in this picture:



you see the tightly wound coils on the bottom...now i purchased a set of eibach sportlines and kyb agxs that were already put together...i installed them and thought nothing of them...now the way the guy put the springs on is the opposite of the picture and the tightly wound coils are on top...what adverse affects can happen because of this...ive been driving like that for a year and didnt notice anything bad thus far...are they definatly on upside down?

thanks for any help...

 

are you sure those are Eibach Sportlines? Every Sportline spring I have seen is red and does not have a difference in the coil spacing, hmm.
I think you may have Sprint Performance springs instead of what was advertised during the sale where you bought them from!

Which, in that case yes, they are installed correctly.

 

Sportlines would be red.

 

you guys read the paragraph wrong...i got my answer in a different post i made...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by vtecvoodoo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Sportlines would be red.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Actually i think form what i remember they are more of a maroon color...


But anyway,
Progressive wound springs, tightly wound section is always on the bottom. Same goes with Valve springs, as most (if not all Honda) OEM valve springs are progressive rate.

-s

 

A spring will compress the same whether you install it one way or another.

 

No.

On progressive rate springs the rate is increased the more the spring is compressed. The correct way to install progressive rate springs, is to have the tighter wound section at the bottom, of the perch or valve spring seat. (suspension springs/ Valve springs)

It doesnt matter on single rate springs, but progressives like the ones pictured above do matter.

-s

 

A progressive spring changes the spring rate depending on the amount of compression.

A spring will compress the same no matter which way its installed.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sander &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Actually i think form what i remember they are more of a maroon color...
</TD></TR></TABLE>

uhhh yeah ... do you know who you're correcting about the color of Eibachs? I think he knows a little about them

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sander &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
But anyway,
Progressive wound springs, tightly wound section is always on the bottom. Same goes with Valve springs, as most (if not all Honda) OEM valve springs are progressive rate.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Sorry you're wrong. As long as the top and bottom ID are the same it won't matter. The tighly wound coils could be in the middle and it would still behave the same as if they were at the top or bottom. They will still compress first, then when they make contact the other coild will start to compress.

 

Yeah, Im just joking about the spring colors.

As far as the whole progressive rate stuff goes. What you guys are saying makes sense, because a spring really is a spring no matter which way it goes on, (provided ID's are the same) although every engine building book and builder ive ever talked to (relating to valve springs) has told me to have the tighter wound portion of the spring at the bottom of the valve springs seat, not the retainer side. I dont doubt what you guys are saying is true, just when your idea of something that you have understood to be fact for quite some time is challenged, then i become alittle aprehensive. Sorry for coming out and saying NO like that. Just the way i had believed it was.

-s

 

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

Actually i think form what i remember they are more of a maroon color...

-s</TD></TR></TABLE>

They are called "ERS Red" if you want to get technical

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by sander &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...although every engine building book and builder ive ever talked to (relating to valve springs) has told me to have the tighter wound portion of the spring at the bottom of the valve springs seat, not the retainer side. I dont doubt what you guys are saying is true, just when your idea of something that you have understood to be fact for quite some time is challenged, then i become alittle aprehensive. Sorry for coming out and saying NO like that. Just the way i had believed it was.

-s</TD></TR></TABLE>

Interesting, it might be due to the weight of the dead coils pushing down on the rest of the spring, causing valve float?

 

When you start talking valve springs, most progressive springs are installed that way, not based on the way the spring rates act, but how the spring will perform, and also that the spring will be more stable having the tighter wound portion sitting on the cylinder head.

When you start talking a suspension spring, its a totally different animal.

 

yes, springs progressively wound will displace the same amount placed either up or down.

but technically there IS a difference. its about the amount of mass thats moving. when you consider a valve spring, those valve springs, rockers and what not are moving and cycling VERY quickly. if given the choice, you want less mass to be moving, so it very much makes sense you have the side that weighs less on the moving side, as opposed to moving the bulk of the spring mass.

for a suspension spring, it really doesnt matter. the difference comes in unsprung mass. but honestly, its not that big of a deal considering the relative overall weight of the total unsprung mass and the relatively very low amount of cycles. however, that doesnt mean theres not a 'better' way, and some ppl will do whatever they can to not give up any possible advantage, even the slightest.

so youre both right.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
but technically there IS a difference. its about the amount of mass thats moving. when you consider a valve spring, those valve springs, rockers and what not are moving and cycling VERY quickly. if given the choice, you want less mass to be moving, so it very much makes sense you have the side that weighs less on the moving side, as opposed to moving the bulk of the spring mass.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Not so much, the actual spring rate will drain power and affect the rpm range of the engine more so than the mass.

 

like i said, given the choice, you put the more massive end to the unmoving side. whether theres a difference, i dont care to quantify.

but i bet if you haphazardly installed the springs any which way on an IRL engine (if they are even progressive), youd get booted from the engine shop.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Tyson &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yes, springs progressively wound will displace the same amount placed either up or down.

but technically there IS a difference. its about the amount of mass thats moving. when you consider a valve spring, those valve springs, rockers and what not are moving and cycling VERY quickly. if given the choice, you want less mass to be moving, so it very much makes sense you have the side that weighs less on the moving side, as opposed to moving the bulk of the spring mass.

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

Yeah, exactly. I couldnt exactly remember why that was the case with valve springs. But its all coming back to me. Your right having all the larger part of your mass at the base of the spring thats compressing and decompressing that fast is more stable and more effiecient. Thanks for clearing that up.

-s