KYB Gr2 Struts
Record Breaker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,205
Likes: 0
From:
RE: KYB Gr2 Struts
They are stock replacements at a great price. They are not a performance strut by any stretch of the imagination. Anything stiffer than the stock springs, or more than 2" lower than stock will blow them just as fast as stock struts.
Best of luck!
Best of luck!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
RE: KYB Gr2 Struts
i've never had them on a neon, but i ran them on my probe GT and i think they're a great upgraded strut! not too harsh and not to soft. I would definetely go with them over any monroe or gabriel anyday!
-MAttie
-MAttie
Record Breaker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,205
Likes: 0
From:
RE: KYB Gr2 Struts
LOL
2.0t, not you (2_0t). Some nitwit who's probably still in high school tried to argue physics with me as it applies to engines. As it's not my habit to argue with idiots (people watching can't tell who's the bigger idiot), so I conceded that I must be the moron of the bunch. I think it had something to do with my questioning why his alleged 2.0L turbo was only running alleged 15's in the alleged quarter mile, and his insistence that a 4 cylinder U.S. badged car wasn't capable of better. I don't remember exactly, I'm sure you could run through his old posts if you wanted.
For what it's worth, I have a 14+ year background in disciplines such as thermodynamics, fluid dynamics and systems, physics (including nuclear physics), and chemistry. I've done tons of research on how that all applies to engines, and I've only got the basics, as far as I'm concerned. I'm only 32 units or so away from my B.A. (finally, may be more, depending if I stick with general Engineering, Mech Eng, or Chem Eng) with a 4.0 GPA in every class since turning 18 (a "few" years ago, LOL).
I give help where I can to those willing to accept it, give advice even if it's not what people might want to hear, and do my best to explain some of the tougher concepts in easier terms. So when dorks like him start smacking off, it's easier to just move on to the next thread. Energy/time better spent.
2.0t, not you (2_0t). Some nitwit who's probably still in high school tried to argue physics with me as it applies to engines. As it's not my habit to argue with idiots (people watching can't tell who's the bigger idiot), so I conceded that I must be the moron of the bunch. I think it had something to do with my questioning why his alleged 2.0L turbo was only running alleged 15's in the alleged quarter mile, and his insistence that a 4 cylinder U.S. badged car wasn't capable of better. I don't remember exactly, I'm sure you could run through his old posts if you wanted.
For what it's worth, I have a 14+ year background in disciplines such as thermodynamics, fluid dynamics and systems, physics (including nuclear physics), and chemistry. I've done tons of research on how that all applies to engines, and I've only got the basics, as far as I'm concerned. I'm only 32 units or so away from my B.A. (finally, may be more, depending if I stick with general Engineering, Mech Eng, or Chem Eng) with a 4.0 GPA in every class since turning 18 (a "few" years ago, LOL).
I give help where I can to those willing to accept it, give advice even if it's not what people might want to hear, and do my best to explain some of the tougher concepts in easier terms. So when dorks like him start smacking off, it's easier to just move on to the next thread. Energy/time better spent.