I'm building a heavy hatch daily driver. I'm not a gut it out and race it kind of guy. My '00 hatch has P/S, P/W, P/L, A/C, a very small system (one 12"), about 75-100lbs in extra dynamat/sound deadener, etc. It probably weighs 2400-2500lbs.

It has a B18C1 and will get a T3 Super 60 in the spring, looking for 250-275whp. Enough to go 12's on pump gas and still get 30mpg with good response.

ANYWAY...

In my quest to make the ultimate daily driver (not track car), I'm looking for a set of coilovers that will allow me to lower the car to the top of the tire, and have the BEST ride quality. By best I mean SOFTEST. I've known quite a few HT'ers that said their car rode great and I got in and was shocked at how stiff it was. I'll use an ASR brace and massive swaybar to control roll.. I'd like the car to absorb bumps for daily driving though. Stock ride is optimal, but obviously impossible.

That being said, I currently have a GC/AGX combo and it is too harsh, even with the AGX's on full soft. This was the previous owner's setup. I've had AGX's on other cars and always thought they were harsh.

To the meat... anyone who has had the following coilovers (hopefully both or all three) please chime in on ride quality..

**Edelbrock Performer IAS - at least one HTer said they were softer than GC/Koni, and the inverted shock has been used in high end motorcycles for best handling for some time...

**Tokico Illumina R (RAK) Coilover - I've had Illuminas on other cars with Eibachs and thought it rode great... I'm curious what Illuminas with their own springs ride like...

**Koni/GC - I hear these ride nicely, but my current AGX/GC setup is noisy as well. I tore apart the interior to lay down sound deadener and matt to make the inside quiet, and the noise drives me nuts. I'm afraid the Koni/GC will do the same. But if this setup is the softest, I might still be game.

All opinoins welcome, please comment only if you've actually owned one of the above setups, and compare it if you can.

THANKS!!!!

-Adam

 

BUMP

 

Anyone else? I'd really like opinoins on the Edelbrock setup...

 

Dropped to the point of flushed tires is a rather low drop, and will leave you with very little front suspension travel. A soft spring is the last thing you'd want, unless you like the sound of sudden metal to metal contact as you run out of suspension travel and your cd player skips from the jarring impact.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MormonBoy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">edit** i dont own any of the above but heres where im commin at.

get a nice set of springs that will give you a drop right above the tire (h&r race etc.) and some stock replacement shocks like tokico blues.

thats the best set up that i can think of given the ride height you want, and closest to stock ride quality.

as far as handling goes, it will handle a bit better than stock im sure. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Stock replacement shock will not be able to handle that low of a ride height without blowing, and will be underdamped before they blow, making the car bounce around after every bump in the road.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostd92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...That being said, I currently have a GC/AGX combo and it is too harsh, even with the AGX's on full soft. This was the previous owner's setup. I've had AGX's on other cars and always thought they were harsh...</TD></TR></TABLE>

Harshness of the ride is determined by the stiffness of the springs, not the shocks. All the shocks do is control the springs, and you either have enough shock or you don't for a given spring rate. Unless the AGX actually increase bump stiffenss with rebound, in which case, ew (my opinion anyway, some people seem to like to fine tune with bump adjustments).

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostd92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...**Koni/GC - I hear these ride nicely, but my current AGX/GC setup is noisy as well. I tore apart the interior to lay down sound deadener and matt to make the inside quiet, and the noise drives me nuts. I'm afraid the Koni/GC will do the same. But if this setup is the softest, I might still be game...</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'm using the Koni/GC combo. Again, the ride is entirely determined by your spring rates. Konis only adjujst rebound, so adjustments to the shock will not change how firm the suspension is, you have to tune that entirely with spring rate selection. If you want a soft ride, get soft springs. It shouldn't make any more noise than stock, unless you have polyurethane bushings or the GC upper mounts (top hats).

 

hrm... I have a one finger gap right now in the front and it never bottoms out with stock hats.. the ride is actually decent, too.

it's the rears that suck. My rears have 2 finger gap, they never bottom out but the right sucks and they noisy.

I've talked to several GC distributors and they all said that GC's are just noisy and to deal with it

I like how the Edelbrock is designed with a shorter shock, so it's not compressed to it's near limit at the height I'd want.

I think to make ride better I'm going to go with a slightly larger sidewall tire. Either a 205/45/17 or a 205/50/16. I currenlty have 205/45/16's

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostd92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">hrm... I have a one finger gap right now in the front and it never bottoms out with stock hats.. the ride is actually decent, too.

it's the rears that suck. My rears have 2 finger gap, they never bottom out but the right sucks and they noisy.

I've talked to several GC distributors and they all said that GC's are just noisy and to deal with it

I like how the Edelbrock is designed with a shorter shock, so it's not compressed to it's near limit at the height I'd want.

I think to make ride better I'm going to go with a slightly larger sidewall tire. Either a 205/45/17 or a 205/50/16. I currenlty have 205/45/16's</TD></TR></TABLE>

Noises from the back? Very strange. Mine only do in the front, and I'm 99% certain that its the GC upper mounts. The rubber spacer they provide looks like it would squeek a little as the spring rotates from compression. Only noises I hear from the back are from when my swaybar occasionally knocks against the shock bodies going over speedbumps with only 1 of the rear tires.

It sounds like you just have too stiff of a rear spring, if you don't like the ride feel they provide. Rear suspension travel should not a be a problem, even with a relatively soft spring back there. Check your trailing arm bushings, I can imagine they could make noise if they're shot. Alternatively, if you have replacement rear LCAs that came with polyurethane bushings and you have not kept them very well lubricated, they'll make a fair bit of noise. Poly swaybay bushings could make noise as well.

I considered larger tires as well, for ride quality, but didn't want to deal with the speedo being off. I know I'm going to go faster than the speed limit from time to time, but last thing I want is a ticket for 88 when I thought I was only going 80. 205/45-16 is the correct size for your car, stick with it. You'll lose acceleration with larger tires, in addition to the added rotational mass, because of the gearing change.

 

I'm not too concerned with wheel weight.. I'm going turbo in the spring. I only want to do high 12's, so a well tuned turbo setup will get me that EASY even with big wheels or a fat hatch.

I'll definitely replace all the bushings, all the way around with stock pieces... I'm afraid of the cost

 

Well... I've purchased a set of the Edelbrock IAS coilovers. I did some research and I like how they used the shock-fork trick in their design...the spring perch is right above the pinch bolt.

At any rate, a dedicated coilver with matching shock/spring has to be better than a pieced together system.

Next step is to get all the bushings replaced. I've got a date with my parts counter this week... hehe

 

you mean the shock is inverted. it doesnt give you any more shock travel. actually less. unless that bumpstop fits in that small cup.



im curious...

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostd92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">At any rate, a dedicated coilver with matching shock/spring has to be better than a pieced together system.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

and this simply is not a true statement.

 

Mind sharing how much you payed?

I'm interested also.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by edelbrock &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">250 lb/in front
150 lb/in rear
They are primarily a sporty street package.

It is possible to swap any Eibach 2.5" diameter spring onto the unit.
One
of our initial prototype sets is running 400lb/in springs at all four
corners and has run at willow springs with good results in that
configuration.
</TD></TR></TABLE>


really soft springs for the kit.

now i remember marauder had these.

another review.
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1200996

 

I remember him saying they were too soft for him.

Sounds perfect for me. And you can't have a soft riding coilover without a soft spring. You can't have a LOW coilover and soft spring without increasd suspension travel (or you'd be hitting the bumpstops all the time). I've talked with Marauder and he didn't have any of those issues at 2" drop...

 

cool. hope it works out for you.

let us know after a few months.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostd92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">At any rate, a dedicated coilver with matching shock/spring has to be better than a pieced together system.</TD></TR></TABLE>

If the damper is adjustable (on the rebound and sometimes more 'complex' compression adjustables are out there--double adjustables) how would it not be better if you can adjust the damper to whatever spring rate you choose to run? The Koni yellow sport shocks have great valving stock and great adjustability to go along with whatever spring rate you chose to use with them.

 

The biggest point is that the shock LENGTH is precise for the length of spring that particular dedicated coilover uses. That way, the shock is under optimal compression at lowered ride heights (instead of a shock made to be able to work with stock springs, that is nearly totally compressed at lowered heights)

 

In that case you'd get the SPSS3 valved and shortened Konis. If you are running a lowered ride height that would warrant the use of higher rate springs, then you'd only bennifit from the better SPSS3 vavling to go along with those springs and the shortened shocks would go right along with the shortened springs/ride height. From there you could step up to Koni 3312 or the uber customizeable 2812.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by t0p_sh0tta &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Mind sharing how much you payed?

I'm interested also.</TD></TR></TABLE>

First I tried some car dealership in Kentucky. They told me they were no longer available. Then I tried autopartswarehouse.com THESE GUYS SUCK!!! They farm out their customer service to other countries. I called 6 times just to try to get someone who spoke NATIVE English. No luck... so I settled for the guy that sounded like he had the best grip on the language.

So I was a dick and asked him 4 times specifically, "DO YOU HAVE THESE COILOVERS ON THE SHELF IN ****YOUR***** WAREHOUSE??" and every time he says, "yes, yes sir, no worries, we have 30+ warehouses." So I cave, and pay them $906 for the full set shipped.

So 4 days later I call and ask for my tracking number, after paying them, and another English-butcherer tells me, "Sorry sir, this is a high-demand item and we have to get it directly from the manufacturer."

I went totally APESHIT because I had already been told Edelbrock discontinued them, and now these monkeys would be screwing around with my money for a month before they figured it out and had to refund me.

So I swalled it and called Summit and Jegs. Oh!! how nice it is to talk to people who's first language is English and can understand the questions you're asking them. I got this really nice guy named Zach at Jegs and he physically called Edelbrock for me after seing in his catalog that the coilovers were "special order."

He called me back after 30 minutes and said he had gotten a hold of the people at Edelbrock. The coilovers for 92-00 civic front, and 96-00 civic rear are DISCONTINUED from Edelbrock, but the Edelbrock rep checked and they still had a full set in their inventory. He grabbed it for me and garaunteed I will see it within 4-7 business days. They were $45 more than the generic dot-com parts store, but peace of mind was worth every penny.

I'm excited after reading all the reviews on here and googling... sounds like these will make an excellent daily-driver setup. I just bought all new factory bushings for the entire rear end, so hopefully everything will ride smooth, low, and quiet

Thanks for all the input guys!

-Adam

 

haha, i was wondering how you got these since they were discontinued. i knew you had to have gotten left over inventory. but your story brought a chuckle...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TunerN00b &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I considered larger tires as well, for ride quality, but didn't want to deal with the speedo being off. I know I'm going to go faster than the speed limit from time to time, but last thing I want is a ticket for 88 when I thought I was only going 80.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I was curious about this, so I ran the numbers through a tire size calculator...

205/45/16 vs. 205/45/17..

Obviously the 17" is an inch taller overall. This is a good thing... that means 0.5" less gap between the top of the fender and the tire without lowering the car, and 0.5" higher ground clearance to the sideskirt... I have a c-west front bumper and sideskirts, so daily driving a car that's lowered to the top of the tire might be troublesome for me with the bodykit. An extra 0.5" of clearance would not be too noticeable from a dropped standpoint, but will help for bigger bumps...

To the speedo... the 205/45/17 is 4.3% too slow... That means when my speedo reads 60mph, I'll actually be doing 62.6mph

And when my speedo reads 80mph (like the guy who posted above), I'll actually be going 83.44mph

Not enough difference to get me in trouble. I'm fine with that.

FWIW, here's a pic of my car: well.. my car has (IMHO) ugly bronze 16" Rota C10's on it. They'll be sold to buy a set of white Rota 17" Battles. And I'll be painting the hood white and it has a stock spoiler.

 

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

Everyone knows that I am biased but if I can make a few observations on the external design without getting into the internals.

With the shock being mounted inverted like that with the spring perch sitting right against the Honda wishbone, there is a pretty major stress riser at the point where the assembly necks down to the 12mm diameter piston rod at the top of the front mount fork. We did this on some Honda racing shocks for awhile and stopped as we had a number of them bend badly at the point usually in relation to shome pretty big whacks (potholes, berms, etc.). Do be careful how you drive and not to hit to mush rough stuff. If allowed to bind or get off angle, that wishbone can become a large lever and the small 12mm rod doesn't have mich side strength. Make sure that you have a good bushing at the LCA and wishbone and no rotational load in the bushing so leave that bolt loose until the car is on the ground to reduce wind up in the bushing. Tightening the bushing with the car jacked up at max droop then putting it on the ground will add bushing preload.

Also, not that unlike the Honda upper spring mount and all other upright designs, all of the weight of the car and the inertia and energy of the moving suspension is borne by the single rubber bushing on the bottom side of your upper mount. In the stock and other situations, the springs and weight of the car are actually loaded directly onto the body shell with the normal upper mount and the upper and lower pin rubbers of the shock rod's upper mount only serve to locate the shock and not carry the weight of the car. With this inverted system, with the upper spring perch attached to the shock body, the car shell is not loded as normally. All weight and motion are carried by that small bottom pin rubber. Keep and eye on the condition of that rubber as it will be seeing extreme loading that it's type is really not meant for. Just keep tabs on it and be prepared to replace it periodically if/asit degrades likely pretty rapidly. If it does fail and binds, it can then put more mojo on the stress rise ont he bottom mount.

Inverted shocks can be great and have some advantage in the right applications but some with special designs like the Honda front need to be kept an eye on. Benn there, done that and don't do it anymore.

Just FYI to think about and keep an eye on.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CRX Lee &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Keep and eye on the condition of that rubber as it will be seeing extreme loading that it's type is really not meant for. Just keep tabs on it and be prepared to replace it periodically if/asit degrades likely pretty rapidly. If it does fail and binds, it can then put more mojo on the stress rise ont he bottom mount.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Thanks for the heads up. Fortunately, Edelbrock has been making these IAS inverted shocks for decades (and the IAS specific shocks since the 80's)... there are many setups out there with 50-100k on them with none of the problems you mentioned. Perhaps your experiences are limitted to your "race" car.

This car is a daily driver. It will never see an autox or roadcourse. Maybe the dragstrip once or twice a year.

The only stress the pin cup should see in normal conditions would be minimal side loading. The trailing arm and control arms LOCATE the bottom mount. Unless your bushings are extraordinarily loose (and I'm replacing all of them with new ones), the pin cup should not be allowed to move in any meaningful amount except in the range of motion that the shock/spring dictate.

I don't believe these coilovers were designed for abuse. Anyone doing their research will find that with spring rates of 250f/150r, they are going to be too under-sprung for anything besides mild spirited street driving.

I don't like to blindly back products... but in certain circumstances/companies, you can trust they do their research.. Edelbrock, having been around for 50+ years and having unlimited access to research processes, to me, was worth a leap of faith in this case.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostd92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't like to blindly back products... but in certain circumstances/companies, you can trust they do their research.. Edelbrock, having been around for 50+ years and having unlimited access to research processes, to me, was worth a leap of faith in this case.</TD></TR></TABLE>

does the fact that they discontinued them (for civic/integra) make a difference in your opinion?


Modified by Tyson at 9:12 PM 10/26/2006

 

Logically, that would make sense.

However, I've talked to Edelbrock, and they said they were discontinued because of lack of sales. They said the market was too heavily biased and saturated.

They're right... kids (especially Honda kids) buy a lot of parts for bragging rights (what moron pays $400-$500 for CTR door panels?? yikes...). Import kids aren't too fond about showing off their traditionally domestic car-part maker's parts. Perhaps if Tein, Omni, GC etc, didn't already have the market locked down they'd be more popular.

That, and my opinion that most Civic owners percentage wise, who have coilovers, have them to slam their cars... the spring rates on these coilovers won't allow for a tucked tire without bottoming out..

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostd92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Fortunately, Edelbrock has been making these IAS inverted shocks for decades (and the IAS specific shocks since the 80's)....</TD></TR></TABLE>

Although Edelbrock has been in the engine parts business for many decades, they are one of the newest companies in the shock business having just started in the late 1990s and leaving a lot of people scratching their heads as to why. They never made any shocks before they bought the Inertia Active System (IAS) from Ricor in the mid-'90s and spent many, many millions making a production facility. Ricor actually shopped their system and patent around to all of the world's shock absorber companies including Koni and no one bought it so they widened the range to non-shock companies and Edelbrock took it. They have only made the shocks for a very limited number of years with a pretty narrow application range and have not really had any market impact.

There have been a number of shock designs that try to improve handling control strength without sacrificing much if any ride quality and this inertia system is one like a number of electronic systems designed by Bose, Delphi's MR system on some Corvettes, Lotus' active suspension, etc. Some systems are better than others. KONi first developed the electronic controlled Continuously Variable Damping (CVD) system but it was too expensive for cars and is being used now on trains then now has the mechanical system Frequency Selective Damping (FSD) that we use in street cars and Formula 1 and Formula 3. Where the IAS senses inertia, the FSD senses the frequency (basically the duration) of the input.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boostd92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
The only stress the pin cup should see in normal conditions would be minimal side loading. The trailing arm and control arms LOCATE the bottom mount. Unless your bushings are extraordinarily loose (and I'm replacing all of them with new ones), the pin cup should not be allowed to move in any meaningful amount except in the range of motion that the shock/spring dictate.</TD></TR></TABLE>

The inverted system should hopefully see limited side loading in normal use but if it does, the only strength is in the 12mm rod. The pin cup/spring seat is a load bearing spot vertically but it offers almost no strength to side forces. The stress riser point where the rod meets the mishbone is the potneitla flex point. Think about a boxer punching something straight on. If everything is in line from his knuckles to his elbow, the full force is and will remain in the straight arm. If the wrist is allowed to become a potential flex point, then the impact blow becomes much weaker and there is risk of hurting the wrist as it takes most of the energy. A boxer with a weak wrist may hurt himself and his wrist more than his opponent. That point where the 12mm rod meets the lower attachment is the wrist and the length of the wishbone can become a lever to act on that flex point just like if you lengthened the distance from wrist to knuckle. So big impacts even on the street have the potential of making the system flex if somehow the load is not bourne in a completely linear manner. That is why we stopped doing it.

The lighter springs certainly show that the system is made for the street and not for racing and should help with ride quality. Also being softer sprung, it gives it more impetus to move vertically and not try to flex off angle into its weak point.

I am not trying to trash the products or dissuade you, just make sure that you are careful with what you already own so you can get the most out of it.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by CRX Lee &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Think about a boxer punching something straight on. If everything is in line from his knuckles to his elbow, the full force is and will remain in the straight arm. If the wrist is allowed to become a potential flex point, then the impact blow becomes much weaker and there is risk of hurting the wrist as it takes most of the energy. A boxer with a weak wrist may hurt himself and his wrist more than his opponent.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

I see your point, but I don't think your analogy is relevant. Perhaps if our hubs were attatched to the unitbody with rubber bands, or hardenned rubber rods, that would make sense. The boxer would have to have a bone from his fist to his chest and another bone from his fist to his waist. Then you can start talking about bending at the wrist being a problem for him or his opponent

Your logic and reasoning is sound. I think for this specific application, it may be a bit exaggerated. Just my two cents though... which don't count for squat because I have $950 invested in the product..hehhe