Google spring colour codes for your vehicle.
Yep.
Thanks guys,
Done the colour code thing and even have this very chart saved to my lap top.
But the colour codes allown don't answer my question. 'Are the CSW springs softer that the 2400 utility springs?' There doesn't seem to be any info about which springs are harder than other springs etc etc. My thinking is, that the CSW is designed to carry 4 people, but much of it's time there is very little payload, so common sence thought suggests that the CSW springs should be softer than the utility srings. But this is not certain, hence my question.
Last week a friend arrived in his 54 plate TD5 90 utility/van (which my 93 200TDi 90 was until the PO fitted side windows). With low miles and standard springs and shocks, where as mine is fitted with standard srings and OME shocks . I did a simple rock test comparison. His car rocked very easily. Mine almost didn't rock at all, mush stiffer springs and shocks.
So, After some emailing and FBing, the guys at ABR and Old Man Emu have shed some light on my shock and spring question at last. I now know that the 2400Kg utility springs are designed for a constant payload of 200Kg and that their medium weight springs are a zero payload. The EMU shocks I have fitted currently are for the 200Kg and the ones I have now bought are for zero payload. I have taken the gamble and also bought new 90 4 seat SW 2400Kg rear springs (all 90s share front spings and shocks on the above chart).
The OME shocks have arrived, so I'll fit these today and test the ride with the softer shocks. It is possible that this will solve the ride issues I have. Softer shocks will make the hard springs more complient keeping the natural anti roll. So might be a good move. If not I'll fit the what I can only presum to be softer CSW springs.
Val.