Xian

Odd... I've never had a problem with the jack tabs bending since they're reinforced. The pinch weld will absolutely bend though if you jack to either side of the correct spot.

mdb4879

Well, I've had them bend on other cars, so I haven't even tried on Hondas.

Xian

Gotcha. Yeah, they're plenty strong enough to jack off of if you need to and where I'd always put my jackstands. If you've got a low enough profile and long enough jack, jacking the car up off the front subframe and the rear tow hook is typically easiest, IMO.

mdb4879

I got my digital camber gauge yesterday and took some measurements just a little bit ago. Here's what I was able to come up with consistently:

FL Height - 4.5
FR Height - 4.5
RL Height - 4.125
RR Height - 4.25

FL Camber - -2.0
FR Camber - -2.5
RL Camber - -2.9
RR Camber - -2.6

I guess I wasn't as far off on height as I thought. This was measured to the jack points (thanks Xian). The front camber looks a bit crazy, though. I may try loosening up the subframe and pulling it to the left to see if I can't correct the camber some more before I lower it.

So the next event is in two weeks. I'm going to try to get it corner balanced before then. If I'm unable to, would it be a good idea to try to even out the front camber with height adjustment, or would that cause me more problems? As for the rear, I'm going to even out the height and raise it to 4.5" on each side, then set my camber. I'm thinking 2.9° is a bit too much. Should I shoot for 2.3-2.5 to start before making adjustments based on a pyrometer? Or what would be a good starting point?

The front I'll probably lower to 4", or to whatever would achieve a good amount of camber. What should I aim for on the front? About 3°? Hopefully I can even out the sides with the subframe adjustment.

Xian

I wouldn't use ride height to try and even out your front camber. The odds of ending up with really, really bad corner/cross weights is worse than having different camber left to right.

My $0.02 would be to sort out your ride height with both front and both rear shocks set to the same height at their respective ends (i.e. both fronts the same for X" high and both rears the same for Y" high). Next get it scaled and cross weighted. Once you've got the car scaled then adjust alignment (camber then toe). Once that's done, toss it back on the scales to make sure the cross hasn't shifted too much (it should have). If it's shifted, adjust the corner weights and then double check the alignment again.

There are a ton of ways to get the car balanced. I ended up adding more front camber (was around 4*) but ran a ton less rear camber (down around 1*). For autox, I'd pay more attention to how the car drives and how the tires wear/roll than a pyrometer. Ultimately, what worked for me and what I thought was driveable may not be your cup of tea. I had a couple other local folks drive my car and they couldn't (or could barely) get through a run without looping it. I thought it was "pretty good" but with a little inherent understeer.

PS
If you're just looking for an off the cuff camber setting then yeah... 3* front and 1.75-2* rear will work.

mdb4879

Yeah, I was just looking for a starting point to adjust from. The final camber will vary from driving style from what I've read. I hear that if one uses camber in the rear to make the car rotate, then less camber will feel different than more camber. Even if the total corner force is the same, the reaction will be different. I hear that a small amount of rear camber will have more initial grip, but will slide a bit more when it comes out (or something like that). Whereas more camber to lose grip will be more twitchy and have a greater tendency to come loose on corner entry, but then once the weight is shifted and body rolls, the camber helps to grab and regain control. I may be off on my description, but it seems like that's roughly what I've been told.

It seems like it'd be hard to judge how much camber to run based on tire wear because that can tend to be more long term. Then when it cokes to shoulder rollover, I thought that had more to do with tire pressure. Is there something I should know?

I was able to get the front camber more even from side to side with a subframe shift and the little bit of slack in the LCA mounting holes. With the front lowered another 1/2" I'm around 2.9° per side.

Xian

Sorry, I should have specified *front* camber based on rollover/wear and *rear* camber based on balance. So, add camber at the front until the tire looks happy and feels good. Take camber out of the rear to get whatever balance you're looking for.

You're right that a but ton of camber can be loose on entry and then tighten up as the car rolls/settles. IME, this was the approach that I had with my CRX and it worked reasonably well with the short, twitchy wheelbase. The EF hatch was in the middle; less rear camber than the CRX but more bar. The DC was less rear camber and more bar than the EF hatch. Given the Cadillac wheelbase of the EG/DC, the biggest issue I had was getting it to rotate...

donut.

Theres probably 39 other ways to get the balance you're looking for and you choose to do it with rear camber? What if it "feels good" with + camber? Is this an auto-x thing?

Xian

Yep, that's why I said there are a ton of ways to get the car balanced.

I've found that going with a "front stiff" spring setup, a decent amount of rear bar, and low rear camber settings works well for autoX where the surfaces aren't as smooth as a track. For a dedicated track car on R-comps, I'd suggest a different (rear spring bias, more rear camber) setup. Ultimately, tune the car for what's fastest for you.

mdb4879

Ok, so here's what I ended up with for now. I'll be doing my trailing arm bushings this weekend (weather permitting) so I'll probably have to go back and make some more adjustments.

Front Height - 4" to the front of the jack tab
Rear Height - 4.5" to the back of the jack tab

Front Camber - -2.9° per side
Front Toe - 1/16" in
Rear Camber - -2.2° per side
Rear Toe - 1/8" in

I decided not to go too low on the camber to start because I didn't want to make too big of a change (even though this whole process is a massive change ready). Hopefully before I had too much camber and I can just keep taking away some camber to gain grip in the rear.

I set the front toe to slightly in because I figure when I get in the car it'll straighten up some. Later I might try setting it with someone about my weight in the driver seat. But for now it feels good driving down the road. I've had some toe out before on this car when playing with it and I didn't like it. It wasn't as stable as my Speed3 was. That thing got a crisper turn in, but was didn't have any negative side effects with an 1/8" toe out. This thing, with 1/16" toe out (no driver) it feels a bit more responsive on turn in as expected, but the steering is very darty on throttle. Cruising you won't notice it, but if you're accelerating hard it like to jerk to one side or the other while you try to correct it. So for now I like the zero toe to slightly in feeling. Its still plenty responsive for me.

xotic_crx

I'll back up what Xian said about the front sway, I really didn't like my car without one. It was very vague on turn-in and slaloms. I'd take the trade of a bit of wheelspin for the better feel, turn in and calming the car down.

I guess I run the opposite, I like how mine's felt with more rear spring and bar with more camber (usually 2-2.5) out back. I've never driven one setup with a front spring bias though, so cannot give constructive feedback as to which is better.

mdb4879

I'll startlooking for a front bar then to try it out. They should be pretty cheap to source.

lsvautocross

Ive been autocrossing for about 6years now and only raced hondas started with a 95 integra and impressed a friend and been driving his DOHC ZC swapped CRX for about 3 years. In our region of Autocrossing Steel Cities SCCA and North Hills Sport Car Club Im know for drifting or usually driving to HARD and losing the rear end around. Most of the mistakes made with losing the rear is due to throttle lift in the bends, coming in to hot into the turn and not staying on partial throttle, in our FWD's you always want partial throttle to keep the car pulling the rear through the turns. We corner balance all our cars, but drive them to the events, once at the events I usually lower the car an equal amount on all four corners to help with the rotation, always make one adjustment at a time, test it out for a couple runs, most errors made are from us drivers over driving the cars, chalk your tires also and see how well they are making contact on the shoulders of the tires make sure your using the whole tire and make tire pressure changes accordingly. I now race a F20B swapped Integra in SMF and compete with our top runners with only having three events of seat time in the car, I have 13x10's on the front with 255 hoosier A6's with a 1 1/4" spacer for barrel clearance, and 13x8's with 225 hoosier A7's with 1" spacer on the rear, and the car is still tail happy if you go to hot and do full lift in mid turn.

Highly recommend just take it a little easier on the entrance of the turns and it will allow you to be on the throttle through the bends and out of them as well. Tire Pressures and VERY important on grip characteristics.

mdb4879

I had a local autocross yesterday, and I'm fairly pleased with the car now. It started out kind of tail happy (as I expected with some of the changes I made being more prone to oversteer), but with some small adjustments the car settled out pretty well. It's still a bit like walking on a knife edge to drive, though. The input it takes to get the rear to come out is almost where I like it, but how it comes out isn't to my liking. The loss of traction is very sharp and twitchy, rather than being gradual and smooth. Because of this I did have to change my driving a bit by making sire to brake a little early to always pull through turns and I did my best to not let the rear come out any unless it was in a position where I knew I could get back on the throttle. This makes it hard to determine how much of an issue I still have since I don't really try to let it walk out, but I was able to make it work.

I think I'm going to go from 500 to 550# springs in the front to help a little bit with the oversteer. If it does too much it'll be easy to regain oversteer. I also came to find out that Rivals are a dual compound tire and once they reach the wear bars they get considerably harder. That, plus last year's Rivals new are probably 0.5s slower on our courses than this year's Rival S, could be where my big time gap is. Still, I was pleased with my final scratch time which was 0.2s behind a National champ in an STF Mini and a little faster than a pro level BS C5 Corvette (my fastest time had a cone, but I barely nicked it so I'll still use that time for reference of what the car is capable of).

So are there any thoughts on what to do to make the oversteer more gradual and controlled. The car is fast if you get it right, but it's difficult to drive because of how careful I have to be. Im currently running 0 toe in the front with -2.9° of camber and 1/4" toe in on the rear with -2.1° of camber. Would 1/4" be too much toe for the rear? I meant to have it set at 1/8", but didn't realize it had changed when I made an adjustment a couple weeks ago and I didn't bother to change it at the event because I wasn't sure if it'd help or hurt. I also have new Moog trailing arm bushings. Given that the current setup should oversteer more than how I previously had it set, I feel that the rear suspension is doing it's job much better given that it's roughly just as balanced. Also, I had rotated my tires front to back, so the rears are more worn than the front. So it should have less grip back there and it's fairly well balanced. Aside from possible uneven tire grip, what would help change the characteristics of the type of oversteer I'm experiencing?

Another discussion, if I try to get new tires what should I go for? I hear a lot of people love the RE-71R, plus I heard the compound is the same all the way down. But I've heard they have a sharp slip angle and if my car is already twitchy then that wouldn't help. My next choice is the Rival S. They're more gradual with their slip and would be good on a twitchy car, but the compound changes at the wear bars. They do have 225/45 which I like, but even if I go to a 15x9 in the front I've been told it won't be much faster than a 205/50 RE-71R (I reckon because contact patch has more to do with tire pressure than anything and I don't think I'll need the faster cooling of a wider tire). Any opinions on the matter?

Here are two of my runs from yesterday. The first is my fastest clean run and the second is my fastest run with a cone. Then I have a comparison of the two. There was a 1.1s gap between those runs. I haven't figured out why there isn't any sound, but when I do I'll post a couple of my first runs which show how the oversteer is.

mdb4879

I edited my previous post with new YouTube links which have sound. Here are also the videos of my first two runs. It's hard to see what causes the oversteer, but the oversteer itself is much more visible. In my later runs, while the car had tamed down, it was still difficult to keep under control once it began to slide. So I found it best to change my driving to keep the rear end from ever walking out much in the first place for fear of spinning. It's still fast, but doesn't handle how I'd like.

Run 1, cold tires, 1/8" toe out in the front, I want to say 30psi in the front and rear tires. I also had a 200lbs passenger:


Run 2, 0 toe in the front, 31psi front tires, 30psi rear, I think I had a passenger this run as well:


On my fastest clean run I had a passenger as well, but my really fast run which I coned I went solo.

After thinking about it and talking with different people, I think the age and wear on my tires may be the culprit (or at least part of it). I was debating between going with the RE-71R and the Rival S ,but I just realized "hey, why not do both?" The RE71-R seems to be the favorite, and they have the same compound all the way down, but they don't have much of a slip angle and may cause my car to still be twitchy. The Rival S has a greater slip angle and is more forgiving, but changes compound about half way down. Perhaps I should try the RE71Rs on the front and the Rival S on the rear? The rear barely wears compared to the front, so I wouldn't care about the compound change because I'd never hit it. But my only concern now is would this create an odd balance between under and oversteer, with the rear tire grip being forgiving but the fronts breaking away more quickly at the limit? Or is this just some strange situation I've created in my head? I've driven RWD cars before that are balance so close to the middle that the rear may start to slide, but then using the throttle will induce understeer mid slide. Would a similar reaction be made in a FWD car? What are y'all's opinions on the matter and of running different tires front to back? I've seen it done on plenty of cars, but I've never known the reasoning behind the driver's decision.

I'm about to replace my front inner and outer tie rod ends, upper and lower ball joints, all the front bushings with polyurethane, and new Moog rear toe arms just to be sure that I don't have any play anywhere. After this, everything will be new so there won't be any question of worn suspension or steering. Depending on how the car reacts after this, the only things I'll have left to try is adding another 50# of spring to the front, changing my rear alignment, and different/new tires. Any thoughts?

Xian

I haven't seen/heard anything to indicate a compound change partway down on the Rival-S. In fact, the only person I know who's almost worn a set out has seen zero indication of a compound change. The RE71R on the other hand has had some conjecture on a compound change at the wear bars (~2/32nds left). A couple folks have suddenly had cars that are much twitchier than they were with a little more tread. Take it all with a grain of salt until more info comes out.

As to the handling, it looks to me like your car is relatively neutral with thrailing throttle oversteer. The times when it gets out of shape, it looks like you were neutral/off throttle and trying to turn the car. Add in wet pavement and some bumps... Yeah.

Was this with a front bar on the car?

Christian

mdb4879

I'll definitely be doing more research and getting opinions on this year's tires. I haven't heard much about the Rival S, the compound change was in reference to last year's Rivals which I'm running.

The pavement is actually dry, it's just a sealed lot. Which does change its characteristics (I've noticed it feels like the it has a decent amount of grip, but when you go over the limit the drop off is much steeper than on plain asphalt), but I've reidden in cars that handle how I should expect mine to, so I know it's not entirely the pavement. As I said, I can get the slide to start how I would like, but once the grip is lost the slide is very fast and twitchy. An STS car I rode in could bring the rear end out almost the same way as my car, but once it came out it was much slower and controlled to get more angle.

This was with no front bar on my car. I'll ask the STS driver if his car has a front bar, but I don't think he does.

mdb4879

I guess another way to put it is I'm use to a car that if you begin to slide from lift throttle or trailbraking you can still let your foot off the gas or even apply a small amount of brake and the rear end won't try to overrun the front. It'll maintain the same angle. This car, if it starts to slide, you 100% need to get back on the throttle immediately or else you will spin. There's not much room for error. If you don't have room to accelerate (as was pretty much the case on the last couple of turns on that course after the last slalom and straight), you'll be spun around. You can't use the slide to slow down into the turn.

Maybe I have a misguided view of how the car should behave and I'm just driving wrong and should change my driving because this is how a fast FWD is suppose to be? The last couple of runs my driving was different than it was last year in my Speed3. It wasn't how I'd like it to be, but it's still fast. Maybe I should just stick with that?