Redwood's instructions suggest 645mm rear free length by default for all listed ride heights (360mm-410mm center-to-fender), with 630mm as a "lowered clearance" alternative for cars at 360-380mm height (i.e. lowered cars). I'm around 390mm-395mm ride height. I did try to length the rear dampers to 645mm but as mentioned, couldn't get them to actually unscrew initially and didn't have time to mess around further, so my rears are still at 630mm length as assembled by Redwood.
Is it correct that if 630mm rear damper length avoids any arm-to-chassis or tire-to-chassis contact issues at lower ride heights, then those should also *not* happen even with my higher height? In other words, only the rear damper free length dictates how high up into the chassis the rear wheel can travel, right? The spring height adjuster / ride height is irrelevant there, right? (At least within a reasonable range of heights e.g. 360mm-410mm covered by Redwood's table in their instructions.)
If everything above is correct, then the reason Redwood only lists 630mm "reduced ground clearance" as an option for lowered cars, is because they feel the increased risk of HVB/chassis-to-ground contact is never worthwhile for cars at stock height, not because the risk at 630mm length is actually any different stock vs lowered. Does that seem right?
Yes I'll probably call Redwood about this too, just to make sure. I was already planning to try lengthening the rear damper to 645mm again at some point. I'm asking all these questions to evaluate if I should do that ASAP, or if it's probably okay to wait a while (e.g. wait until I think the car could use an alignment anyways).