[boxsterjon]

I suspect it will be a few months until I get to freeze the spec for my Boxster 4.0 but the biggest decision will be whether to go -10 or -20 on the suspension. I will use the car on the track four or five times a year but mainly for road trips (not a daily driver).

Ideally I would prefer - 20 but I had a really bad experience with a Z4 with really harsh suspension which gave me backache, something I’ve never suffered from before or since. I had to get rid of it after 6 months but that wouldn’t be an option with the Boxster.

I completely understand that S-PASM is way better than what I had on my Z4 but my risk averse attitude says go for -10 to avoid any possibility of a costly and heart (or back!) breaking mistake.

It seems that owners have been very happy with whichever option they have selected (and I guess we all like to believe we have made the right choice).

But is there anyone out there who regrets speccing -20mm suspension because it has been too firm? Or anyone in the -10 camp who secretly wishes they’d gone for -20?

Go on, be honest - this is a big decision!!

 

[OttawaSteve]

If they secretly wished for -20, they wouldn't tell you.

If you have read through the threads on this issue, you probably have as much information as you will get. You will realize that it isn't a particularly big decision, as everyone seems to be happy with what they have. People will staunchly defend their choice, especially the -20 group, and say any other choice is a big mistake. You will also note that the main criticism of the -10 is the wheel gap, which is aesthetics and subjective and not related to ride quality, which of course they cannot properly judge without driving both extensively.

I went with -10 for the extra clearance, but certainly would have been happy with the SPASM. Heck, I loved the suspension in my 981 S, which was no PASM at all.

If you are a serious track nutter, SPASM would be a no-brainer, but you would already know that.

 

[Scrounger]

I’ve PASM on my base and was really concerned about the speed hump we have at work as it’s massive yet the standard 10mm drop is fine.
The dilemma I have now is that I’m about to put a deposit on a GTS and would the 20mm get over the hump? Fortunately I’ve got a couple of hours in my OPCs demo next week so will take it to work and see if it gets over it.

 

[makeadeel]

Same use case as you @boxsterjon. I have S-PASM (-20), and at first was worried it would be too low, but I don't think it is. I am careful when need be (curbs, speed bumps, driveway entry, etc.) and usually go at an angle.

As to comfort, both me and my copilot agree the BGTS is more comfortable (maybe more compliant and less jittery is a better description) than my M4 convertible was.

Speedbump test pic for reference

 

[Treemagnet]

Our BS had -20 SPASM. Never really had issues with height, provided I was paying attention to ingress/egress angles and speed bumps. As far as comfort, the car was amazingly compliant and comfortable at all times, including in Sport+. The ride was more comfortable than any true sports car I've ever driven and only a hair less compliant than my Bride's SL450, which speaks volumes. So, we're definitely going with -20 on the GTS we just ordered.

 

[nova996]

Most BMW sport suspensions are much less comfortable than either Porsche or Ferrari, even including the GT cars. The F3x M-sport suspension is unusable for me in sport or sport+, except on track. We keep that in comfort all the time. My son, who is a kart driver, thinks the suspension on that wagon is too jarring! It's rare for him to say that.

I haven't driven a Z4, but I would guess that even the -20mm will be comfortable as compared to that. The packaging requirements and weight and weight distribution are very different, which gives the Porsche and Ferrari engineers a big advantage here. They can make a suspension much more compliant, while still performing very well.

 

[bmf]

Mine has pasm (-10) for ground clearance only. Still managed to scratch front lip.
If its not a concern I’d go with -20 as there is no noticeable difference in firmness.

 

[Elucidus]

I went with -10 because of ground clearance as well. When GTS shopping, I found one that had -10 and it was already just ever-so-slightly lower than my current car, which would scrape on occasion going in and out of my driveway. I wasn’t about to sacrifice more clearance.

I’ve only driven 0, -20 and -30 cars and they all rode quite nicely in terms of bumpiness as far as I’m concerned.

 

[YD718]

I have the cayman T with minus 20mm and there’s no problem whatsoever with speed bumps driveways and so forth and same for ride quality and I have issues here and then with my lower back but never because of driving in my Porsche
Note that in sport plus the pasm turns on and then the ride is noticeably firmer and still you can press the button and set it off
In light of the above and since the minus 20 minimizes the gap between wheels and body I personally prefer the minus 20

 

[slilley]

I strongly considered both for my CGTS, but went with the -20mm option. As it turns out, this -20mm 718 actually has more ground clearance than my 997.2 with factory sport suspension. So I'm 100% happy with my decision.

If you go with the -10mm option, the big difference is simply the ground clearance provided by the extra 1cm. The ride of both cars is going to be Porsche-sport-car firm, and I'm sure you could drive both cars back-to-back on a crappy road and not be able to determine which car has the -10 vs. -20 suspension.

I've driven my -20 car a total of 1,500 miles, and I've only heard the front scrape once when I had to make a quick left turn into a raised driveway. I took a look under the car when I got home, and there was no obvious damage. I think it was just those rubber aero bits that extend down in front of the wheels. I've driven the car on some pretty sketchy back roads through a bunch of small towns near me, and am in awe of how good this car handles the bumps!

 

[slilley]

One more bit of feedback: either option is going to be great -- I don't think you can go wrong no matter what you decide! I don't even think the 1cm change in ride height is very noticeable. I've looked at cars with both options, and from a styling perspective the difference was very minor.

 

[YD718]

One more bit of feedback: either option is going to be great -- I don't think you can go wrong no matter what you decide! I don't even think the 1cm change in ride height is very noticeable. I've looked at cars with both options, and from a styling perspective the difference was very minor.

Totally agree regarding the gap it’s minor
When comparing the non pasm to the minus 20 it is noticeable although also not terribly

 

[Swiss Tony]

I’m going to my build freeze date this week and have decided to go with PASM rather than SPASM. Main reason is that I had PASM on my base 2019 Cayman and found the ride ultra comfortable - we did a 2,500 mile road trip around Europe and had no issues. When I test drove a GTS with SPASM I did feel the ride was definitely firmer. I think the springs are shorter and stiffer? It might have been the 20” wheels playing a part too (I had 19” on my old car). But whereas I can’t downgrade the wheels on my GTS, I can opt for PASM.

 

[Elucidus]

SPASM has different springs (height/rate) and sway bars vs PASM, yes.

20" wheels can be rougher but some of this can be tuned out via shock and spring as well.

 

[Markoware]

I suspect it will be a few months until I get to freeze the spec for my Boxster 4.0 but the biggest decision will be whether to go -10 or -20 on the suspension. I will use the car on the track four or five times a year but mainly for road trips (not a daily driver).

Ideally I would prefer - 20 but I had a really bad experience with a Z4 with really harsh suspension which gave me backache, something I’ve never suffered from before or since. I had to get rid of it after 6 months but that wouldn’t be an option with the Boxster.

I completely understand that S-PASM is way better than what I had on my Z4 but my risk averse attitude says go for -10 to avoid any possibility of a costly and heart (or back!) breaking mistake.

It seems that owners have been very happy with whichever option they have selected (and I guess we all like to believe we have made the right choice).

But is there anyone out there who regrets speccing -20mm suspension because it has been too firm? Or anyone in the -10 camp who secretly wishes they’d gone for -20?

Go on, be honest - this is a big decision!!

I was in the same boat specifically because mine is my daily driver and I didn't want it to be too harsh. I was not worried about ground clearance, but ride. In the end after reviewing threads (much of them speaking to clearance) I decided I probably wasn't going to notice much of a difference either way and went -20. It's perfectly fine, but if I had -10 I'm sure I'd be just as happy...I figured going -20 I'd be less likely to have any regrets.

Where I think there is a really difference in ride quality is in wheel size. Going from my 19" winters to 20" summers is noticeable. If 19" were a factory option on the GTS and I had to order again I would consider optioning them for my use case. It isn't a huge difference, but it was enough that when driving on the 20" for the first time after taking off the 19" I had a moment when I thought I'd set my pressures too high until I remembered I'd swapped wheels. To be clear the ride never bothers me and I would not have thought about it if I had only ever used the 20".

 

[CaymantheAlways]

-20 for me for sure

 

[Pocketrocket]

-20mm I have opted for on my GTS 4.0 build. It's really not that low. Remember the GT4/Spyder is -30mm plus the front bumper is a much lower design.

For me the -20mm has a much better stance, And is just about low enough to not feel the desire to fit even lower springs (such as the Eibach) in the future.

 

[curious66]

I pick up my MY22 BGTS tomorrow after a July allocation (with SPASM; had a 987 for 16 years before this) so can provide you my perspective after a few miles, but also keep in mind that the 10mm difference equates to less than 1/2 inch (.39 to be exact) so the actual height difference (to my mind) is practically indiscernible but the handling capabilities are said to be improved. FWIW.

 

[Cape Codder]

I suspect it will be a few months until I get to freeze the spec for my Boxster 4.0 but the biggest decision will be whether to go -10 or -20 on the suspension. I will use the car on the track four or five times a year but mainly for road trips (not a daily driver).

Ideally I would prefer - 20 but I had a really bad experience with a Z4 with really harsh suspension which gave me backache, something I’ve never suffered from before or since. I had to get rid of it after 6 months but that wouldn’t be an option with the Boxster.

I completely understand that S-PASM is way better than what I had on my Z4 but my risk averse attitude says go for -10 to avoid any possibility of a costly and heart (or back!) breaking mistake.

It seems that owners have been very happy with whichever option they have selected (and I guess we all like to believe we have made the right choice).

But is there anyone out there who regrets speccing -20mm suspension because it has been too firm? Or anyone in the -10 camp who secretly wishes they’d gone for -20?

Go on, be honest - this is a big decision!!

I specifically requested the10mm not for handling, which both will provide exquisitely. I insisted upon 10mm (raised by…)for under clearance. To me, nothing is worse than bottoming your $110,000. brand new car out of speed bumps of driveway entries. Lowered by 20mm to much risk and anxiety for me. 2021BGTS

 

[~el~jefe~]

I would suggest a 20mm. The GTS 4.0 is heavier. If you do pdk, a lot heavier. Heavier needs to be harnessed more than light weight. I have a 2310 lbs. car, it does not need much suspension to rock, not much of a low center of gravity needed. 5.5 inches is what it has stock. way way high, but it's perfected MX-5 RF.

I drove a 20mm Cayman S a week ago on rough rode, very very rough roads. IT was fine. the problem was the 20" wheels and vibrations of the tires is all. Just was noisy at times on crap roads. Who cares though **** it. Car rocks the planet. 20mm makes it rock more.

a 19" tire probably would be quieter. 20mm was very smooth and stable though, sick.