| BIGSKYWRX | 11-16-2004 11:39 PM |
[QUOTE=makofoto]The Nov issue of Turbo & High-Tech Performance magazine has strut dyno graphs for the stock WRX, STI and Tein Flex struts. Would this be something that you guys would like posted here, ie. scanned and attached? Can one legally do that ? Perhaps when the Dec. issue comes out ... they will post that article on-line ... like they do with a lot of their articles: [url]http://www.turbomagazine.com/tech/[/url][/QUOTE]
Is there any chance anyone could scan those graphs (can't find the magazine) and email me them. I've been looking for a long time for those graphs. It would be much appreciated:)
Danka
Big Sky
Is there any chance anyone could scan those graphs (can't find the magazine) and email me them. I've been looking for a long time for those graphs. It would be much appreciated:)
Danka
Big Sky
| DrBiggly | 11-17-2004 12:32 AM |
Oooh, that would be great to get hold of! :)
| wrx2.0 555 | 11-17-2004 06:01 AM |
[QUOTE=Homemade WRX]yeah, you can also balance align balance...either way you really have to do one of the steps twice...[/QUOTE]
That would be an incorrect statement.
Since corner balancing affects the alignment then the alignment MUST be the [B]LAST[/B] step of this process.
Hence------[QUOTE]Edit: to BriDrive's point, if you have to skip one then leave out the first alignment.
[/QUOTE]
Scott
That would be an incorrect statement.
Since corner balancing affects the alignment then the alignment MUST be the [B]LAST[/B] step of this process.
Hence------[QUOTE]Edit: to BriDrive's point, if you have to skip one then leave out the first alignment.
[/QUOTE]
Scott
| javid | 11-17-2004 08:45 AM |
Both effect each other, its a matter of how much one effects the other. The one that effects the other more you probably want to do second. Between the comments above, the 4 hours I spent on the rack this past weekend, and my growing understanding of all this jazz, I am pretty convinced that you want to balance, align, balance.
| BIGSKYWRX | 11-17-2004 09:25 PM |
Thanks to Mako for sending me the charts! :)
Interesting to say the least. The first thing I noticed was that I believe they may have swapped some data around on the STi struts- namely the front/rear reversed.
FHI's data for the STi strut @ 0.3m/sec is front 2396/791 N, rear 1668/690 N- the article listed 1157/568 front and 2068/735 rear (@0.3m/sec)- I can't imagine that FHI #'s are that off and that the dampng would be more in the rear than the front, my guess is just a typo and they are reversed.
Thus
@0.3 the STi front 2068/735 rear 1157/568, WRX front 1146/519, rear 939/441
@ 0.20 the STi front 1470/578 rear 960/471, WRX front 803/480 rear 753/363
@ 0.10 the STi front 752/441 rear 696/333 , WRX front 490/315 rear 439/255
Looks like the STi struts are roughly 60-85% stiffer in front w/ rebound, 25-35% stiffer in compression, in the rear 25-50% stiffer w/ rebound and 30% stiffer in compression.
Big Sky
Interesting to say the least. The first thing I noticed was that I believe they may have swapped some data around on the STi struts- namely the front/rear reversed.
FHI's data for the STi strut @ 0.3m/sec is front 2396/791 N, rear 1668/690 N- the article listed 1157/568 front and 2068/735 rear (@0.3m/sec)- I can't imagine that FHI #'s are that off and that the dampng would be more in the rear than the front, my guess is just a typo and they are reversed.
Thus
@0.3 the STi front 2068/735 rear 1157/568, WRX front 1146/519, rear 939/441
@ 0.20 the STi front 1470/578 rear 960/471, WRX front 803/480 rear 753/363
@ 0.10 the STi front 752/441 rear 696/333 , WRX front 490/315 rear 439/255
Looks like the STi struts are roughly 60-85% stiffer in front w/ rebound, 25-35% stiffer in compression, in the rear 25-50% stiffer w/ rebound and 30% stiffer in compression.
Big Sky
| trhoppe | 11-18-2004 11:48 AM |
Added the stock STi strut :) Hmmmmm
[img]http://www.tomhoppe.com/misc pics/compare.jpg[/img]
-Tom
[img]http://www.tomhoppe.com/misc pics/compare.jpg[/img]
-Tom
| Apex Rex | 11-18-2004 02:51 PM |
How do you read one of those charts? Sorry for the newbie question, Im just trying to learn more about suspensions and suspension tuning. :D
~Apex
~Apex
| ToddStratton | 11-18-2004 05:47 PM |
In the chart above, the positive force values are "bump" or "compression"--the force the damper resists movement of the wheel away from the road . The negative force values are "rebound"--the force the damper "pushes" the wheel back towards the road. I've seen some graphs that list the bump as negative and rebound as positive, though.
The shapes of the charts are typically grouped into linear, progressive or digressive categories. Progressive curves start with less damping and go up at some rate > than linear. Digressive rates start out with higher rates and taper off. The custom valved Teins (blue) in the above chart are examples of a digressive curve. The whitelines look linear and the others are a mix of digressive and linear.
The damper speed (in mm/sec here) can be thought of in terms of the speed of the piston in the damper--low speed is for a small movement of the piston and high speed is for larger movement (like hitting a sqaure-ish bump) for a given amount of time
I've made some generalizations since I've only recently started paying attention to this aspect of suspension and how dampening and spring rate affects ride.
I'm very interested in finding links to other shock-dyno graphs for popular struts like the Cusco, H&R and Zeal units. I like the adjustability I saw in the KW race setup (3-way) [url]http://www.kwsuspensions.com/3way.htm[/url]. Still seems to lack the severe low-speed damping of the revalvled Teins above.
TRS
The shapes of the charts are typically grouped into linear, progressive or digressive categories. Progressive curves start with less damping and go up at some rate > than linear. Digressive rates start out with higher rates and taper off. The custom valved Teins (blue) in the above chart are examples of a digressive curve. The whitelines look linear and the others are a mix of digressive and linear.
The damper speed (in mm/sec here) can be thought of in terms of the speed of the piston in the damper--low speed is for a small movement of the piston and high speed is for larger movement (like hitting a sqaure-ish bump) for a given amount of time
I've made some generalizations since I've only recently started paying attention to this aspect of suspension and how dampening and spring rate affects ride.
I'm very interested in finding links to other shock-dyno graphs for popular struts like the Cusco, H&R and Zeal units. I like the adjustability I saw in the KW race setup (3-way) [url]http://www.kwsuspensions.com/3way.htm[/url]. Still seems to lack the severe low-speed damping of the revalvled Teins above.
TRS
| Apex Rex | 11-18-2004 06:42 PM |
Thank you very much! Makes a LOT more sense now :)
| solo-x | 11-18-2004 07:10 PM |
damn tom, those group 4 dampers look like crap!!!
seems like a lot of bump force on your revalved tein's, but a pretty decent curve. i'd think a slightly lower bump force across the range would improve grip on crappy street tires.
the STi dampers look pretty much like what i expected.
anybody got dyno plots of the wrx koni insert?
nate
seems like a lot of bump force on your revalved tein's, but a pretty decent curve. i'd think a slightly lower bump force across the range would improve grip on crappy street tires.
the STi dampers look pretty much like what i expected.
anybody got dyno plots of the wrx koni insert?
nate
| makofoto | 11-19-2004 02:39 AM |
STI Strut (Green background is Front Strut, Blue is the rear):
[IMG]http://images7.fotki.com/v126/photos/4/43793/836092/STIStrutDynoCropped-vi.jpg[/IMG]
WRX Strut:
[IMG]http://images8.fotki.com/v128/photos/4/43793/836092/WRXStrutDynoCropped-vi.jpg[/IMG]
TeinFlex Strut ... set Hard (Black), Medium (Red) & Soft (Yellow)
[IMG]http://images8.fotki.com/v127/photos/4/43793/836092/TeinDynoResultsCropped-vi.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://images7.fotki.com/v126/photos/4/43793/836092/STIStrutDynoCropped-vi.jpg[/IMG]
WRX Strut:
[IMG]http://images8.fotki.com/v128/photos/4/43793/836092/WRXStrutDynoCropped-vi.jpg[/IMG]
TeinFlex Strut ... set Hard (Black), Medium (Red) & Soft (Yellow)
[IMG]http://images8.fotki.com/v127/photos/4/43793/836092/TeinDynoResultsCropped-vi.jpg[/IMG]
| wrx2.0 555 | 11-19-2004 06:14 AM |
[QUOTE=javid]Both effect each other, its a matter of how much one effects the other. The one that effects the other more you probably want to do second. Between the comments above, the 4 hours I spent on the rack this past weekend, and my growing understanding of all this jazz, I am pretty convinced that you want to balance, align, balance.[/QUOTE]
So in your 4 hours on the rack, how much weight shift did you see after making alignment changes?
And did you take the time to settle the suspension after each change?
So in your 4 hours on the rack, how much weight shift did you see after making alignment changes?
And did you take the time to settle the suspension after each change?
| Fred | 12-31-2004 10:18 AM |
I'm at work this week while everybody else is on vacation, so I figured I'd do something worthwhile & post this:
edit - file was accidentally deleted from my webspace - see chart below for the useful info
Tein HG = rally suspension (I'd been using this on the autox/track/rallyx car before I traded it for the WRX). Oh, and the spring rates are 213 front/ 168 rear. :lol: Talk about overdamped...
edit - file was accidentally deleted from my webspace - see chart below for the useful info
Tein HG = rally suspension (I'd been using this on the autox/track/rallyx car before I traded it for the WRX). Oh, and the spring rates are 213 front/ 168 rear. :lol: Talk about overdamped...
| makofoto | 12-31-2004 02:04 PM |
Fred Did It Better ;)
| Fred | 12-31-2004 02:41 PM |
even better:
[IMG]http://home.att.net/~kevinmallen/dampingcurves.jpg[/IMG]
:D
[IMG]http://home.att.net/~kevinmallen/dampingcurves.jpg[/IMG]
:D
| Wayne_Coots | 02-27-2005 05:39 PM |
Does anyone have a chart for Ohlins?
| Fred | 03-18-2005 03:16 PM |
got these from someone today:
[url]http://home.att.net/~kevinmallen/WRXSportinsertsfront.pdf[/url]
[url]http://home.att.net/~kevinmallen/WRXSportinsertsrear.pdf[/url]
[url]http://home.att.net/~kevinmallen/WRXSportinsertsfront.pdf[/url]
[url]http://home.att.net/~kevinmallen/WRXSportinsertsrear.pdf[/url]
| Nutter | 03-18-2005 04:15 PM |
Im looking to upgrade my suspension with higher rate springs. My setup is as follows:
4way STi pink Struts with STI "Pinks" lowering springs. Rear 22-24mm Whiteline Bar with end links. Front camber plates rear Gropu "N" tophats and engine mounts. I want to keep the struts but get stiffer srpings, what is out there that will fit my application ?
thanks
John
4way STi pink Struts with STI "Pinks" lowering springs. Rear 22-24mm Whiteline Bar with end links. Front camber plates rear Gropu "N" tophats and engine mounts. I want to keep the struts but get stiffer srpings, what is out there that will fit my application ?
thanks
John
| Ru fan | 03-18-2005 07:31 PM |
Idea!
�
�
What about some kind of aftermarket front and rear subframes? I picture something made out of aluminum tubing like all those pretty little frame braces, and it would have the suspension mounting points moved upward to allow the cars a lower center of gravity but with the correct suspension geometry. Is this possible? Seems like a fairly simple process to build one of these things, and they aren't all that difficult to install. I almost can�t believe the vendors haven't thought of something like this before. I think I recall seeing something like this on a WRC car?
Later,
Seth E. :alien:
Later,
Seth E. :alien:
| kwak | 03-18-2005 11:02 PM |
John, how about starting your own thread in the Brakes & Suspension forum instead of taking over this thread. Spring rate info is in the thread [URL]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=695688[/URL].
| Nutter | 03-19-2005 09:42 AM |
I fail to see how asking one question = "taking over" this thread. I wanted peoples thoughts on my choices specific to my setup. I guess "The new and improved advanced suspension and brakes thread" may not be what I thought it was !
| RaceComp Engineering | 03-19-2005 10:21 AM |
[QUOTE=Nutter]I fail to see how asking one question = "taking over" this thread. I wanted peoples thoughts on my choices specific to my setup. I guess "The new and improved advanced suspension and brakes thread" may not be what I thought it was ![/QUOTE]
Hey Nutter, I just saw your post. I can help you with that. I started the thresad a long time ago to offer a place that some of the less common questions could be answered like a open forum. (not saying your question wasnt more or less common). So as a vendor I have kinda stayed off the thread, as people will think you are biased. If you want I could answer your question in a PM. At any rate, hope that helps.
Myles
944 turbo guy
Hey Nutter, I just saw your post. I can help you with that. I started the thresad a long time ago to offer a place that some of the less common questions could be answered like a open forum. (not saying your question wasnt more or less common). So as a vendor I have kinda stayed off the thread, as people will think you are biased. If you want I could answer your question in a PM. At any rate, hope that helps.
Myles
944 turbo guy
| RaceComp Engineering | 03-19-2005 10:25 AM |
[QUOTE=Nutter]Im looking to upgrade my suspension with higher rate springs. My setup is as follows:
4way STi pink Struts with STI "Pinks" lowering springs. Rear 22-24mm Whiteline Bar with end links. Front camber plates rear Gropu "N" tophats and engine mounts. I want to keep the struts but get stiffer srpings, what is out there that will fit my application ?
thanks
John[/QUOTE]
Which Sti 4 way struts do you have?...IF they are version 7, then you are in a difficult position as there isnt much out there thats stiffer. You could need to modify the strut and put a threaded body over the existing strut, or upgrsade(which I know isnt what you want to do) to the version 8 Arai struts and use those 350/280 spring rates (which dont fit the version 7 STi 4 way struts). Beyond that, its the world of coilovers.
Myles
4way STi pink Struts with STI "Pinks" lowering springs. Rear 22-24mm Whiteline Bar with end links. Front camber plates rear Gropu "N" tophats and engine mounts. I want to keep the struts but get stiffer srpings, what is out there that will fit my application ?
thanks
John[/QUOTE]
Which Sti 4 way struts do you have?...IF they are version 7, then you are in a difficult position as there isnt much out there thats stiffer. You could need to modify the strut and put a threaded body over the existing strut, or upgrsade(which I know isnt what you want to do) to the version 8 Arai struts and use those 350/280 spring rates (which dont fit the version 7 STi 4 way struts). Beyond that, its the world of coilovers.
Myles
| makofoto | 03-19-2005 11:04 AM |
Seth ... by using spacers between your wheels and hubs ... you can mathematically lower your roll center. I'm using the H&R Spacers (Options Auto Salon), 15 mm in front, 5 in the rear (come with the proper length studs). H&R insists these do not put damaging added stress on your bearings. They would only hurt old fashion type bearings that require a bit of play. Those types of bearings haven't been used in a long time. The strict german TUV regulatory agency wouldn't allow this german company to sell these very nicely made spacers if they could damage cars designed for their autobahns.
| kwak | 03-19-2005 12:43 PM |
[QUOTE=Nutter]I guess "The new and improved advanced suspension and brakes thread" may not be what I thought it was ![/QUOTE]Take a look at the first post of this thread to see the guidelines. I might be acting like a nazi here but let's keep this thread to its original intent. "Brakes & Suspension" is the appropriate place to ask.
Look at the link to the spring chart I gave you and you will see, as Myles points out, you have limited options.
Look at the link to the spring chart I gave you and you will see, as Myles points out, you have limited options.
| kwak | 03-19-2005 01:06 PM |
[QUOTE=makofoto]Seth ... by using spacers between your wheels and hubs ... you can mathematically lower your roll center.[/QUOTE]Since moving the tire out does not change the instantaneous center, the roll center is [I]raised[/I] ever so slightly. I'm surprised H&R has this wrong on their website.
[QUOTE=makofoto]I'm using the H&R Spacers (Options Auto Salon), 15 mm in front, 5 in the rear (come with the proper length studs). H&R insists these do not put damaging added stress on your bearings. They would only hurt old fashion type bearings that require a bit of play. Those types of bearings haven't been used in a long time. The strict german TUV regulatory agency wouldn't allow this german company to sell these very nicely made spacers if they could damage cars designed for their autobahns.[/QUOTE]Let's take an example vehicle. The 04 STi bearings are a known weak point so Subura used beafier bearings on the 05 STi. Spacers would make the weak ones fail sooner.
Seth, from what I've read recently the front lower suspension points need to be raised. I'm not sure how to make that work with a subframe. You have an interesting idea though. Find a way to fix the horrible camber curve.
[QUOTE=makofoto]I'm using the H&R Spacers (Options Auto Salon), 15 mm in front, 5 in the rear (come with the proper length studs). H&R insists these do not put damaging added stress on your bearings. They would only hurt old fashion type bearings that require a bit of play. Those types of bearings haven't been used in a long time. The strict german TUV regulatory agency wouldn't allow this german company to sell these very nicely made spacers if they could damage cars designed for their autobahns.[/QUOTE]Let's take an example vehicle. The 04 STi bearings are a known weak point so Subura used beafier bearings on the 05 STi. Spacers would make the weak ones fail sooner.
Seth, from what I've read recently the front lower suspension points need to be raised. I'm not sure how to make that work with a subframe. You have an interesting idea though. Find a way to fix the horrible camber curve.
| makofoto | 03-19-2005 06:57 PM |
I was repeating what H&R told me over the phone. The TUV angle makes sense though ... from someone that lived in Germany for 20 years ... and remembers my german friends trying to get their cars through their tough inspections ...
| Nutter | 03-20-2005 11:13 PM |
[QUOTE=RaceComp Engineering]Which Sti 4 way struts do you have?...IF they are version 7, then you are in a difficult position as there isnt much out there thats stiffer. You could need to modify the strut and put a threaded body over the existing strut, or upgrsade(which I know isnt what you want to do) to the version 8 Arai struts and use those 350/280 spring rates (which dont fit the version 7 STi 4 way struts). Beyond that, its the world of coilovers.
Myles[/QUOTE]
Thankyou for your reply. How do I tell what version struts I have ? Im guessing that I have the v7 but Im not sure. Please answer me in a PM so as not to upset so of our more sensitive members.
John
ps I did read page one of this thread and no I dont run on 19's :banana:
Myles[/QUOTE]
Thankyou for your reply. How do I tell what version struts I have ? Im guessing that I have the v7 but Im not sure. Please answer me in a PM so as not to upset so of our more sensitive members.
John
ps I did read page one of this thread and no I dont run on 19's :banana:
| Arnie | 03-21-2005 03:31 AM |
Nutter - I agree with Kwak, your original question can be best answered in the regular suspension forum. But regarding your question about what struts you have, take a look at your front struts. If the lower spring perch has holes in it, you've got V8, if it doesn't, you've got V7. However, sorry, these are "newb" questions that don't really belong in this thread, snobbish as that may sound. Just trying to keep the technical level of this thread on track.
| Nutter | 03-21-2005 09:34 AM |
[QUOTE=Arnie]Nutter - I agree with Kwak, your original question can be best answered in the regular suspension forum. But regarding your question about what struts you have, take a look at your front struts. If the lower spring perch has holes in it, you've got V8, if it doesn't, you've got V7. However, sorry, these are "newb" questions that don't really belong in this thread, snobbish as that may sound. Just trying to keep the technical level of this thread on track.[/QUOTE]
Ok, I get the message. Thanks for the information. If you would just indulge me a moment longer. Here is a link to a picture of one front strut.
[URL=http://nutter.8m.net/cgi-bin/i/images/Front05lo.jpg]Sti Pink Front Strut.[/URL]
Once again you can answer me via PM if you prefer.
John
Ok, I get the message. Thanks for the information. If you would just indulge me a moment longer. Here is a link to a picture of one front strut.
[URL=http://nutter.8m.net/cgi-bin/i/images/Front05lo.jpg]Sti Pink Front Strut.[/URL]
Once again you can answer me via PM if you prefer.
John
| Arnie | 03-21-2005 01:25 PM |
that would be V7. Is that an actual picture of your assembly?
| Nutter | 03-21-2005 02:53 PM |
Yes that's a pic of the strut on my car and yes I forgot the rubber boot the first time I put the struts together ! :rolleyes:
| RaceComp Engineering | 03-21-2005 02:58 PM |
[QUOTE=Nutter]Thankyou for your reply. How do I tell what version struts I have ? Im guessing that I have the v7 but Im not sure. Please answer me in a PM so as not to upset so of our more sensitive members.
John
ps I did read page one of this thread and no I dont run on 19's :banana:[/QUOTE]
I think you prob have Version 7 and thats the issue, because there isnt much wlse you can do spring wise. You are in the same boat as alot of people and so the next step would be something alot stiffer.
Myles
John
ps I did read page one of this thread and no I dont run on 19's :banana:[/QUOTE]
I think you prob have Version 7 and thats the issue, because there isnt much wlse you can do spring wise. You are in the same boat as alot of people and so the next step would be something alot stiffer.
Myles
| kwak | 03-21-2005 10:55 PM |
[QUOTE=makofoto]I was repeating what H&R told me over the phone. The TUV angle makes sense though ... from someone that lived in Germany for 20 years ... and remembers my german friends trying to get their cars through their tough inspections ...[/QUOTE]Ya, it's hard to believe someone as well known as H&R is putting out incorrect information. The webpage sounds like so much marketing hype.
| RaceComp Engineering | 03-22-2005 12:55 AM |
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=737770[/url]
:)
Myles
:)
Myles
| D_REX | 03-22-2005 08:29 AM |
[QUOTE=kwak]Seth, from what I've read recently the front lower suspension points need to be raised. I'm not sure how to make that work with a subframe. You have an interesting idea though. Find a way to fix the horrible camber curve.[/QUOTE]
I've been thinking about this. Raising the LCA pivot points is not very easy. What if the issue were approached from the other end, lowering the pivot point for the ball joint. All this would take is a ball joint with a longer shaft. I haven't looked at wheel clearances yet but it should be very easy to do w/ a 17" wheel. Anybody ever looked at this? Other ideas?
I've been thinking about this. Raising the LCA pivot points is not very easy. What if the issue were approached from the other end, lowering the pivot point for the ball joint. All this would take is a ball joint with a longer shaft. I haven't looked at wheel clearances yet but it should be very easy to do w/ a 17" wheel. Anybody ever looked at this? Other ideas?
| Aaron B | 03-22-2005 08:49 AM |
[QUOTE=D_REX]I've been thinking about this. Raising the LCA pivot points is not very easy. What if the issue were approached from the other end, lowering the pivot point for the ball joint. All this would take is a ball joint with a longer shaft. I haven't looked at wheel clearances yet but it should be very easy to do w/ a 17" wheel. Anybody ever looked at this? Other ideas?[/QUOTE]
Both are very popular changes among the Mustang guys. Nearly all of the big Mustang suppliers offer K members with adjustable A arm mounts and most all of them run Steeda's X2 extended ball joint. Helps them to raise the roll center back up to near stock heights while still running a lower ride height.
Both are very popular changes among the Mustang guys. Nearly all of the big Mustang suppliers offer K members with adjustable A arm mounts and most all of them run Steeda's X2 extended ball joint. Helps them to raise the roll center back up to near stock heights while still running a lower ride height.
| D_REX | 03-22-2005 09:04 AM |
[QUOTE=Aaron B]Both are very popular changes among the Mustang guys. Nearly all of the big Mustang suppliers offer K members with adjustable A arm mounts and most all of them run Steeda's X2 extended ball joint. Helps them to raise the roll center back up to near stock heights while still running a lower ride height.[/QUOTE]
IIRC the rear mount for the LCA is to the unibody. The front mount could be moved upwards with some work or a new cross member, but I'm not sure what could be done about the rear mount.
Thanks for the heads up on the Steeda part :D
IIRC the rear mount for the LCA is to the unibody. The front mount could be moved upwards with some work or a new cross member, but I'm not sure what could be done about the rear mount.
Thanks for the heads up on the Steeda part :D
| duncangrant | 03-22-2005 09:48 AM |
[QUOTE=D_REX]I've been thinking about this. Raising the LCA pivot points is not very easy. What if the issue were approached from the other end, lowering the pivot point for the ball joint. All this would take is a ball joint with a longer shaft. I haven't looked at wheel clearances yet but it should be very easy to do w/ a 17" wheel. Anybody ever looked at this? Other ideas?[/QUOTE]
Don't forget the steering arm ball-joint would have to be moved to match.
Don't forget the steering arm ball-joint would have to be moved to match.
| D_REX | 03-22-2005 10:08 AM |
[QUOTE=duncangrant]Don't forget the steering arm ball-joint would have to be moved to match.[/QUOTE]
Baer already makes a "tracker" kit suitable for use on the Suby. I just need to find someone who weither makes an extended ball joint, or is willing to :D
Baer already makes a "tracker" kit suitable for use on the Suby. I just need to find someone who weither makes an extended ball joint, or is willing to :D
| Aaron B | 03-23-2005 09:22 AM |
[QUOTE=D_REX]I just need to find someone who weither makes an extended ball joint, or is willing to :D[/QUOTE]
I'd say contact Steeda and see who makes theirs, [url]http://www.steeda.com[/url] I believe is the correct address. Otherwise, you can check your local oval/dirt track shop, I've seen extended ball joints sold for their applications as well.
I'd say contact Steeda and see who makes theirs, [url]http://www.steeda.com[/url] I believe is the correct address. Otherwise, you can check your local oval/dirt track shop, I've seen extended ball joints sold for their applications as well.
| RaceComp Engineering | 03-23-2005 10:57 AM |
[QUOTE=D_REX]I've been thinking about this. Raising the LCA pivot points is not very easy. What if the issue were approached from the other end, lowering the pivot point for the ball joint. All this would take is a ball joint with a longer shaft. I haven't looked at wheel clearances yet but it should be very easy to do w/ a 17" wheel. Anybody ever looked at this? Other ideas?[/QUOTE]
there is a team in Japan that uses this approach and it works well. They dont sell to the public, not in Japan and def not here, which is a shame, but its good to know its been done. You guys are on the right track.
Myles
there is a team in Japan that uses this approach and it works well. They dont sell to the public, not in Japan and def not here, which is a shame, but its good to know its been done. You guys are on the right track.
Myles
| D_REX | 03-23-2005 11:02 AM |
[url]http://www.colemanracing.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=49[/url]
Sells everything needed to get it done. They have weld in collars to fit their generic ball joints. Would be just a little work ;) The only question is whether or not the diameter and angle of the taper is compatible with our uprights.
Anybody want to donate a set of stock lower control arms? I'll be the guinnea pig and I'll give you my stock arms, modified if you want, if I get it to work.
I wanna play :D
Sells everything needed to get it done. They have weld in collars to fit their generic ball joints. Would be just a little work ;) The only question is whether or not the diameter and angle of the taper is compatible with our uprights.
Anybody want to donate a set of stock lower control arms? I'll be the guinnea pig and I'll give you my stock arms, modified if you want, if I get it to work.
I wanna play :D
| D_REX | 03-23-2005 04:17 PM |
*chirp - chirp*
*chirp - chirp*
:D
*chirp - chirp*
:D
| dwx | 03-23-2005 05:42 PM |
There are plenty of adjustable ball joints available for other cars, I'm sure something could work pretty easily. As for raising the inboard points, you could probably do it a decent amount with offset bushings.
Nagisa Auto in Japan are making a set of fully adjustable LCAs for the WRX, but they are still three months out and cost $1600...
Nagisa Auto in Japan are making a set of fully adjustable LCAs for the WRX, but they are still three months out and cost $1600...
| ashumo | 05-07-2005 01:53 AM |
bump for a good thread...actually stumbled across it seaching for the nagisa lca's
| brandonl | 05-07-2005 11:39 AM |
Why not build tubular heim jointed LCAs instead of fabbing a slider ball joint on to and existing arm?
Brandon
PS> Anyone have the charts for Proflex gravel spec boingers?
Brandon
PS> Anyone have the charts for Proflex gravel spec boingers?
| D_REX | 05-09-2005 08:04 AM |
[QUOTE=brandonl]Why not build tubular heim jointed LCAs instead of fabbing a slider ball joint on to and existing arm?
Brandon
PS> Anyone have the charts for Proflex gravel spec boingers?[/QUOTE]
Kludging an adjustable, or lengthened, ball joint onto an existing LCA should be a simpler / easier proof of concept. The attachment points of the stock LCA do not lend themselves to rod end attachment. The rear mounting point specifically will have to be fabricated. It's certainly somethingI'm interested in doing but not a quick and dirty project, at leat not for me :(.
Brandon
PS> Anyone have the charts for Proflex gravel spec boingers?[/QUOTE]
Kludging an adjustable, or lengthened, ball joint onto an existing LCA should be a simpler / easier proof of concept. The attachment points of the stock LCA do not lend themselves to rod end attachment. The rear mounting point specifically will have to be fabricated. It's certainly somethingI'm interested in doing but not a quick and dirty project, at leat not for me :(.
| pio!pio! | 05-09-2005 03:43 PM |
Something like this?
[img]http://www.sr20forum.com/img/data/500/medium/1_relocated_ball_joint_compressed.jpg[/img]
This is not a subie but the concept is the same, right?
[img]http://www.sr20forum.com/img/data/500/medium/1_relocated_ball_joint_compressed.jpg[/img]
This is not a subie but the concept is the same, right?
| D_REX | 05-10-2005 08:02 AM |
Here's a pic of the Nagisa parts
[img]http://www.more-japan.com/xcart/product_image.php?imageid=49[/img]
[img]http://www.more-japan.com/xcart/product_image.php?imageid=49[/img]
| funsti | 05-10-2005 05:42 PM |
[quote=trhoppe][img]http://www.tomhoppe.com/misc%20pics/compare.jpg[/img][/quote]
I'm a suspension noob but I just installed a set of Whiteline Group4 'Race Spec' coilovers on my 2005 STi. Can I get some explanation of this graph?
Why are only the Whitelines plotted with what looks to be a great many more data points as well as all the way to about 580 mm/s. Are the other plots all theoretical and the Whitelines actual data?
The front (soft) plot is the damper setting at softest and the front (hard) plot is the damper setting at the hardest right?
The G4 'race spec' documentation says that the damper adjustments actually change bound and rebound at slightly different rates but the graph doesn't seem to bear that out.
The graph shows that the G4 struts are no stiffer on the 'bound' (positive numbers right?) than the stock STi struts even on their stiffest settings, is this really true?
Also the rebound graph for the G4s shows that they are actually softer than the stock struts when using their softest settings. This doesn't make sense to me as the G4 race spring rates (front: 9kg / 504lbs) are over double that of the stock STi spring rates. Why would you need a rebound rate lower than that of the stock struts they are replacing when the springs at their softest are going to be double that of the spring rates used on the stock struts?
It seems from reading the rebound graph that I'm going to have to run the G4s at close to their maximum stiffness adjustments in order to rebound harder than the stock STi struts. I do know that the stock STi struts are overdamped for the factory springs and that the JDM 'pink' lowering springs are a better match so that does help explain this a bit.
-Noob in need of education
I'm a suspension noob but I just installed a set of Whiteline Group4 'Race Spec' coilovers on my 2005 STi. Can I get some explanation of this graph?
Why are only the Whitelines plotted with what looks to be a great many more data points as well as all the way to about 580 mm/s. Are the other plots all theoretical and the Whitelines actual data?
The front (soft) plot is the damper setting at softest and the front (hard) plot is the damper setting at the hardest right?
The G4 'race spec' documentation says that the damper adjustments actually change bound and rebound at slightly different rates but the graph doesn't seem to bear that out.
The graph shows that the G4 struts are no stiffer on the 'bound' (positive numbers right?) than the stock STi struts even on their stiffest settings, is this really true?
Also the rebound graph for the G4s shows that they are actually softer than the stock struts when using their softest settings. This doesn't make sense to me as the G4 race spring rates (front: 9kg / 504lbs) are over double that of the stock STi spring rates. Why would you need a rebound rate lower than that of the stock struts they are replacing when the springs at their softest are going to be double that of the spring rates used on the stock struts?
It seems from reading the rebound graph that I'm going to have to run the G4s at close to their maximum stiffness adjustments in order to rebound harder than the stock STi struts. I do know that the stock STi struts are overdamped for the factory springs and that the JDM 'pink' lowering springs are a better match so that does help explain this a bit.
-Noob in need of education
| trhoppe | 05-10-2005 06:24 PM |
[quote]Why are only the Whitelines plotted with what looks to be a great many more data points as well as all the way to about 580 mm/s. Are the other plots all theoretical and the Whitelines actual data?[/quote] Everything from 300mm/s on is only for REALLY REALLY hard bumps and I guess the other companies don't need it. Most race damper charts that I've seen don't go over 300mm/s either
[quote]The front (soft) plot is the damper setting at softest and the front (hard) plot is the damper setting at the hardest right?
[/quote] bingo
[quote]The G4 'race spec' documentation says that the damper adjustments actually change bound and rebound at slightly different rates but the graph doesn't seem to bear that out.
[/quote] They do from what I'm seeing. At 100mm/s on the stiff rebound its ~1000N and at 200mm/s its ~1800N. At 100mm/s on the stiff bound (compression,bump) its ~500N and at 200mm/s its ~600N. Those are "different rates of change" to me.
[quote]Also the rebound graph for the G4s shows that they are actually softer than the stock struts when using their softest settings. This doesn't make sense to me as the G4 race spring rates (front: 9kg / 504lbs) are over double that of the stock STi spring rates. Why would you need a rebound rate lower than that of the stock struts they are replacing when the springs at their softest are going to be double that of the spring rates used on the stock struts?
[/quote] As you see, the Tein RA struts are on the black curve and those use 8K springs. Even though they have better low speed damping then the whiteline, for "bump handling" (higher piston velocity), they are the same. Tein even recommends up to a 10K spring for their stock RAs. The STi struts are a VERY good strut and can handle 400lb springs IMHO.
Remember that this graph was also from November of 04. I also seem to remember that Whiteline was running lower rates back then on their race spec, like 7/5 maybe. It was low enough to get me going :huh: as far as the "race" designation. 9K front rates ain't that low. I would request another chart from them for their newest "race spec" dampers and compare. If its different, I'll redo this chart.
-Tom
[quote]The front (soft) plot is the damper setting at softest and the front (hard) plot is the damper setting at the hardest right?
[/quote] bingo
[quote]The G4 'race spec' documentation says that the damper adjustments actually change bound and rebound at slightly different rates but the graph doesn't seem to bear that out.
[/quote] They do from what I'm seeing. At 100mm/s on the stiff rebound its ~1000N and at 200mm/s its ~1800N. At 100mm/s on the stiff bound (compression,bump) its ~500N and at 200mm/s its ~600N. Those are "different rates of change" to me.
[quote]Also the rebound graph for the G4s shows that they are actually softer than the stock struts when using their softest settings. This doesn't make sense to me as the G4 race spring rates (front: 9kg / 504lbs) are over double that of the stock STi spring rates. Why would you need a rebound rate lower than that of the stock struts they are replacing when the springs at their softest are going to be double that of the spring rates used on the stock struts?
[/quote] As you see, the Tein RA struts are on the black curve and those use 8K springs. Even though they have better low speed damping then the whiteline, for "bump handling" (higher piston velocity), they are the same. Tein even recommends up to a 10K spring for their stock RAs. The STi struts are a VERY good strut and can handle 400lb springs IMHO.
Remember that this graph was also from November of 04. I also seem to remember that Whiteline was running lower rates back then on their race spec, like 7/5 maybe. It was low enough to get me going :huh: as far as the "race" designation. 9K front rates ain't that low. I would request another chart from them for their newest "race spec" dampers and compare. If its different, I'll redo this chart.
-Tom
| deuce.five | 05-11-2005 01:19 AM |
[QUOTE=D_REX]Here's a pic of the Nagisa parts
[img]http://www.more-japan.com/xcart/product_image.php?imageid=49[/img][/QUOTE]
:eek: WOW, those are nice.
[img]http://www.more-japan.com/xcart/product_image.php?imageid=49[/img][/QUOTE]
:eek: WOW, those are nice.
| nkorniev | 05-11-2005 04:52 AM |
STI track suspension set Up
�
�
Oh ye gods of handiling I cast ye a question and hope thou can cast me down an answer.
I know there are some folks out there that really know how to eliminate STI understeer for track use. I'm looking at purchasing an STI but I want to get an Idea of what I need for track use.
Rob Ainscough(V8venom) has made some references (on another froum) to the crappy stock alignment setup of the STI as the cause of the understeer. But he has'nt responded to my PM (understandable since he is racing and does'nt want to give away his secrets to his competitors)
(if you haven't seen robs video's they're worth a watch, he's a great driver and his car seems to be dialed in perfectly)
I know alot of people put a heavier sway bar in the rear and this seems to reduce understeer tendancy. But from all I've learned from racing is that, doing this will reduce the cornering speed of the vehicle(how many g's it will pull on the skidpad). Thus I'm looking for some alternative solutions.
adding an air dam is an option but It will only truly help in high speed cornering.
I think that adding in some negative camber (via camber plates) in the front end is the best option for the track (it will cause abnormal tire wear on the street)
Is there anyone out there that has a good setup for thier sti for track use?
or anyone who can confirm or deny my suspicions? or give me thier alignment setup or mods that theyve used to eliminate\seriously reduce understeer?
I know there are some folks out there that really know how to eliminate STI understeer for track use. I'm looking at purchasing an STI but I want to get an Idea of what I need for track use.
Rob Ainscough(V8venom) has made some references (on another froum) to the crappy stock alignment setup of the STI as the cause of the understeer. But he has'nt responded to my PM (understandable since he is racing and does'nt want to give away his secrets to his competitors)
(if you haven't seen robs video's they're worth a watch, he's a great driver and his car seems to be dialed in perfectly)
I know alot of people put a heavier sway bar in the rear and this seems to reduce understeer tendancy. But from all I've learned from racing is that, doing this will reduce the cornering speed of the vehicle(how many g's it will pull on the skidpad). Thus I'm looking for some alternative solutions.
adding an air dam is an option but It will only truly help in high speed cornering.
I think that adding in some negative camber (via camber plates) in the front end is the best option for the track (it will cause abnormal tire wear on the street)
Is there anyone out there that has a good setup for thier sti for track use?
or anyone who can confirm or deny my suspicions? or give me thier alignment setup or mods that theyve used to eliminate\seriously reduce understeer?
| javid | 05-11-2005 09:20 AM |
Sway bars are nice. I would get adjustable ones at both ends. If you are going to retain 'stockish' rate springs then get big bars (24 to 26). If you plan to get some uber springs (12-14 k) you will be fine with smaller bars (20-24).
Alignment: zero the toe, -2 to -2.5 front camber for street tires maybe -1.5 in back.
Everyone has different preferances and a variety of setups will work...
I would recommend lots of track time through out the build up so that you are familiar with the STi chassis and how certain mods effect it.
Alignment: zero the toe, -2 to -2.5 front camber for street tires maybe -1.5 in back.
Everyone has different preferances and a variety of setups will work...
I would recommend lots of track time through out the build up so that you are familiar with the STi chassis and how certain mods effect it.
| RaceComp Engineering | 05-11-2005 09:26 AM |
I agree with JAVID,...on the firmer spring 12-14 kg range. In a correction situation the car will be far more predictable than if you take the soft spring but 55mm sway bar route !! LOL. The deflection rate on some of those large sway bars is a killer and will create some snap oversteer for you arse !!
Myles
Myles
| funsti | 05-11-2005 10:26 AM |
[QUOTE=trhoppe]They do from what I'm seeing. At 100mm/s on the stiff rebound its ~1000N and at 200mm/s its ~1800N. At 100mm/s on the stiff bound (compression,bump) its ~500N and at 200mm/s its ~600N. Those are "different rates of change" to me.
As you see, the Tein RA struts are on the black curve and those use 8K springs. Even though they have better low speed damping then the whiteline, for "bump handling" (higher piston velocity), they are the same. Tein even recommends up to a 10K spring for their stock RAs. The STi struts are a VERY good strut and can handle 400lb springs IMHO.
Remember that this graph was also from November of 04. I also seem to remember that Whiteline was running lower rates back then on their race spec, like 7/5 maybe. It was low enough to get me going :huh: as far as the "race" designation. 9K front rates ain't that low. I would request another chart from them for their newest "race spec" dampers and compare. If its different, I'll redo this chart.
-Tom[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the reply Tom! Yea, obviously I wasn't really reading the graph. I was just thrown off by the fact that the other suspensions are showing some abrupt turns in their curves where the G4s look pretty much linear in the same regions by comparison.
I had heard the STi struts were good but wow.. this graph shows them to be nearly comparable to Tein RAs. I almost wish I had tried out the JDM pink lowering springs with a set of thick anti-sway bars. However I am very happy with the G4's so far. I had the ride height WAY too low before (about 340mm front, 320mm rear as measured from center of wheels to tops of fenders, hey.. this was the way it was after installation, I fixed it two days later!). I just raised it to 365mm front 355mm rear and the ride comfort improved 150%. The handling seems -greatly- improved as well. Where before the car would be pissed off about trying to lay down power through a really bumpy turn it now sails through almost as if the bumps weren't even there!
As you see, the Tein RA struts are on the black curve and those use 8K springs. Even though they have better low speed damping then the whiteline, for "bump handling" (higher piston velocity), they are the same. Tein even recommends up to a 10K spring for their stock RAs. The STi struts are a VERY good strut and can handle 400lb springs IMHO.
Remember that this graph was also from November of 04. I also seem to remember that Whiteline was running lower rates back then on their race spec, like 7/5 maybe. It was low enough to get me going :huh: as far as the "race" designation. 9K front rates ain't that low. I would request another chart from them for their newest "race spec" dampers and compare. If its different, I'll redo this chart.
-Tom[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the reply Tom! Yea, obviously I wasn't really reading the graph. I was just thrown off by the fact that the other suspensions are showing some abrupt turns in their curves where the G4s look pretty much linear in the same regions by comparison.
I had heard the STi struts were good but wow.. this graph shows them to be nearly comparable to Tein RAs. I almost wish I had tried out the JDM pink lowering springs with a set of thick anti-sway bars. However I am very happy with the G4's so far. I had the ride height WAY too low before (about 340mm front, 320mm rear as measured from center of wheels to tops of fenders, hey.. this was the way it was after installation, I fixed it two days later!). I just raised it to 365mm front 355mm rear and the ride comfort improved 150%. The handling seems -greatly- improved as well. Where before the car would be pissed off about trying to lay down power through a really bumpy turn it now sails through almost as if the bumps weren't even there!
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét