Rear Suspension

I have just brought S40 1.8 1999 Model. I have found a difference in height of the rear suspension o/s is lower than n/s. I am told by Volvo dealership that this is normal for this model and year of car. I dont see that Vovlo would have sold these vehicles knowingly that there was a difference in height. I am taking this up with Volvo but would like to hear from anyone else with this model who has the same problem.
Many thanks.

[bimmer49]

Oh mate, big can of worms there! My V40 sits lower than I want it to. Ive bought quite a selection of arms, tie bars, shock absorbers (READ GAS STRUTS) and a mixture of springs but it still sits too low despite a comprehensive geometry check at 60 euros. Someone may have changed any of the above and it has dropped a bit. I can't see why my car sits 50mm lower than anyone else's even after all the replacement parts.

[Dirty Diesel]

Originally Posted by bimmer49

Oh mate, big can of worms there! My V40 sits lower than I want it to. Ive bought quite a selection of arms, tie bars, shock absorbers (READ GAS STRUTS) and a mixture of springs but it still sits too low despite a comprehensive geometry check at 60 euros. Someone may have changed any of the above and it has dropped a bit. I can't see why my car sits 50mm lower than anyone else's even after all the replacement parts.

I noticed that your profile says that your V40 is a Bi-Fuel model. Could the lower rear end be caused by the extra tank, pumps and other hardware required for the LPG system? Maybe they were supposed to have different springs or shockers than other models. Just a thought!

[bimmer49]

Well I had considered the extra weight of the gas tank. I would have thought it weighs about 30kg empty being a cast item. My car only sits right with NOTHING in the back. Got rubber bungees between the coils each side!