm for each (front and rear).

And while you might think I can't see a 1/10th inch difference, that's actually 2.5mm. Pretty sure I'd see a 2.5mm difference.

No, wait, if the 40 and 45 represent percentage of width (245 and 275 respectively), then the sidewall height *should* be 98mm and 96.25mm respectively. So that means there's approx 17mm of "sidewall" either bulging or under the lip. That's interesting.

OK, you're up, Snails.

twin_snails

iTrader: (2)

Maybe the sidewall is measured from the edge of the bead...that would account for the disparity of 17ish mm. I'm thinking the 98mm vs 96.25mm for the rear should not make a difference but I think there are several factors in play that we've talked about that are adding up to be greater than the sum of their individual parts, as minuscule as the differences are.

Hehe...this has been an interesting experiment as I think we've finally solved the perceived saggy bum issue. Perception is reality as they say, but the investigation reveals some other aspects in play.

Rochester

iTrader: (9)

Agreed.

Here's another on-topic question: wouldn't the car handle better when dropped equidistant to OEM height specifications? I'm thinking if the car were modified so that the rear fender-gap were to match the front fender-gap... that would be less than optimal, from a handling POV.

And while that might be true, perhaps no so much as to notice or matter.

G37Xtreme

On some level ground, my OEM springs put my front fender 3/16" higher than the rear.

Rear: 28 3/16"
Front: 28 6/16"

However, on the passenger side, it's lower in the front. What would account for this? It's still higher than the rear, but it's 2/16 lower than the driver's side at 28 4/16"

I'm using x/16 instead of x/8, and I've purposely not reduced my fractions where applicable.

blnewt

iTrader: (13)

Suspensions have multiple moving parts all w/ their own variance, when it all adds up there will be some differences, just a nature of the mechanics involved. When you put all new lowering springs on a G for example and go to measure side to side it's very rare to have an exact match. An eighth of an inch is pretty normal IME.