| Fitz | 06-10-2006 09:37 PM |
Suspension advice - track only car
�
�
So I spent the majority of the evening searching various posts on spring rates, bump steer; essentially becoming very intimate with every post Tom and Gary have ever made.
Here's my dilemna:
Car setup:
The car's a MY00 caged-flared-gutted race only GC8 shod with 265/45/16's or 275/40/17's. Weighs in at 2650 pounds wet. Suspension is Koni yellows (standard length) with a GC coilover Kit. Spring rates are 400 lb front, 225 rear; 8" length F & R. Front camber plates; rear stock plates. Rear swaybar is a whiteline 18-20-22 set at 22 mm. Front bar is a stock 02 WRX bar (18 mm I believe). Other pertinent mods include a Cusco front LSD and a hair-dryer under the hood.
Useage:
Hillclimbs. Basicly your favorite "long way home" closed for your very own personal use. Track days at various north east tracks. Think die-hard tarmac car.
The suspension setup is legacy from when the car was daily driven. Id like to go with something a little more kidney shattering and competitive on the track. I know Tom's a fan of 300F/350R spring rates. Are these decent rates for "track duty only" as well as auto-x? Additionally, I feel that the front Koni's are too long for the application. I'm bottoming out the car fairly frequently at Loudon (chicane-chicane). I'm hoping that the larger spring rates will solve this (assuming I go to 500F-600R), but this is all to be deicded.
People's thoughts?
Thanks,
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
[IMG]http://flat4racing.com/images/Ascutney03/Ascutney-rear.jpg[/IMG]
Here's my dilemna:
Car setup:
The car's a MY00 caged-flared-gutted race only GC8 shod with 265/45/16's or 275/40/17's. Weighs in at 2650 pounds wet. Suspension is Koni yellows (standard length) with a GC coilover Kit. Spring rates are 400 lb front, 225 rear; 8" length F & R. Front camber plates; rear stock plates. Rear swaybar is a whiteline 18-20-22 set at 22 mm. Front bar is a stock 02 WRX bar (18 mm I believe). Other pertinent mods include a Cusco front LSD and a hair-dryer under the hood.
Useage:
Hillclimbs. Basicly your favorite "long way home" closed for your very own personal use. Track days at various north east tracks. Think die-hard tarmac car.
The suspension setup is legacy from when the car was daily driven. Id like to go with something a little more kidney shattering and competitive on the track. I know Tom's a fan of 300F/350R spring rates. Are these decent rates for "track duty only" as well as auto-x? Additionally, I feel that the front Koni's are too long for the application. I'm bottoming out the car fairly frequently at Loudon (chicane-chicane). I'm hoping that the larger spring rates will solve this (assuming I go to 500F-600R), but this is all to be deicded.
People's thoughts?
Thanks,
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
[IMG]http://flat4racing.com/images/Ascutney03/Ascutney-rear.jpg[/IMG]
| DrBiggly | 06-10-2006 10:09 PM |
I'll say this one thing: If you deviate from the Konis you will be quite sorry unless dropping mad coin on some nice 2 or 3 way shocks. I'd change up the spring rates and get the Konis revalved for the quickest/cheapest fix, although *where* in your setup to up the rates depends on what you think of the car's current rotational abilities, etc. Also depends on what sort of alignment you prefer as well (Some camber in the rear or perhaps none) to get the car coming around. :)
-Biggly
-Biggly
| M | 06-10-2006 11:13 PM |
higher spring rates will solve your problems of bottoming out. "Revalve" the dampers for these rates. If the dampers are old this could be part of the trouble, rebuild them.
| Fitz | 06-11-2006 08:37 AM |
[QUOTE=DrBiggly]I'll say this one thing: If you deviate from the Konis you will be quite sorry unless dropping mad coin on some nice 2 or 3 way shocks. I'd change up the spring rates and get the Konis revalved for the quickest/cheapest fix, although *where* in your setup to up the rates depends on what you think of the car's current rotational abilities, etc. Also depends on what sort of alignment you prefer as well (Some camber in the rear or perhaps none) to get the car coming around. :)
-Biggly[/QUOTE]
Alignment currently is:
F: -3.5 camber. 1/8" toe out.
R: -2 camber. 0" toe.
With the current setup, I have no issues rotating the car; very necessary in hillclimbs.
I'm leaning towards a 7" spring in front; probably something in Javid's 12k territory although I don't know if I'll go that stiff in the rear. Rear will still be an 8" spring. I also think I'm going to try to drop the Koni insert down inside the AGX housing in the front to give me a tad more travel.
For struts I'm on the single adjustable Koni yellows (8610-1351 F, 8610-1352 R). Would it be worth it to have these re-valved to support the higher spring rates or just upgrade to the 8611's?
Thanks,
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
-Biggly[/QUOTE]
Alignment currently is:
F: -3.5 camber. 1/8" toe out.
R: -2 camber. 0" toe.
With the current setup, I have no issues rotating the car; very necessary in hillclimbs.
I'm leaning towards a 7" spring in front; probably something in Javid's 12k territory although I don't know if I'll go that stiff in the rear. Rear will still be an 8" spring. I also think I'm going to try to drop the Koni insert down inside the AGX housing in the front to give me a tad more travel.
For struts I'm on the single adjustable Koni yellows (8610-1351 F, 8610-1352 R). Would it be worth it to have these re-valved to support the higher spring rates or just upgrade to the 8611's?
Thanks,
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
| Joel Gat, 1.8L | 06-11-2006 05:04 PM |
Hello,
[QUOTE=Fitz]
I'm leaning towards a 7" spring in front; probably something in Javid's 12k territory although I don't know if I'll go that stiff in the rear. Rear will still be an [/QUOTE]
Maybe I don't know hill climbs, but I have spent quite a bit of time on race tracks and I think one of the key differences between race cars that work and race cars that look "race-y" is spring rates. There are plenty of cars out there, including top level cars, running way too high spring rates. You see these stiffly sprung cars bouncing madly over rough stuff and berms and they always look crazy-flat through the turns, but they can never put their power down until the track is back to being glass smooth or completely straight.
Meanwhile, you see a car in the middle of such a pack of over-sprung cars that looks like a street car - it's leaning way more than the more typical looking racecars. It doesn't bounce like the rest. And mysteriously, at every corner exit, it slingshots forward and takes another position or two. Suddenly, there's a Subaru bringing the battle to the front of the pack.
In my experience, if it's one of my cars, after the race, I'll hear kvetching about how unfair AWD is and how the AWD cars can put down the power unfairly early in a turn to get too good of a corner exit. "It's no fair, my 2WD car with 1000 pound springs and no (or small) swaybars just can't put the power down the same way."
Nah, it's the ridiculous springs. It has nothing (or only a little) to do with AWD. It's all about the fact that your overly sprung car has tires that are working like springs, instead of like tires. Every bump in the road is a traumatic event and the tires are too busy to do their job. The tire has one job - stick to the ground. The lighter your springs are, the better the tire can follow the track surface, going over bumps, changes in surface, etc. and the less those actions impact the chassis (ie, the wheel goes up and down and the chassis stays at the same attitude during that period). While the tires are working, you've got traction.
It was the same with the WRX in USTCC (once we figured this out, somewhere back in 2001) as it is now on a new team, with the Legacy in Grand Am Cup. Check out the ample coverage we got during the Phoenix race. Notice some of the big passes we do. A train of cars, all taking the only line they can take because as soon as they hit the bumpiness at the apex, they've got to follow the same gradual track-out line (both FWD and RWD cars in the train, so it's not an inherent FWD weakness or something like that). Meanwhile, the Legacy is driving a different race, on the inside, hitting the same corner, and tracking out on the inside of the entire train of cars, gaining position after position.
In fact, during the last USTCC race, at Miller in Utah, I was having a discussion with some of the teams when I heard that while the EVO was running a good-in-my-opinion 6-8xx pound range set of springs, one of the BMWs was running 1500-2000 pound springs, with no rear swaybar even. From my vantage point on the tower, what I saw was exactly as expected. The EVO certainly leaned more (looked less "race"), but he had tenacious grip compared to the BMW and made huge gains in corner exits. The 700 pound heavier EVO (on the same tires) lost ground during the corners and braking, but started to make most of it up at corner exit already, which translated to large gains by the end of any straight.
Although your exact setup will require your own tuning and tweaking (and depends heavily on the rest of your car), generally speaking, unless there's something crazy going on, you probably should set your goals (for near 1:1 motion ratio strut-based cars, like the Impreza, Legacy, EVO, etc) around something in that 6-8xx pound range. Shooting for 1200 pound front springs will get you a car that in the end, terminally understeers / kills front tires. It won't have great front end grip, and to get it matched well, front to rear, will require huge rear springs, and it will only feel neutral once you reduce rear end grip to match the low front grip. It may work great on a limited basis, but unless your car is radically different from a standard car, I doubt it's a good setup.
Of course, some people think you should have super stiff springs and no swaybars. Some people think you should have super soft springs and ridiculous swaybars. I think extreme anything isn't great, but I'd rather err on the side of softer springs so that the tires can get some grip.
My suggestion is find a set of springs to try in the 6-850 pound range, bias the rate front-to-rear according to however your favorite poster or author or palm reader suggests (don't get married to that idea, though), get "normal" but stiff swaybars (ie, Cobb, Hotchkis, Whiteline, etc., but perhaps not the 27mm / 32mm super high rate bars), and go from there. You'll have to be a pretty good driver to be able to learn anything about the springs without having appropriate dampers, so go for a revalve and let whomever is doing it know that you're experimenting at 700 +/- 100. They can probably get you setup appropriately for that range of springs.
Then go out to the track with a friend and a stopwatch at least, and start learning the car. Make drastic changes if you want to understand how they affect the car. Start with 600 front and 800 rear. Spend 30 minutes honing your driving and get to a steady lap time. Then swap them - 800 front 600 rear. How's that feel? What changed? Maybe try 700 front and combine that with 600 rear and compare that to 800 pound rear with those same 700 fronts. Do most of your spring rate changes with the car set to the middle of the adjustment range for the shocks. You'll confuse the issue if you make shock changes. Find a spring rate that feels the best / gives you the best lap times. Think about the way the car feels - in steady state "sweepers", is the car understeering or oversteering? If it's oversteering at high speed sweepers, which combination of springs addressed this condition better - going up in front spring rate or down in rear spring rate (to get the rears to grip better)? Then work on shocks.
Depending on 1-way, 2-way, etc., fix everything to the middle position except one setting at one end. IE, all middle except rear compression. Then do some laps with the rear compression at minimum. See what that feels like. Then set rear compression to maximum. See what that feels like. Now, your butt is tuned in to what rear compression damping changes feel like. Do the same for all the settings. Now you know what they feel like. Now chose some settings (all middle?) and get used to the car. Decide which of those feelings you felt before that you want more of now. More rear rebound? front rebound?
At least then you'll have a baseline to work from. Now you can apply all that book and internet knowledge - the car is transferring weight to the rear too quickly - do I want to increase rear compression or increase front rebound to slow that down?
Of course, you'll need a friend and a tire temp gauge (preferably a probe type), and you'll need him to sit right at the pit entrance, so you can come in as hot as possible, to get tire temps. After you have the basic setup done, start logging temps. See how the temps change across the tire (inside/middle/outside). Adjust your camber accordingly, but first make sure you have little to no toe (otherwise, you won't know if heat is coming from scrubbing due to toe - it takes more experience and knowledge to start differentiating temps caused by different factors). If the middles are not in-line with the insides and outsides, maybe add or subtract some air. Find out, first, from the mfr, what pressures the tires work best at. Don't add air if it means you'll be over where the tires work best...
Anyway, yeah, it's easier to ask "what spring rates should I use," but my guess is that 99% of the people who give you an answer probably haven't done all the setup work themselves. They're probably guessing or quoting from some of the very few people who have done the work. And... even if they have, if you go through the above process, by the time you finish (a few weekends, at least), you'll know more about chassis setup and you'll have more first hand experience with handling issues than just about everyone who goes to the track, races, or even low end professional race teams.
After this exercise, if you're at a new track, and there's a decreasing radius, off camber turn, that you've never experienced, and it leads onto the fastest straight, so time gained here is more important than time elsewhere on the track, and you'll start to remember - the car is overloading that outside front... I fixed that last time by slowing the transfer to that tire... I can do that by increasing rear rebound or front compression, but when I do that...
And you'll be another step ahead of your competition.
Have fun, 'cause it ain't worth it if it ain't fun!
Joel Gat
GOTO:Racing
[QUOTE=Fitz]
I'm leaning towards a 7" spring in front; probably something in Javid's 12k territory although I don't know if I'll go that stiff in the rear. Rear will still be an [/QUOTE]
Maybe I don't know hill climbs, but I have spent quite a bit of time on race tracks and I think one of the key differences between race cars that work and race cars that look "race-y" is spring rates. There are plenty of cars out there, including top level cars, running way too high spring rates. You see these stiffly sprung cars bouncing madly over rough stuff and berms and they always look crazy-flat through the turns, but they can never put their power down until the track is back to being glass smooth or completely straight.
Meanwhile, you see a car in the middle of such a pack of over-sprung cars that looks like a street car - it's leaning way more than the more typical looking racecars. It doesn't bounce like the rest. And mysteriously, at every corner exit, it slingshots forward and takes another position or two. Suddenly, there's a Subaru bringing the battle to the front of the pack.
In my experience, if it's one of my cars, after the race, I'll hear kvetching about how unfair AWD is and how the AWD cars can put down the power unfairly early in a turn to get too good of a corner exit. "It's no fair, my 2WD car with 1000 pound springs and no (or small) swaybars just can't put the power down the same way."
Nah, it's the ridiculous springs. It has nothing (or only a little) to do with AWD. It's all about the fact that your overly sprung car has tires that are working like springs, instead of like tires. Every bump in the road is a traumatic event and the tires are too busy to do their job. The tire has one job - stick to the ground. The lighter your springs are, the better the tire can follow the track surface, going over bumps, changes in surface, etc. and the less those actions impact the chassis (ie, the wheel goes up and down and the chassis stays at the same attitude during that period). While the tires are working, you've got traction.
It was the same with the WRX in USTCC (once we figured this out, somewhere back in 2001) as it is now on a new team, with the Legacy in Grand Am Cup. Check out the ample coverage we got during the Phoenix race. Notice some of the big passes we do. A train of cars, all taking the only line they can take because as soon as they hit the bumpiness at the apex, they've got to follow the same gradual track-out line (both FWD and RWD cars in the train, so it's not an inherent FWD weakness or something like that). Meanwhile, the Legacy is driving a different race, on the inside, hitting the same corner, and tracking out on the inside of the entire train of cars, gaining position after position.
In fact, during the last USTCC race, at Miller in Utah, I was having a discussion with some of the teams when I heard that while the EVO was running a good-in-my-opinion 6-8xx pound range set of springs, one of the BMWs was running 1500-2000 pound springs, with no rear swaybar even. From my vantage point on the tower, what I saw was exactly as expected. The EVO certainly leaned more (looked less "race"), but he had tenacious grip compared to the BMW and made huge gains in corner exits. The 700 pound heavier EVO (on the same tires) lost ground during the corners and braking, but started to make most of it up at corner exit already, which translated to large gains by the end of any straight.
Although your exact setup will require your own tuning and tweaking (and depends heavily on the rest of your car), generally speaking, unless there's something crazy going on, you probably should set your goals (for near 1:1 motion ratio strut-based cars, like the Impreza, Legacy, EVO, etc) around something in that 6-8xx pound range. Shooting for 1200 pound front springs will get you a car that in the end, terminally understeers / kills front tires. It won't have great front end grip, and to get it matched well, front to rear, will require huge rear springs, and it will only feel neutral once you reduce rear end grip to match the low front grip. It may work great on a limited basis, but unless your car is radically different from a standard car, I doubt it's a good setup.
Of course, some people think you should have super stiff springs and no swaybars. Some people think you should have super soft springs and ridiculous swaybars. I think extreme anything isn't great, but I'd rather err on the side of softer springs so that the tires can get some grip.
My suggestion is find a set of springs to try in the 6-850 pound range, bias the rate front-to-rear according to however your favorite poster or author or palm reader suggests (don't get married to that idea, though), get "normal" but stiff swaybars (ie, Cobb, Hotchkis, Whiteline, etc., but perhaps not the 27mm / 32mm super high rate bars), and go from there. You'll have to be a pretty good driver to be able to learn anything about the springs without having appropriate dampers, so go for a revalve and let whomever is doing it know that you're experimenting at 700 +/- 100. They can probably get you setup appropriately for that range of springs.
Then go out to the track with a friend and a stopwatch at least, and start learning the car. Make drastic changes if you want to understand how they affect the car. Start with 600 front and 800 rear. Spend 30 minutes honing your driving and get to a steady lap time. Then swap them - 800 front 600 rear. How's that feel? What changed? Maybe try 700 front and combine that with 600 rear and compare that to 800 pound rear with those same 700 fronts. Do most of your spring rate changes with the car set to the middle of the adjustment range for the shocks. You'll confuse the issue if you make shock changes. Find a spring rate that feels the best / gives you the best lap times. Think about the way the car feels - in steady state "sweepers", is the car understeering or oversteering? If it's oversteering at high speed sweepers, which combination of springs addressed this condition better - going up in front spring rate or down in rear spring rate (to get the rears to grip better)? Then work on shocks.
Depending on 1-way, 2-way, etc., fix everything to the middle position except one setting at one end. IE, all middle except rear compression. Then do some laps with the rear compression at minimum. See what that feels like. Then set rear compression to maximum. See what that feels like. Now, your butt is tuned in to what rear compression damping changes feel like. Do the same for all the settings. Now you know what they feel like. Now chose some settings (all middle?) and get used to the car. Decide which of those feelings you felt before that you want more of now. More rear rebound? front rebound?
At least then you'll have a baseline to work from. Now you can apply all that book and internet knowledge - the car is transferring weight to the rear too quickly - do I want to increase rear compression or increase front rebound to slow that down?
Of course, you'll need a friend and a tire temp gauge (preferably a probe type), and you'll need him to sit right at the pit entrance, so you can come in as hot as possible, to get tire temps. After you have the basic setup done, start logging temps. See how the temps change across the tire (inside/middle/outside). Adjust your camber accordingly, but first make sure you have little to no toe (otherwise, you won't know if heat is coming from scrubbing due to toe - it takes more experience and knowledge to start differentiating temps caused by different factors). If the middles are not in-line with the insides and outsides, maybe add or subtract some air. Find out, first, from the mfr, what pressures the tires work best at. Don't add air if it means you'll be over where the tires work best...
Anyway, yeah, it's easier to ask "what spring rates should I use," but my guess is that 99% of the people who give you an answer probably haven't done all the setup work themselves. They're probably guessing or quoting from some of the very few people who have done the work. And... even if they have, if you go through the above process, by the time you finish (a few weekends, at least), you'll know more about chassis setup and you'll have more first hand experience with handling issues than just about everyone who goes to the track, races, or even low end professional race teams.
After this exercise, if you're at a new track, and there's a decreasing radius, off camber turn, that you've never experienced, and it leads onto the fastest straight, so time gained here is more important than time elsewhere on the track, and you'll start to remember - the car is overloading that outside front... I fixed that last time by slowing the transfer to that tire... I can do that by increasing rear rebound or front compression, but when I do that...
And you'll be another step ahead of your competition.
Have fun, 'cause it ain't worth it if it ain't fun!
Joel Gat
GOTO:Racing
| trhoppe | 06-11-2006 06:42 PM |
I'll respond with a few of my opinions in a bit, but just wanted to
:golfclap:
to Joel's post :)
-Tom
:golfclap:
to Joel's post :)
-Tom
| Kostamojen | 06-11-2006 06:58 PM |
[QUOTE=Fitz]
Car setup:
The car's a MY00 caged-flared-gutted race only GC8 shod with 265/45/16's or 275/40/17's. Weighs in at 2650 pounds wet. Suspension is Koni yellows (standard length) with a GC coilover Kit. Spring rates are 400 lb front, 225 rear; 8" length F & R. Front camber plates; rear stock plates. Rear swaybar is a whiteline 18-20-22 set at 22 mm. Front bar is a stock 02 WRX bar (18 mm I believe). Other pertinent mods include a Cusco front LSD and a hair-dryer under the hood.
[/QUOTE]
Is that everything? What about lateral links, bushings, braces and such?
That 400/225 sounds odd...
Have you read up on center diff's too?
And I think Joels post should have a C/N stating: *DMS 50's* ;)
Car setup:
The car's a MY00 caged-flared-gutted race only GC8 shod with 265/45/16's or 275/40/17's. Weighs in at 2650 pounds wet. Suspension is Koni yellows (standard length) with a GC coilover Kit. Spring rates are 400 lb front, 225 rear; 8" length F & R. Front camber plates; rear stock plates. Rear swaybar is a whiteline 18-20-22 set at 22 mm. Front bar is a stock 02 WRX bar (18 mm I believe). Other pertinent mods include a Cusco front LSD and a hair-dryer under the hood.
[/QUOTE]
Is that everything? What about lateral links, bushings, braces and such?
That 400/225 sounds odd...
Have you read up on center diff's too?
And I think Joels post should have a C/N stating: *DMS 50's* ;)
| Patrick Olsen | 06-11-2006 08:18 PM |
Very nice post, Joel, some good stuff in there. I'm one of those guys who can recommend spring rates, but I haven't done all that tuning stuff, so don't listen to me, Fitz. :) I will say the 400/225 split seems pretty big, but I know you know how to drive, so if you say the car rotates I'll believe you.
As for fixing the Konis, I just had mine done by [url=http://www.truechoicekoniracingservices.com]Truechoice[/url]. I had the fronts shortened for more bump travel, and had all four revalved to match my 300#ish spring rates. It cost me around $700-800 (I'm too lazy to go find my receipt). I haven't gotten them back on the car yet, but I'm really interested to see how the new valving feels. Anyway, just wanted to throw out a dollar amount so you have some idea what to expect to pay. Oh, and I went with Truechoice because their turn-around time was around 2 weeks, while Koni was running around 7-8 weeks (that's as of about two months ago).
Pat
As for fixing the Konis, I just had mine done by [url=http://www.truechoicekoniracingservices.com]Truechoice[/url]. I had the fronts shortened for more bump travel, and had all four revalved to match my 300#ish spring rates. It cost me around $700-800 (I'm too lazy to go find my receipt). I haven't gotten them back on the car yet, but I'm really interested to see how the new valving feels. Anyway, just wanted to throw out a dollar amount so you have some idea what to expect to pay. Oh, and I went with Truechoice because their turn-around time was around 2 weeks, while Koni was running around 7-8 weeks (that's as of about two months ago).
Pat
| leecea | 06-11-2006 11:32 PM |
Isn't a 12k spring exactly in the 600-800 range? I don't see anywhere where he says 1200lb front springs.
| TheWRX | 06-12-2006 01:22 AM |
[QUOTE=leecea]Isn't a 12k spring exactly in the 600-800 range?[/QUOTE]
Yes. 12 kg/mm = 672 lb/inch.
Yes. 12 kg/mm = 672 lb/inch.
| Joel Gat, 1.8L | 06-12-2006 01:39 AM |
Hello,
Sorry, no units were posted so I read it wrong. Nonetheless, everything I said applies...
Joel
Sorry, no units were posted so I read it wrong. Nonetheless, everything I said applies...
Joel
| buzz367 | 06-12-2006 01:49 AM |
i say we see more pics of that orange beast! :)
| Fitz | 06-12-2006 11:37 AM |
Jesus Joel.. I don�t know what I did to honor such an in-depth reply, but if you�re ever on the East Coast during a hillclimb weekend, bring your driving shoes. ?
I�ll try and answer as logically as I can.
The modifications to the car have progressed over time. Initially, the car was a daily driver, used for auto-x, rally-x, various track days and a hell of a lot of back road spirited driving. It was turbo�d to fix the 165hp issue. Flared post the 2002 One Lap to combat lack of rubber and caged for both chassis rigidity and safety.
Through this time period, the suspension has seen various iterations eventually morphing away from auto-x/rally-x and toward more high speed tarmac. Unlike everything else I do in life, I don�t have a notebook recording my impressions with various spring rates, swaybar settings, or tire pressures. Frankly, I�m not sure if it would have mattered as my driving style was still heavily morphing up until probably a year or two ago.
Early on I adopted a fast in � hard left foot brake through mid corner � and hard on the gas coming out. Essentially throwing the car through turns. This technique worked well for me on both track days and hill-climbs and I was usually in the top three in class. The hillclimb line isn�t as conventional due to the elevation change mid-corner or the sharpness of the turn, sometimes as much as 170 degrees. Increase the rubber width from 225 to 275, throw in an additional ~150 hp.. now we�re having some fun. It took an �off� at Mt Okemo and the wisdom of Michael Wilson, Charlie North, and Roy Hopkins to point out that while my technique did have a place in life, it certainly isn�t every corner on every race track.
Fast forward a year or two where I began to consistently work on corner entry, throttle modulation, and a much more conventional line. Spring rates increased from 225F/200R to 300F/225R and finally 400F/225R. Front swaybar remained stock up until this year, rear swaybar setting varied between 18-20-22 settling on 22 for most everything but ice racing. A Whiteline ALK was added to the mix with negligible change noticed. The front LSD was an experiment that happened to be dropped in my lap. I liked how the car pulled coming out of the hillclimb corners (especially with the 275 series tires) and moved it from my spare transmission to the one I usually run.
The reason for the trip down memory lane? While I�d love to have the level of data that Joel is requesting, my previously inconsistent driving style, the fact that test and tune opportunities with a minimal number of variables weren�t readily available, and having to share the duties of the car between daily driving, auto-x, rally-x, hillclimbs, One Lap, etc didn�t lend well to structured data collection. The only data I have, is how the car felt entering and exiting corners, whether they be off-ramps or turn 3 at loudon. If I found an increased level of grip, the modification stayed on. If I found understeer or slower than desired corner speeds, the modification usually was reversed.
That being said, I�m not looking to carbon copy someone else�s ideal track setup. I am looking to revisit my starting point settings, drive the car, and morph from there. I�d prefer to not change more than one thing at a time however realize that increasing the spring rates and having the shocks re-valved goes hand in hand. All this being said, where should I start? 600-800? 500-700?
[QUOTE]Anyway, just wanted to throw out a dollar amount so you have some idea what to expect to pay.[/QUOTE]
That's great Pat. I'll factor it into the budget. Much appreciated.
Thanks,
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
I�ll try and answer as logically as I can.
The modifications to the car have progressed over time. Initially, the car was a daily driver, used for auto-x, rally-x, various track days and a hell of a lot of back road spirited driving. It was turbo�d to fix the 165hp issue. Flared post the 2002 One Lap to combat lack of rubber and caged for both chassis rigidity and safety.
Through this time period, the suspension has seen various iterations eventually morphing away from auto-x/rally-x and toward more high speed tarmac. Unlike everything else I do in life, I don�t have a notebook recording my impressions with various spring rates, swaybar settings, or tire pressures. Frankly, I�m not sure if it would have mattered as my driving style was still heavily morphing up until probably a year or two ago.
Early on I adopted a fast in � hard left foot brake through mid corner � and hard on the gas coming out. Essentially throwing the car through turns. This technique worked well for me on both track days and hill-climbs and I was usually in the top three in class. The hillclimb line isn�t as conventional due to the elevation change mid-corner or the sharpness of the turn, sometimes as much as 170 degrees. Increase the rubber width from 225 to 275, throw in an additional ~150 hp.. now we�re having some fun. It took an �off� at Mt Okemo and the wisdom of Michael Wilson, Charlie North, and Roy Hopkins to point out that while my technique did have a place in life, it certainly isn�t every corner on every race track.
Fast forward a year or two where I began to consistently work on corner entry, throttle modulation, and a much more conventional line. Spring rates increased from 225F/200R to 300F/225R and finally 400F/225R. Front swaybar remained stock up until this year, rear swaybar setting varied between 18-20-22 settling on 22 for most everything but ice racing. A Whiteline ALK was added to the mix with negligible change noticed. The front LSD was an experiment that happened to be dropped in my lap. I liked how the car pulled coming out of the hillclimb corners (especially with the 275 series tires) and moved it from my spare transmission to the one I usually run.
The reason for the trip down memory lane? While I�d love to have the level of data that Joel is requesting, my previously inconsistent driving style, the fact that test and tune opportunities with a minimal number of variables weren�t readily available, and having to share the duties of the car between daily driving, auto-x, rally-x, hillclimbs, One Lap, etc didn�t lend well to structured data collection. The only data I have, is how the car felt entering and exiting corners, whether they be off-ramps or turn 3 at loudon. If I found an increased level of grip, the modification stayed on. If I found understeer or slower than desired corner speeds, the modification usually was reversed.
That being said, I�m not looking to carbon copy someone else�s ideal track setup. I am looking to revisit my starting point settings, drive the car, and morph from there. I�d prefer to not change more than one thing at a time however realize that increasing the spring rates and having the shocks re-valved goes hand in hand. All this being said, where should I start? 600-800? 500-700?
[QUOTE]Anyway, just wanted to throw out a dollar amount so you have some idea what to expect to pay.[/QUOTE]
That's great Pat. I'll factor it into the budget. Much appreciated.
Thanks,
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
| DrBiggly | 06-12-2006 12:41 PM |
Fitz,
Could you detail any changes about the Whiteline ALK? I'm not a fan of it and still believe that underneath all of the hype about removing anti-lift/anti-dive it's still just a bushing. (Can respond in PM as well.)
Joel Gat: I've found some of this myself in a simple autox setup as far as the springrates/bars bit but you've gone into a fabulous level of detail. That single post is without a doubt a great asset to folks looking to understand more about their racing setup. :)
-Biggly
Could you detail any changes about the Whiteline ALK? I'm not a fan of it and still believe that underneath all of the hype about removing anti-lift/anti-dive it's still just a bushing. (Can respond in PM as well.)
Joel Gat: I've found some of this myself in a simple autox setup as far as the springrates/bars bit but you've gone into a fabulous level of detail. That single post is without a doubt a great asset to folks looking to understand more about their racing setup. :)
-Biggly
| Fitz | 06-12-2006 01:01 PM |
[QUOTE=DrBiggly]Fitz,
Could you detail any changes about the Whiteline ALK? I'm not a fan of it and still believe that underneath all of the hype about removing anti-lift/anti-dive it's still just a bushing. (Can respond in PM as well.)
Joel Gat: I've found some of this myself in a simple autox setup as far as the springrates/bars bit but you've gone into a fabulous level of detail. That single post is without a doubt a great asset to folks looking to understand more about their racing setup. :)
-Biggly[/QUOTE]
-Biggly, the only benefit I've observed on my end is that the ALK is easy to source used and cheap. It is a poly bushing verses the OEM rubber bushing. I understand the math behind how it's supposed to work, but fundamentally haven't observed substantial differences.
Over the past few years, I've tried to source parts that may be needed trackside. The other ALK I have is currently bolted to a set of control arms and resides in the tow rig. I think I paid $100 for the set of control arms with the ALK and much less than that for the ALK that's currently on the car.
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
Could you detail any changes about the Whiteline ALK? I'm not a fan of it and still believe that underneath all of the hype about removing anti-lift/anti-dive it's still just a bushing. (Can respond in PM as well.)
Joel Gat: I've found some of this myself in a simple autox setup as far as the springrates/bars bit but you've gone into a fabulous level of detail. That single post is without a doubt a great asset to folks looking to understand more about their racing setup. :)
-Biggly[/QUOTE]
-Biggly, the only benefit I've observed on my end is that the ALK is easy to source used and cheap. It is a poly bushing verses the OEM rubber bushing. I understand the math behind how it's supposed to work, but fundamentally haven't observed substantial differences.
Over the past few years, I've tried to source parts that may be needed trackside. The other ALK I have is currently bolted to a set of control arms and resides in the tow rig. I think I paid $100 for the set of control arms with the ALK and much less than that for the ALK that's currently on the car.
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
| sachilles | 06-12-2006 04:17 PM |
Just an FYI. You may want to look into our events at SLMP (SCCV). Checked out the link to your website.
Reason I suggest this is that its a great event to test and tune a setup on a small road course.
The next one is the first weekend of July.
Reason I suggest it is that it is run similar to an autocross or a hillclimb. The exception being that you get 3 consecutive laps to see how a setup is working for you. The "track" is only 3/4 of a mile long. No walls to hit etc. Therefore, if a setting is completely wrong and you go off the track rear end first...there is very little risk of damaging the car(trust me, I know :lol: ).
You end up with a large amount of seat time, more than a neha hillclimb.
Downside is that your car will not be able to use tires with a treadwear rating below 80 due to the track owners rules.
Track was designed for karts, and as a result was built without cars in mind. Heavy cars, with r compounds equals a damaged track.
[IMG]http://alavigne.net/slmp/images/SLMPTrack3_med.jpg[/IMG]
average track width is 28 ft.
Event is only $100 for the weekend for members, so its worth the $$.
Free camping on site.
details at [URL=http://www.sccv.org]SCCV.ORG[/URL]
You will also have several neha regulars there to gauge your progress against.
PM if you want more info.
Reason I suggest this is that its a great event to test and tune a setup on a small road course.
The next one is the first weekend of July.
Reason I suggest it is that it is run similar to an autocross or a hillclimb. The exception being that you get 3 consecutive laps to see how a setup is working for you. The "track" is only 3/4 of a mile long. No walls to hit etc. Therefore, if a setting is completely wrong and you go off the track rear end first...there is very little risk of damaging the car(trust me, I know :lol: ).
You end up with a large amount of seat time, more than a neha hillclimb.
Downside is that your car will not be able to use tires with a treadwear rating below 80 due to the track owners rules.
Track was designed for karts, and as a result was built without cars in mind. Heavy cars, with r compounds equals a damaged track.
[IMG]http://alavigne.net/slmp/images/SLMPTrack3_med.jpg[/IMG]
average track width is 28 ft.
Event is only $100 for the weekend for members, so its worth the $$.
Free camping on site.
details at [URL=http://www.sccv.org]SCCV.ORG[/URL]
You will also have several neha regulars there to gauge your progress against.
PM if you want more info.
| ToddStratton | 06-12-2006 05:13 PM |
I'll throw in my 2 cents...
Take a look at the 2-way competition setup from KW. The 3-way are even nicer, but I have no experience with them. Reasonable, IMO, and lots of adjustability in the dampers and in the springs that are available. They have a nice PDF completely describing them here: [url]http://www.kw-suspension.com/en/30_Products/30_KW_Competition/40_Racing-Catalog/index.php[/url]
Also, the BergCup is a hill climb series here in Germany that KW is a main sponsor of. Lots of experience setting up hill climb cars...check it out: [url]http://www.berg-cup.de/[/url]
I am extremely happy with mine. I have 100 nm (560 lb) up front and 90 nm (513lb) in the rear. Stock sways and just bushings (rear and lateral links, steering). Ride on the road is surprisingly supple--not jarring at all, even with the rebound turned up. Turn it down on the way home...nice!
I'm just discovering the tip of the 2-way adjustability iceberg, but I'm loving it. The biggest drawback I've noticed so far is the lack of rear droop. I haven't measured, but probably only 3-4 inches or so. I haven't gotten to that being a problem on the track, though.
My car basically goes to the track and back...It's a great setup that always gets compliments when I give PAX laps.
edit: re-read and don't want it to sound like a KW add. Just want to point out there are good options that give you 2-way adjustability for reasonable prices. I feel pretty good about my spring rates, and I left my dampers on the same settings for hundreds of track miles before I started really stepping through changes like Joel mentioned (I don't measure tire types yet, because Ithere is no safe way to get a "quick" pit stop at my "local" track.)
Also would like to push the trailing and lateral link bushings...super stuff.
Todd
Take a look at the 2-way competition setup from KW. The 3-way are even nicer, but I have no experience with them. Reasonable, IMO, and lots of adjustability in the dampers and in the springs that are available. They have a nice PDF completely describing them here: [url]http://www.kw-suspension.com/en/30_Products/30_KW_Competition/40_Racing-Catalog/index.php[/url]
Also, the BergCup is a hill climb series here in Germany that KW is a main sponsor of. Lots of experience setting up hill climb cars...check it out: [url]http://www.berg-cup.de/[/url]
I am extremely happy with mine. I have 100 nm (560 lb) up front and 90 nm (513lb) in the rear. Stock sways and just bushings (rear and lateral links, steering). Ride on the road is surprisingly supple--not jarring at all, even with the rebound turned up. Turn it down on the way home...nice!
I'm just discovering the tip of the 2-way adjustability iceberg, but I'm loving it. The biggest drawback I've noticed so far is the lack of rear droop. I haven't measured, but probably only 3-4 inches or so. I haven't gotten to that being a problem on the track, though.
My car basically goes to the track and back...It's a great setup that always gets compliments when I give PAX laps.
edit: re-read and don't want it to sound like a KW add. Just want to point out there are good options that give you 2-way adjustability for reasonable prices. I feel pretty good about my spring rates, and I left my dampers on the same settings for hundreds of track miles before I started really stepping through changes like Joel mentioned (I don't measure tire types yet, because Ithere is no safe way to get a "quick" pit stop at my "local" track.)
Also would like to push the trailing and lateral link bushings...super stuff.
Todd
| zzyzx | 06-12-2006 06:00 PM |
It took me a minute to figure out why Joel went on a rant about high spring rates... a unit mixup. I agree that springs in the 600-850 range sounds reasonable.
The 8611 is an excellent shock and can handle the rates you intend to use: you will not need to revalve them. Depending on how old your 8610s are, you may not need to revalve those for the higher rates, either.
You haven't mentioned whether your tires are R compounds or not. That's an important detail, IMO. Ultimate grip levels you attain need to be addressed by sufficient roll stiffness.
If I assume that the surfaces can be rough, rutted, etc, then I don't think I recommend going over 700F & 500R. Your GC8 (like mine of similar weight), will tend to get unsettled over big bumps. For a racing on unknown or unpredictable surfaces, lower rates are preferable. So are smaller (or no) bars. I wouldn't recommend a reversed rate (higher in rear than front) setup unless there's a specific issue you're trying to address. The chassis will stay more composed if the rates resemble the F/R weight distribution of the car.
Your bottoming out issue could very well be a indication of too little bump travel than it is of too soft a spring rate. You should measure your front bump travel and post it. My guess is that it's just not enough. Either way, it's hard to know w/o the measurement. That said, I'm a little suprised that you can bottom out and yet not have your tires contact the inner fender area, etc (read: Damn, I need flared fenders!).
Another thing to consider is using tender springs. They IMO fit your application well: where you want a lower initial spring rate to deal with road irregularities, but need more roll resistance through a corner. I've noticed that the use of tender springs rarely comes up here on NASIOC for some reason.
In summary: Use only enough spring to avoid handling issues (e.g. bottoming out) and only enough shock to control the spring and keep the wheels on the ground where they belong. I personally prefer not to sacrifice mechanical grip for "feel" (e.g. lightning quick transitional response from ghettofabulously large swaybars...).
At any rate, using the Konis (8611 or 10) with rates < 700 will result in a very compliant ride that tracks well.
- Steve
[url="http://zzyzxmotorsports.com"]Zzyzx Motorsports[/url]
The 8611 is an excellent shock and can handle the rates you intend to use: you will not need to revalve them. Depending on how old your 8610s are, you may not need to revalve those for the higher rates, either.
You haven't mentioned whether your tires are R compounds or not. That's an important detail, IMO. Ultimate grip levels you attain need to be addressed by sufficient roll stiffness.
If I assume that the surfaces can be rough, rutted, etc, then I don't think I recommend going over 700F & 500R. Your GC8 (like mine of similar weight), will tend to get unsettled over big bumps. For a racing on unknown or unpredictable surfaces, lower rates are preferable. So are smaller (or no) bars. I wouldn't recommend a reversed rate (higher in rear than front) setup unless there's a specific issue you're trying to address. The chassis will stay more composed if the rates resemble the F/R weight distribution of the car.
Your bottoming out issue could very well be a indication of too little bump travel than it is of too soft a spring rate. You should measure your front bump travel and post it. My guess is that it's just not enough. Either way, it's hard to know w/o the measurement. That said, I'm a little suprised that you can bottom out and yet not have your tires contact the inner fender area, etc (read: Damn, I need flared fenders!).
Another thing to consider is using tender springs. They IMO fit your application well: where you want a lower initial spring rate to deal with road irregularities, but need more roll resistance through a corner. I've noticed that the use of tender springs rarely comes up here on NASIOC for some reason.
In summary: Use only enough spring to avoid handling issues (e.g. bottoming out) and only enough shock to control the spring and keep the wheels on the ground where they belong. I personally prefer not to sacrifice mechanical grip for "feel" (e.g. lightning quick transitional response from ghettofabulously large swaybars...).
At any rate, using the Konis (8611 or 10) with rates < 700 will result in a very compliant ride that tracks well.
- Steve
[url="http://zzyzxmotorsports.com"]Zzyzx Motorsports[/url]
| Draken | 06-12-2006 06:16 PM |
[QUOTE=sachilles]Just an FYI. You may want to look into our events at SLMP (SCCV).
-snip-
[/QUOTE]
Anyone get below 54 seconds yet?
Chris H.
-snip-
[/QUOTE]
Anyone get below 54 seconds yet?
Chris H.
| sachilles | 06-13-2006 08:58 AM |
[QUOTE=Draken]Anyone get below 54 seconds yet?
Chris H.[/QUOTE]
I think the lowest is mid 55 in a car(karts are lower).
I believe that 55 was an evo. STi's have been in that ballpark as well as a Lotus....and when the lotus comes back.....it should rip.
Fun event that I highly recommend to anyone. Good transition to a bigger track event.
I think 54 is doable by the right person in the right car. If R compounds were allowed with the heavier cars, I think it would have already happened.
Chris H.[/QUOTE]
I think the lowest is mid 55 in a car(karts are lower).
I believe that 55 was an evo. STi's have been in that ballpark as well as a Lotus....and when the lotus comes back.....it should rip.
Fun event that I highly recommend to anyone. Good transition to a bigger track event.
I think 54 is doable by the right person in the right car. If R compounds were allowed with the heavier cars, I think it would have already happened.
| Draken | 06-13-2006 11:14 AM |
I went out there twice, once with SCCV, and a second time with a group of Subie guys. I think we went in September. I managed several mid 54s. I had hoped to get back the following spring, as I had fine-tuned the suspension a bit, and gotten tuned. I have no doubt I could have been in 53s even on the stock RE070. And I would have loved to have tried the 275 hoosiers.
But I agree, it's a great track to get some experience on.
Chris H.
But I agree, it's a great track to get some experience on.
Chris H.
| sachilles | 06-13-2006 11:38 AM |
Hmmm, I must have met you at some point. Still don't remember anyone in the 54's though. Couple of years ago maybe?
I would have been there in my white Audi or my grey 61 mini.
Was your time there with sccv in a bugeye with NY plates?
It was about that time that Joe(the track owner) decided against the sticky tires....as he found out the track had accordianed near the corners from the heavy cars braking with sticky tires. Not an issue for us, but the kart folks have a tough time with it.
Sorry didn't mean to hijack your thread fitz.
I would have been there in my white Audi or my grey 61 mini.
Was your time there with sccv in a bugeye with NY plates?
It was about that time that Joe(the track owner) decided against the sticky tires....as he found out the track had accordianed near the corners from the heavy cars braking with sticky tires. Not an issue for us, but the kart folks have a tough time with it.
Sorry didn't mean to hijack your thread fitz.
| Draken | 06-13-2006 11:46 AM |
I ran with SCCV in June 2004 or something. Then a bunch of us Subie guys rented the track direct from Joe, it wasn't with SCCV. This was October 2004. BBC put together a big video: [url]http://www.rchampion.com/slmp_large.mpg[/url]
I have a silver 2004 STi.
Chris H.
ps: Fitz can suck it
I have a silver 2004 STi.
Chris H.
ps: Fitz can suck it
| sachilles | 06-13-2006 11:53 AM |
none of the videos on his site work at the moment.
[URL=http://sccv.org/results/slmp/slmp_27june2004.htm]june slmp results[/URL]
Did you do saturday only?
[URL=http://sccv.org/results/slmp/slmp_27june2004.htm]june slmp results[/URL]
Did you do saturday only?
| Draken | 06-13-2006 12:12 PM |
Looks like I ran the September 2004 SCCV event.
[url]http://sccv.org/results/slmp/slmp_05sept2004.htm[/url]
Then we went back in October.
Chris H.
[url]http://sccv.org/results/slmp/slmp_05sept2004.htm[/url]
Then we went back in October.
Chris H.
| sachilles | 06-13-2006 02:13 PM |
Ok...there you are, so you saw Nicks Lotus already.
He's doing a complete redesign on it. Biggest difference will be far more power. Displacement going from 1300cc to 1600+ with fuel injection. Suspension should be better etc.
Anyways Fitz, its a good event. The one in July is over half full.
He's doing a complete redesign on it. Biggest difference will be far more power. Displacement going from 1300cc to 1600+ with fuel injection. Suspension should be better etc.
Anyways Fitz, its a good event. The one in July is over half full.
| Sparvy | 06-13-2006 04:19 PM |
Do you have to be a SCCV member to attend this event or is it open to everyone
| Joel Gat, 1.8L | 06-13-2006 04:55 PM |
Hello,
Man, so much for creating a discussion on learning how to set up a race car :p
Joel
Man, so much for creating a discussion on learning how to set up a race car :p
Joel
| sachilles | 06-13-2006 05:02 PM |
[QUOTE=Sparvy]Do you have to be a SCCV member to attend this event or is it open to everyone[/QUOTE]
no but the entry fee is more.
no but the entry fee is more.
| Kostamojen | 06-14-2006 02:10 AM |
[QUOTE=Joel Gat, 1.8L]Hello,
Man, so much for creating a discussion on learning how to set up a race car :p
Joel[/QUOTE]
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Man, so much for creating a discussion on learning how to set up a race car :p
Joel[/QUOTE]
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
| Jack | 06-14-2006 10:00 AM |
Mark,
I think another avenue that's worth considering is to get a really experienced instructor in the passenger seat with you. Discuss ahead of time that your goal is to sort out your suspension setup. Guys like Bruce Allen, Stewart or Marty or Chris Tier or Dan Malek ......man...I can probably name 10 others....are good choices. I know that I've solved sway bar issues on the first lap after turn 2B for FastFood, years ago (too much front sway bar) just from the feel from the passenger seat. These guys all have a ton of track time and can likely help. You're probably not going to get numbers out of them, but general help like "do more sway bar" or "too little rear spring" is going to help. Your car is not typical in any measure, so you can't just get in a car with a guy who's running exactly what you have.
jack
I think another avenue that's worth considering is to get a really experienced instructor in the passenger seat with you. Discuss ahead of time that your goal is to sort out your suspension setup. Guys like Bruce Allen, Stewart or Marty or Chris Tier or Dan Malek ......man...I can probably name 10 others....are good choices. I know that I've solved sway bar issues on the first lap after turn 2B for FastFood, years ago (too much front sway bar) just from the feel from the passenger seat. These guys all have a ton of track time and can likely help. You're probably not going to get numbers out of them, but general help like "do more sway bar" or "too little rear spring" is going to help. Your car is not typical in any measure, so you can't just get in a car with a guy who's running exactly what you have.
jack
| DMS North America | 06-14-2006 03:19 PM |
Cool post guys.
-mark
[url]www.dmsnorthamerica.com[/url]
-mark
[url]www.dmsnorthamerica.com[/url]
| eclip5e | 06-15-2006 12:42 PM |
In order to keep your suspension geometry, you may want to check this out. They make some compelling products that'll allow lower stance without compromising suspension geometry or running higher spring rates to solve body roll problems.
[url]http://www.ikeya-f.co.jp/en/product_notice/foot_works.html[/url]
[url]http://www.ikeya-f.co.jp/en/product_notice/foot_works.html[/url]
| redsube' | 06-18-2006 12:47 PM |
Fitz, when i was reading your thread i was thinking to myself..... I wonder if this was the awesome orange GC i saw at an AX? Sure enough your pic answered my question. I saw your car a couple of weeks ago at Devens. The event right before the nationals. I was there racing my good friend's teal CRX. We were in the 4th heat so i had some time to really look at your whip. Its not often that i see a subaru so prepped for racing. My home SCCA is MoHud, NY. Mostly DD that race on the weekends. Seeing your car, got me really curious about your setup. Love your car!
Ok, now to get back to your original post.....
from your list of parts/mod a few things jumped out at me.
Rear spring rates
Front LSd
Front swaybar
My car is an 02 WRX that i race in SM <boost controller, thats it, little underclassed but whatev>
GC with AGX 7" springs 350F 250R GrpN mounts
whiteline 22mm adjustable <on middle setting for now>
endlinks
the differences in spring rates front and rear are greater than my setup. Have you thought of going stiffer in the rear? like 275-300 range? I know the cusco wangan street car rates are 391F and 289R
I have been debating on upgrading my front swaybar because i dont have a fLSD. everybody on here seems to love them but i find most people who do have STi's with a factory LSD. Ive raced several FWD and RWD with and without LSD. The cars with LSD run vastly different setup than those without. With that being said i think that you would really benefit from a larger front swaybar. maybe in the 22-26mm range. With a FLSD and stiffer front bar i think the car will pull itself back quicker after oversteer. That seemed to be the biggest difference with my friends CRX before and after LSD. the front wheels now just drag the car wherever you steer it!
Do you have upgraded strut mounts? i found that they really help the car with higher spring rates
Ok, now to get back to your original post.....
from your list of parts/mod a few things jumped out at me.
Rear spring rates
Front LSd
Front swaybar
My car is an 02 WRX that i race in SM <boost controller, thats it, little underclassed but whatev>
GC with AGX 7" springs 350F 250R GrpN mounts
whiteline 22mm adjustable <on middle setting for now>
endlinks
the differences in spring rates front and rear are greater than my setup. Have you thought of going stiffer in the rear? like 275-300 range? I know the cusco wangan street car rates are 391F and 289R
I have been debating on upgrading my front swaybar because i dont have a fLSD. everybody on here seems to love them but i find most people who do have STi's with a factory LSD. Ive raced several FWD and RWD with and without LSD. The cars with LSD run vastly different setup than those without. With that being said i think that you would really benefit from a larger front swaybar. maybe in the 22-26mm range. With a FLSD and stiffer front bar i think the car will pull itself back quicker after oversteer. That seemed to be the biggest difference with my friends CRX before and after LSD. the front wheels now just drag the car wherever you steer it!
Do you have upgraded strut mounts? i found that they really help the car with higher spring rates
| Fitz | 07-11-2006 08:53 PM |
[QUOTE=sachilles]Anyways Fitz, its a good event. The one in July is over half full.[/QUOTE]
Charlie North has had nothing but good things to say about this event since I began talking to him in 2001. I'll make it out there someday.
[QUOTE]Do you have upgraded strut mounts? i found that they really help the car with higher spring rates[/QUOTE] Fronts are Apexi aluminum camber plates with spherical bearings. Rears are group N. Thanks for the compliments. :)
So after researching Performance Blue Springs, Hypercoils, and Eibach, I opted for the heavier Eibach springs. Hard to beat $60 a corner. I purchaed a set of 7" 650lb for the front (up from 400lb's) and 8" 550lb for the rear (up from 250lb's). I also found a set of 7" 500lb on ebay for $25 shipped.
Yesterday/today I changed out the springs. I had forgotten what a p.i.t.a. it was to get to the rear top strut bolts with a cage and two fixed seats. Damn I'm getting too old to limbo in via the trunk. Front bump travel is about 1.5", Rear is 2.5". I left the rear swaybar setting at 22mm. A quick sprint around the block and everyting felt OK, but I didn't do anything foolish either. Frankly I was just listening for creaking or banging that shouldn't have been there.
I would have liked to go 675lb's in the front but Eibach only makes up to 65olb in a 7" spring. In talking with Koni, I'm going to run them and see how the dampening feels. I may have to send at least the fronts in for re-valving due to age/wear & tear/etc... If I do, I'll probably have them shortened 1-2" as well to promote a tad more bump travel.
I'll try and keep the thread posted come test day.
Thank-you all for your advice.
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
Charlie North has had nothing but good things to say about this event since I began talking to him in 2001. I'll make it out there someday.
[QUOTE]Do you have upgraded strut mounts? i found that they really help the car with higher spring rates[/QUOTE] Fronts are Apexi aluminum camber plates with spherical bearings. Rears are group N. Thanks for the compliments. :)
So after researching Performance Blue Springs, Hypercoils, and Eibach, I opted for the heavier Eibach springs. Hard to beat $60 a corner. I purchaed a set of 7" 650lb for the front (up from 400lb's) and 8" 550lb for the rear (up from 250lb's). I also found a set of 7" 500lb on ebay for $25 shipped.
Yesterday/today I changed out the springs. I had forgotten what a p.i.t.a. it was to get to the rear top strut bolts with a cage and two fixed seats. Damn I'm getting too old to limbo in via the trunk. Front bump travel is about 1.5", Rear is 2.5". I left the rear swaybar setting at 22mm. A quick sprint around the block and everyting felt OK, but I didn't do anything foolish either. Frankly I was just listening for creaking or banging that shouldn't have been there.
I would have liked to go 675lb's in the front but Eibach only makes up to 65olb in a 7" spring. In talking with Koni, I'm going to run them and see how the dampening feels. I may have to send at least the fronts in for re-valving due to age/wear & tear/etc... If I do, I'll probably have them shortened 1-2" as well to promote a tad more bump travel.
I'll try and keep the thread posted come test day.
Thank-you all for your advice.
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
| MPME | 07-11-2006 09:11 PM |
[QUOTE=Fitz]So I spent the majority of the evening searching various posts on spring rates, bump steer; essentially becoming very intimate with every post Tom and Gary have ever made.
People's thoughts?
Thanks,
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
[/QUOTE]
Feel free to shoot me an [[email�protected]]email[/EMAIL] off forum.
People's thoughts?
Thanks,
Fitz
[url]www.Flat4Racing.com[/url]
[/QUOTE]
Feel free to shoot me an [[email�protected]]email[/EMAIL] off forum.
| BIGSKYWRX | 07-11-2006 11:15 PM |
A point on the 8610's that Tom pointed out to me (via a discussion w/ Koni) is that the "newer" 8610's for the WRX are essentially maxed out in the front, the rears have a little room for revalving (up to the front rates).
I thought the 8610's were suitable for up to 350ish rates, very suprised to hear they are adequate for much, much higher rates- interesting.
Hill climbs while they share some similiarity to track use, seem to have their own set of "problems"- you mentioned some- extremely tight corners, very uneven (would have to guess often broken) terrain- definitely a few more hazards along the route :) I would think that travel would have to factor in as a important component.
I think you'll find rear rates approaching the fronts (as you've selected) will fair better overall vs a wide gap front to rear (your previous setup).
I might have missed it, but current ride heights?
Looking forward to hearing the results :)
I thought the 8610's were suitable for up to 350ish rates, very suprised to hear they are adequate for much, much higher rates- interesting.
Hill climbs while they share some similiarity to track use, seem to have their own set of "problems"- you mentioned some- extremely tight corners, very uneven (would have to guess often broken) terrain- definitely a few more hazards along the route :) I would think that travel would have to factor in as a important component.
I think you'll find rear rates approaching the fronts (as you've selected) will fair better overall vs a wide gap front to rear (your previous setup).
I might have missed it, but current ride heights?
Looking forward to hearing the results :)
| trhoppe | 07-11-2006 11:22 PM |
This is for the 8610-SPORT OTS Inserts into WRX housings and not the 8610/8611 shocks such as the one used in the zzyzx oilcovers.
If you look at the valving graphs of the Sport Inserts and the 8611 Race shocks, you will notice a VERY similar if not "identical" rebound curve, but a much more robust compression curve, with of course adjustability, in the 8611. The Sport insert has roughly half of the compression that the stock valving 8611 has.
-Tom
If you look at the valving graphs of the Sport Inserts and the 8611 Race shocks, you will notice a VERY similar if not "identical" rebound curve, but a much more robust compression curve, with of course adjustability, in the 8611. The Sport insert has roughly half of the compression that the stock valving 8611 has.
-Tom
| pio!pio! | 07-11-2006 11:42 PM |
A very small tidbit about the 8611 and digressive valving: they are digressive as standard now intead of an option.
source: [url]http://www.sr20forum.com/showthread.php?t=159502[/url]
source: [url]http://www.sr20forum.com/showthread.php?t=159502[/url]
| BIGSKYWRX | 07-12-2006 12:05 AM |
Tom- a little OT but was looking in the thread the other day where you had a bunch of the strut dynographs now seem to be gone-dy.
| trhoppe | 07-12-2006 12:10 AM |
Which thread was that? I thought I put em back....
-Tom
-Tom
| BIGSKYWRX | 07-12-2006 12:17 AM |
this was one- there was another, but can't remember which one that was (the mind is the first thing to go :))
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=825189&page=1&pp=25[/url]
[url]http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=825189&page=1&pp=25[/url]
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét