My civic got broken into for the 3rd time so i decided to help them out and remove the rest of the interior parts. i'm going to strip most of the interior parts and just make it a track car. the car is on jack stands with no suspension.. i'm going to purchase some gc/koni setup.

here's currently what i have in the car for suspension (or will have).. 97 Civc hatch dx.. switching out the front lower control arm to 99-00 si ones along with si swaybar. rear has st competition swaybar/tie bar combo. while it had the tein basics on there 450 lb f/225 lb r spring rates, the car had snap oversteer during lift or trailbraking.. i would think rebound is pretty soft on basics so don't know if having quicker rebound will fix it. i'm going to be swapping a b16 or b18 into the car. i'd like to keep the rear competition bar in there. with that said, what would be the ideal springs rates for the car?

i read up on that other thread concerning snap oversteer, but since i didn't have rebound adjustment, i couldn't experiment.. and since my car got broken into i couldn't try anything else anyway..

 

first off I would suggest NOT putting the 99-00 control arms and the sway bar on. That bar is WAY too big from my own experience on setting up my 00 si. If you're having snap oversteer with those spring rates its most likely your driving.

For a fast setup I would start at a spring choice that would most likely be VERY dangerous for you so I'm not going to recomend one. Start with what you have and get on track and drive. It'll make much more of a difference than just throwing parts at it.

Don't be afraid to modify the car a little bit as personal experience and figuring out what works and what doesn't will add to your knowledge to setup your car later.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ryan12321 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If you're having snap oversteer with those spring rates its most likely your driving. </TD></TR></TABLE>
i would have to agree if i was the only one driving.. but everyone that has driven the car has spun out (including 2 of the members that browse this forum).. only one national solo2 champion got it 90 degrees, but saved it after killing 6 cones so that's one person that didn't technically spin out yet..

i personally don't have a problem with the snap oversteer, i use it to my advantage to get around the course faster, even road course.. but i don't want more than what i have now.. not sure if it will help, but some quick info about me.. i've only been driving autox/track for about a year and a half, but i can drive pretty much all cars equally well.. fwd/rwd/awd..

any recommendation on spring rate will be fine, even dangerous .. i will adjust accordingly or adjust the spring rates.. the alignment setup for the civic was -3.1 f camber/-2.0 r camber (was going to add more neg. camber, but thieves interupted me before i had the chance).. 1/8" toe out.. i even had 1/16" toe in at the rear when it was snapping out..

..by the way.. just curious.. how many of you guys use those rear competition sway/tie bar combo? is it working for you well?

 

maybe the problem of the snap over steer is in something else and not the coil overs or sway bar.

check out al your bushings and such

 

I would suggest adding more camber. I'm thinking that theres so much roll in the rear, that the tires lose adhesion before the front ones. Sooo if you add more camber it would probably fix the problem.

 

Then my starting setup would be 600/800 with smaller front sway bar and 22mm rear bar. Camber around 2.7 in front and around 2.5 in back. Then tune from there. But thats just me. Theres a lot more detail that goes into it for toe, ride height, rake, etc.

You can't just name a perfect setup. It must be done thru development and testing.

 

You should start by saying what you're using the car for. The autocross people will tell you different settings than the track people.

I agree that the car shouldn't have had oversteer problems with that setup. If it did, then there's likely a problem with the car such as bad bushings, or odd toe settings.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JeffS &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I agree that the car shouldn't have had oversteer problems with that setup. If it did, then there's likely a problem with the car such as bad bushings, or odd toe settings.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Could it be as simple as rear tire pressure, or worn tires in rear after rotation?


-Chris

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ryan12321 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You can't just name a perfect setup. It must be done thru development and testing.</TD></TR></TABLE>
i agree.. just needed a starting point to begin then adjust from there..

i never really thought about the bushings being a factor.. i'll go ahead and swap them out to urethane ones.

the car will be used mostly for track.. some auto-x duties.. street driving will simply be to and from the track..

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by syclone &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
i agree.. just needed a starting point to begin then adjust from there..

i never really thought about the bushings being a factor.. i'll go ahead and swap them out to urethane ones.the car will be used mostly for track.. some auto-x duties.. street driving will simply be to and from the track..</TD></TR></TABLE>

don't do that to the RTA bushing

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

don't do that to the RTA bushing</TD></TR></TABLE>
because?

so replace them with oem bushings?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by syclone &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
because?

so replace them with oem bushings?</TD></TR></TABLE>

or mugen if you search in this forum the poly one will cause this snap oversteer also

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

or mugen if you search in this forum the poly one will cause this snap oversteer also</TD></TR></TABLE>
yeah, i read a lot of people in this forum recommending the mugen hard rubber one.. but i never came across the reason against the poly one..

thanks

 

BTW when Ryan12321 says 600/800 he means 600 front and 800 rear. Most autocross cars run a stiffer spring in the rear. That's why it seems strange that you are getting oversteer with your current setup. And while I agree with the comment about the poly trailing arm bushing if you are at stock height, it seems to work pretty well if you are lowered. I'm guessing because the rear suspension just doesn't move very much!

 

I hope I read your post correctly. This might be useless info, but here's my .02 cents...

The thing that stands out to me is the low spring rate out back (225) coupled with a large rear sway bar. Since cars tend to come this way from the factory (ITR), then I'd say that in itself isn't causing a problem. But possibly when couple with the substantially higher rates (450) up front?...

You're also working with an EK chassis. IMO they haven't even seen 10% of the development that the EG chassis has. Even though a lot of the EG suspension bolts up it truly is a different chassis. Ages ago, I was in an evolution school and Larry Fine was my instrutcor. I had just started in autox with my 98' DX hatch. It was bone stock. The only suspension mod I had was Eibach Prokits. Everything else, including tires was straight from the factory. Upon driving my car for a run or two Larry found the level of oversteer pretty shocking considering the state of the suspension. Unfortunately, it wasn't "good" oversteer, but snap oversteer during throttle lift and transitions. When I went with GC sleeves, 300f/400r rates, FRONT and rear ST sway bars (front sway bars aren't always a bad idea), and adjustable shocks, the problem went away completely and the car began to behave "normally". The spring rates were a compromise because I was still commuting in that car, so I didn't have quite the level of oversteer I was looking for. 400f/600r would have been just right I think.

 

i have 550front and 750 rear gc/koni setup and i dont have snap oversteer on my 94 civic cx. the only way i can get over steer is with trail braking! so i agree its weird that you are gettin oversteer something with that setup. no sway bars for me, yet. there must be another factor in your suspension causing that. i thought for sure i would get a lot of oversteer but my car just understeers.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by fsp31 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...When I went with GC sleeves, 300f/400r rates, FRONT and rear ST sway bars (front sway bars aren't always a bad idea), and adjustable shocks, the problem went away completely and the car began to behave "normally". </TD></TR></TABLE>
interesting.. that was helpful input.. the rear trailing arm bushings are about 2 1/2 years old so i'm hoping it's still good..

i already have front and rear st swaybars in the car.. so with this new info i'll take it one step at a time.. gc kit was ordered.. can't believe they don't carry koni's for civics.. if the snap persists, i'll put in new rta bushings..

i read up on the koni neuspeed edition.. shortened strut.. anything else different over the off the shelf koni's? is it worth the extra money?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by STS_Underdog &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">And while I agree with the comment about the poly trailing arm bushing if you are at stock height, it seems to work pretty well if you are lowered. I'm guessing because the rear suspension just doesn't move very much!</TD></TR></TABLE>

I also tent to somewhat agree here. I'm also not sure not having dynamic toe control is a bad thing either. I Have a set ready to install and see what I like.

It seems like its just an agreed upon thing here that they are bad. has anyone tried different toe settings and alignment settings to try and see if they could be good with further development?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by STS_Underdog &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> And while I agree with the comment about the poly trailing arm bushing if you are at stock height, it seems to work pretty well if you are lowered. I'm guessing because the rear suspension just doesn't move very much!</TD></TR></TABLE>

3 or 4 people with race prep'd cars commetend on this and one "karl" had this problem for a long time switch it out to a mugen one snap over steer went away

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">3 or 4 people with race prep'd cars commetend on this and one "karl" had this problem for a long time switch it out to a mugen one snap over steer went away</TD></TR></TABLE>

That could have been because you are getting rid of the dynamic toe which toes in the rear tires under compression. If he was having too much toe out that can definately make the car much looser.

To me it doesn't sound like anyone has taken the time to test other alignment options to see if with the right settings it could be a benefit. You wouldn't run many different tire brands and never change your alignment would you? Same thing. Think outside the box.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">or mugen if you search in this forum the poly one will cause this snap oversteer also</TD></TR></TABLE>

This another messageboard myth that you should stop perpetuating. I ran Urethane trailing arm bushings with no problems.

Everyone was happy with them until the almighty Jack said they were bad... and of course Scott wanted to be special and proclaim the same thing many months later.

My only point is, just becuase you've heard .RJ say they were bad about 500 times now doesn't mean that you should make statements like the one above, for which you have no personal experience.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JeffS &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This another messageboard myth that you should stop perpetuating. I ran Urethane trailing arm bushings with no problems.

Everyone was happy with them until the almighty Jack said they were bad... and of course Scott wanted to be special and proclaim the same thing many months later.

My only point is, just becuase you've heard .RJ say they were bad about 500 times now doesn't mean that you should make statements like the one above, for which you have no personal experience. </TD></TR></TABLE>

exactly my thoughts as well. I have not tried them yet so I can't say they are bad. I will be soon though.

I may find the same results they have, but the explanations I have read do not lead me to believe it is automatically a bad part. I do agree 100% it will not allow the suspension to work as honda designed it, but thats not neccesarily always bad.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by fsp31 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I hope I read your post correctly. This might be useless info, but here's my .02 cents...

The thing that stands out to me is the low spring rate out back (225) coupled with a large rear sway bar. Since cars tend to come this way from the factory (ITR), then I'd say that in itself isn't causing a problem. But possibly when couple with the substantially higher rates (450) up front?...

You're also working with an EK chassis. IMO they haven't even seen 10% of the development that the EG chassis has. Even though a lot of the EG suspension bolts up it truly is a different chassis. Ages ago, I was in an evolution school and Larry Fine was my instrutcor. I had just started in autox with my 98' DX hatch. It was bone stock. The only suspension mod I had was Eibach Prokits. Everything else, including tires was straight from the factory. Upon driving my car for a run or two Larry found the level of oversteer pretty shocking considering the state of the suspension. Unfortunately, it wasn't "good" oversteer, but snap oversteer during throttle lift and transitions. When I went with GC sleeves, 300f/400r rates, FRONT and rear ST sway bars (front sway bars aren't always a bad idea), and adjustable shocks, the problem went away completely and the car began to behave "normally". The spring rates were a compromise because I was still commuting in that car, so I didn't have quite the level of oversteer I was looking for. 400f/600r would have been just right I think. </TD></TR></TABLE>

So I'm not alone. I've been having the same exact problem!!!!!!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by JeffS &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

This another messageboard myth that you should stop perpetuating. I ran Urethane trailing arm bushings with no problems.

Everyone was happy with them until the almighty Jack said they were bad... and of course Scott wanted to be special and proclaim the same thing many months later.

My only point is, just becuase you've heard .RJ say they were bad about 500 times now doesn't mean that you should make statements like the one above, for which you have no personal experience. </TD></TR></TABLE>

i told him to search, and karl had this problem with his car. i told him too look around and see what others have had the problem with.

 

Man this is weird. I don't know why us EK people haven't come together on this before...

I'm definitely not up on the nuances of the EG chassis, but the "rumor" I've heard is that they were able to throw a lot more computing power at the design of the EK chassis (makes sense), so while it does weigh more, there is substantially less chassis flex. I'm not saying it's "really stiff", but compared to the EG it is. A friend built his SM project on an EG chassis. And even after replacing every bushing under the car with poly (all mine were original stock pieces), installing strut tower braces, and lower tie bars, he still complained that his car still didn't have the "feel" that my car had.

BTW, something I messed around with was that giant cross brace bolted in under the back seat. I took it out, but was never able to tell a difference in handling so I put it back thinking it might be against the rules to remove it. I also removed my rear strut tower brace because I just felt it didn't do anything. As for the big cross brace, I couldn't really tell whether it was for side impact protection, chassis stiffening, or both.

I'm still confused on the issue. I felt I fixed it on my car, but I have no idea why or how. I'll leave it to one of these engineers to explain it all to me. But in my case it's for posterity because the EK was stolen out of my driveway about 6 weeks ago. However, I've sourced an EG as a replacement with a JDM Type R motor in it (i wanna be like chris).

Edit: And the EG will be parked in the *garage*.