subframe

[Yoof]

It would be good to hear from anyone that has fitted and have been using the pps frame

well thats the point. There is loads of hype but the only person who I know to run a pps one on a decent g is steve PSD

I don't think Steve ever ran one, if he did it was only for a few weeks- not really enough time to test it at all.

I'd argue Rolls Royce/ Bentley, Rolls Royce are blatently better, Robin and I work for Bentley 

[polo classic]

Fair enough, but how many of us are going to be running monster power on track? I got a frame to improve one of the G's biggest weaknesses; shit handling on the road. I reckon most people who buy a frame will have one for that reason. I got a PPS which was an easy fit but which I haven't really put to the test yet, but the quick burst I had with it was an eye opener. In truth this thread's beginning to sound like a couple of old giffers arguing Rolls Royce/Bentley. I really don't think that in a real life, on road test, anyone would be able to tell the differance.

Just remember that some of the guys recommending PPP is actually the guys behind PPP.

I know that the PPS frame is based on Steve's experience with John Marchant and my Salzmann wishbone kit. Had the opportunity to have a look at the PPS one next to my Salzmann when I picked mine up after E38 last year. And I can only say the PPS one looks very well made, and I doubt there 99,9% of you can't tell them apart handling wise

[Yoof]

Frode, I'm not reccomending my product for financial gain- my profit margins are minimal and I don't rely on PPP products for any income whatsoever, I'm reccomending it because it's been properly tested and is used on the UKs quickest & most powerful G40s.

The PPS frame isn't based on any of Steve's experience (which is limited) He copied a Salzmann kit (which are a renound bad fit) and did no comprehensive testing at all- he has little understanding of chassis dynamics and generally learns from customers experiences, at their expense.

I can safely say all the components and frame itself we sell will stand up to drag radials, hard circuit abuse (with slicks), and over 10,000 road miles. No-one else I know in the UK has done such extensive testing- especially not on their own cars.

Handling wise you are correct, I would be surprised if anyone could tell the differance, but I can honestly say in 5 years a PPP frame will still be attached firmly to the underneath of your car, it would be fiction for anyone else in the UK to claim the same.

[giorgio]

since we are on the subject - which subframe sits lower?

I know smashing it off the floor is not the point but I am glad its made of strong stuff or it may have found its way into the bin.

Final conclusion - PPS better design, PPP gets the build quality. And for me there is no substitute for quality when it comes to my G.

[Yoof]

Why do they have a better design?!?

[giorgio]

Would like the rear part removable.


Might just be a bent front end on my part but I find doing anything at the front end is a major pain with the subframe as its such a ballache to take it on/off

[Yoof]

Making the subframe detachable at the rear loses vital strength, hence us not doing it.

I can get my frame on/off in under 30mins, there's not many jobs I need to do that for, even a gearbox swap I'd rather whip the whole lump out, but I suppose if you've not got an engine crane that might not be an option...

[polo classic]

Yoof, have you seen the the Salzmann and PPS side-by-side like I have? If you had, you would know that the PPS is far from a copy of the Salzmann, it is not even close.

Steve had wishbones on his car for a while, and the PPS one incorporates a few revisions Steve recomended after testing it.

[djtez]

yea i agree on scotsjohn comment there..

i have full intension of owning a ppp subframe only coz they had excellent replies and were patient and had good answer to my questions..
if am payin extra money for just the fact that they seem to sell it better then so be it

but for me you always "get wat you pay for"

dont turn this into clubpolo for god sake next we'll be debating 'wats a safe strectch'

we all love the G's lets just keep it that way

[Yoof]

Yoof, have you seen the the Salzmann and PPS side-by-side like I have? If you had, you would know that the PPS is far from a copy of the Salzmann, it is not even close.

Steve had wishbones on his car for a while, and the PPS one incorporates a few revisions Steve recomended after testing it.

Steve didn't have the frame on his car for any length of time at all- it's a shame he felt the need to lie to you, but then again he has to everyone else, the fact his car hasn't been registereed on the road for months, or had an engine in. I'd worry about Steve's reccomended revisions (which incorporated a blatent copy of our own rear gearbox mount) he is a con-artist and has minimal experience with chassis developments, let alone enough to base his 'revisions' on, he's never used it on track, accumulated enough miles on the road, or used the stickiest tyres- as such his revisions are fictional guesses, not based on test results and facts.

I have seen a PPS frame up close, as have I seen your exact Salzmann one, and over 30 of my own. The Salzmann ones where never a good fit, JBM would tell you that! Ours went straight on a 1980s Mk1 with no major problems at all.

I'll happily give anyone a demo in my car with our frame on it- I can't see anyone else doing that, especially not Steve being as he went bust. And PPS's site is down at the moment? I've nothing against volksnorm, infact he's a well sound guy, it's Steve Pitt's lies and dishonesty that appal me.

[juan]

Has anyone got pictures of all three subframes? I think it would be good to get a pick of all three together on the same page

I think a visual representation would be a better starting point for discussion rather than bickering about what steve pitt did or didn't do.

I think so far ppp have proven their product and its ability, you can't argue with the facts and figures.

The experience ive had so far with volksnorm (stuart) has been good and the service excellent and although the pps frame has not been fitted yet everything looks great quality wise.


Yoof- Anymore specific technical details on how exaxctly the frames differ design wise?

[Yoof]

I've got a rudementary FEA analysis somewhere of one of my frames, which I'm not 100% on as the integrity of welds is hard to simulate (as I'm sure you know) especially when it's done by hand, the consistency is never the same as an automated process.

Stuarts website had some decent photos on it, just looking through pics of ours and PPS ones carfully will highlight most different areas, more subtle ones such as strut pick-up points, TCA location slots/ tie in points might not be so obvious.

PMs replied to 

[Robin]

Just to add my 2pence in this.

I got a PPP frame, only the stage 1 version, was a bitch to fit as it was a good tight fit which is what you want for a subframe, wouldn't like to fit one again but certainly well worth the pain and hassle as it makes a good big of difference.

When buying stuff like this i always tend to go by other peoples opinions and experiences regarding the product in question and the feedback for the PPP subframe was enough for me to spend my wedge!

[polo classic]

It's also worth noting that fitting subframes to a tuned g40 that has been driven hard all its life might not be that easy, the g40 chassie beeing so flimsy as it is. After almost 20 years of beeing twisted around, mounting points might not be 100% on the spot where the factory intended. That said a I think Ing. Salzmann must have used a chrashed Polo as pattern for his frames

[wozzaG40]

I f i remember rightly, Yoof was very happy to make the frames to your cars specific measurements if you thought you chasis had been battered around a bit.