Originally Posted by: fifty inch 
As I said the sweet spot for ride height aka optimal ride height is generally the fastest no matter which track or if you run aero or not. Only exception for me so far is Watkins Glen for some cars.
Daytona road courses if you can fit springs. Not sure about homestead but would imagine one of the layouts may prefer it. Works on road america west (or whatever that high speed layout is), Silverstone national to an extent, Sebring (car dependent...bumps mess up some cars mentioned below but not others), monza short and Lemans.
The Holden monero is one of many examples. That car loved jacked up rear height. Pretty cool AKRA1X got my buggati reference. Lol.
Other examples include (from my experience and what I can recall) Ford Bronco (former #1 tune until stock suspension turned out to be faster via more power upgrades), 73 Skyline (former top 10 tune and still #1 in division after a year and I think fastest non-muscle car), sunbeam tiger (faster than Skyline and I think still #1 in division on track I ran it on), Plymouth GNX, and others that I later swapped back to stock or sport suspension because it was faster (via more power upgrades). Not trying to brag, but felt tangible results were needed here.
None of these are normal builds though. The more grip, the less need for raised rears.
Messed around with eagle talon and it worked too...despite having terrible acceleration. I'm going to drop it back down though because it doesn't feel right on tracks it did ok on.
All cars mentioned are no aero. And then there is a merc I did that didn't like it at all! It preferred a balanced height.
I personally don't like raised rears on Watkins Glenn because it loses too much times in the uphill essess. Car seems to unload in the rear too much...but that is just my experience with no aero cars.