this is directed to those running higher rates up front than in back and still gets the car to rotate...been thinking about this (i have nothing to do in winter)

so what's your setup guys? car, swaybar size, allignment, staggered rims or anything helpful?

 

Off the top of my head I can think of a lot of different ways to get that to work. To my driving its not the optimal setup to me.

PM solo-x. He's probably the fastest auto-xer on that setup though.

Just some things that you can do to make it work.
1) Stagered tire size
2) Toe settings
3) Camber settings, more in front up to a point(more front grip), less in rear(get to rotate)
4) Rake(reight height f/r bias)
5) Tire pressures
6) Shock settings and valving
7) Weight transfer
8) Weight distribution


All of those are things I take into consideration when setting up my car. Thats why its so hard to just tell people the optimal setup, because its going to be different for every car.

 

If it works, is it "wrongly" biased?

Of course, I have no idea how people make that work. I tried something close to that on my Integra and it was AWFUL.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Catch 22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If it works, is it "wrongly" biased?

Of course, I have no idea how people make that work. I tried something close to that on my Integra and it was AWFUL.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I kindof wanted to try it on the Civic but now SCCA tells me whether my spring rates are right or wrong.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Catch 22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If it works, is it "wrongly" biased?

Of course, I have no idea how people make that work. I tried something close to that on my Integra and it was AWFUL.</TD></TR></TABLE>

well i meant "wrongly" because most people in the states think it is lol...been watching too many best motoring vids and if they set their cars like that i wonder why don't we

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by azian21485 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">been watching too many best motoring vids and if they set their cars like that i wonder why don't we </TD></TR></TABLE>

Its not just spring rates.

 

I wonder what kind of spring bias the FWD road racers use in Europe?

 

I used to run a front stiff setup and it took a lot of toe out in front to get that thing to turn. If I had kept that setup I would have also had to run narrower tires in the rear and raise the rear end to help get any oversteer. Just too many sacrifices had to be made.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by azian21485 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">this is directed to those running higher rates up front than in back and still gets the car to rotate...been thinking about this (i have nothing to do in winter)

so what's your setup guys? car, swaybar size, allignment, staggered rims or anything helpful? </TD></TR></TABLE>

Assuming you are talking about autox (which I believe is the case)...

I run 500/450, with the same bars/shocks/alignment that everyone else seems to run (ST rear, HF front, zero toe rear). Works for me.

The thing to remember is that once you have transferred all the weight in the rear of the car (i.e. inside rear wheel unloads), the F/R bias no longer matters. At that point, the extra rate in the front merely controls body roll. That's why I do it.

The rear unloading happens pretty fast on corner entry. Delaying it a bit gives a more stable entry, with more neutral cornering mid-turn. Less body roll in the mid-corner allows for less static negative camber, which allows for better acceleration off the turn (inside wheel is not so canted). It also helps in straight-line braking.

Hope that's not TMI.

--Andy

 

i'm a lot more front biased then andy is. a LOT. (like 700/550 itr bars front and rear) i run a touch of rear toe in, zero toe up front. -2.5* front camber, -1* rear camber. top secret shock valving. getting the car to rotate this year was NOT the problem. it handled good enough that even carrying around 200lbs extra weight then the ef's i could still run towards the front. (assuming the driver showed up) more shock development is happening this year to try and tighten the car up a bit more on entry. the car is also going on a diet. 50lbs is already gone, only 100lbs more to go!

nate

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by azian21485 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">this is directed to those running higher rates up front than in back and still gets the car to rotate...been thinking about this (i have nothing to do in winter)

so what's your setup guys? car, swaybar size, allignment, staggered rims or anything helpful? </TD></TR></TABLE>

NOTE: I track my car. I do not AutoX with it.

I run 12kg/mm front springs & 8kg/mm rear on a 99 prelude.

My alignment is about 1/16th" total toe out up front & some toe in on the rear.

Roll bars front & back are stock.

Wheels & tires are 15x7 and 225/50 all around.

The car overall has good grip but suffers from considerable understeer on off camber , hairpin (eg, off ramp at buttonwillow) but has considerable high speed stability -which I like.

Before I change my setup any further, the car really could use an LSD.

After that, I'll decide whether or not it needs more slow speed rotation.

One other thing to keep in mind is the length of the wheelbase; the same spring rates on a car with a 98" wheelbase might rotate just fine, while on a 101" wheelbase won't do diddly.


Modified by bb6h22a at 2:49 PM 2/3/2005

 

I also run a stiffer front setup. 600f/500r, stock front bar 22mm rear, 1/16th to 1/8th total toe out in front, 0 to 1/16th in in the rear. I also run 13x9's with 225 50's all the way around. And somehow the car still seems to rotate like mad.

Maybe Rodney will chime in on this as I know he also runs a stiffer front setup.

 

hmmm...i was always under the impression toe in in the rear would prevent the car from rotating? seems the other way around according to your setups...is this true?

 

THanx for posting Andy.

I am in the prosses of selling my 91 Civic (See Sig) that I ran the basic 400f/450r. BUT..This year I am working on a 88 CRX Si for STS2 and we will be running 375f/350r. This is due to the fact that the newer street tires will probably not have as stiff of a side wall, and that the CRX has a shorter wheel base. But other than that and figuring out the rear bar setting we should be close to the 91's setting.

We are also planning on playing with 205's on 7.5 wheels front, and 195's on 7's in the rear if the New Azenis is the tire to run... But we will see.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by azian21485 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...is this true?</TD></TR></TABLE>

no

BTW, ppl are mixing track setups with autox setups, the two are not really interchangable from my experience. A well setup track car won't be the utlimate setup at an autox and vice versa.

 

so...for those running toe in, whats your reasons for it? did the car wander too much with slight toe out? or was it snap oversteering?

sorry i didn't mention earlier but someone was right..this will be used for autox

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by El Pollo Diablo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">BTW, ppl are mixing track setups with autox setups, the two are not really interchangable from my experience. A well setup track car won't be the utlimate setup at an autox and vice versa.</TD></TR></TABLE>

i don't really agree with that statement. i won't get into it here though.

nate

 

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

i don't really agree with that statement.

nate</TD></TR></TABLE>

I do.
I've watched really fast raod race Hondas show up at autocrosses for years and they never ever beat the purpose built autocross cars. Doesn't matter who is driving them.

In Road Racing there is no need for a car that is stable through a slalom or can rotate quickly through a damned near 1st gear hairpin.
In autocross, you don't need a car to be stable through a 4th gear, 100mph sweeping right hander.

You can set up a car to be good at both, but it will excel at neither.

Scott, speaking from experience, not opinion.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Catch 22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You can set up a car to be good at both, but it will excel at neither.
Scott, speaking from experience, not opinion.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Ditto. An optimal road race FWD set up is a tail happy handful on a typical auto-x course.

 

im still very much new to this with only 9 hpde days under my belt but on my hatch (EG) i am using the jic flta2 coilover setup which is 10k and 7k , front and rear respectively. i dont have any sway bars or strut bars just the coilovers and it has worked great for me. all the instructors that have driven my car say that it is
pretty well set up and to me seems to rotate very well when needed.

as for alignment settings. im running a decent amount of toe in on the rear and almost none on the front. and about 1.8 degrees negative camber in the rear and 1.0 degree negative in the front.

misha

 

so what's with this toe in madness? a front biased spring rate, small swaybars, and no toe out in the rear...why does it rotate? i don't understand

 

450 f/350r

adjustable shocks do wonders.
full stiff rear full soft front and it has nice mild oversteer,

but I don't "race" so i'm sure my setup suxorz compared to others,
no swaybars right now also.

I have a 22mm progress bar in the mail,
and an oem 21mm sitting in my closet.
all going on asap!!!

I've found that changes to damping work betterthan fuddling with tire pressures
to help bring the butt of the car around.
using damping it feels like the car is oversteering, as opposed to the back just losing traction... (ok maybe it's the same **** but it don't feel that way )

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tad &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">450 f/350r

adjustable shocks do wonders.
full stiff rear full soft front and it has nice mild oversteer,

I've found that changes to damping work betterthan fuddling with tire pressures
to help bring the butt of the car around.
using damping it feels like the car is oversteering, as opposed to the back just losing traction... (ok maybe it's the same **** but it don't feel that way )</TD></TR></TABLE>

i'll second that.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by azian21485 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">a front biased spring rate, small swaybars, and no toe out in the rear...why does it rotate? i don't understand </TD></TR></TABLE>

You have to understand what each component does and how it would affect or be affected by other components in order to understand their setup.

One example is that they like to run lower offset wheel up front than the rear to make the front track wider (or use spacers). It would retard the front motion ratio so the spring rate has to go up to balance that out. So even tho the front springs are physically stiffer than the rear, in reality it might work softer than the rear.

 

If you race a front stiff road race car for a season and then swap springs for a rear stiff setup you will not go back again. Believe me. Why try to make a front stiff setup work well with band-aid fixes? Address the problem. So many people worship racers in Japan but I fully believe that if they brought those cars over here they would get their *** handed to them by good SCCA IT drivers with rear stiff setups. Hell, I run rear stiff on my street car. I can't imagine ever going back to pushing like a snout heavy pig in a front stiff race car again.