AS-R or ST sway for auto-x
Like tite says. 91 crx planning on running in sm2 class. current spring rates are 560 up front and 336 in rear. planning on running no front sway bar. Thanks
-Casey
-Casey
Planning on no front sway....isn't that more of a last resort to kill understeer?
ASR should be much stiffer. My Type R is about 3-4 times stiffer than the ST.
ASR should be much stiffer. My Type R is about 3-4 times stiffer than the ST.
...and why not run SMF? It is going to be ridiculously difficult to compete in SSM (formerly SM2) with a FWD 4-cyl...even if it's a Honda. SMF could use all the support it can get.
Edit: Sorry for the misinformation. The CRX is specifically excluded from SMF. My bad.
Edit: Sorry for the misinformation. The CRX is specifically excluded from SMF. My bad.
Last edited by JBrettHowell; Jan 13, 2010 at 09:56 AM.
I would go with the ST bar.
But it doesn't really matter what bar you go with if you stick with those spring rates. Those rates are going to be pretty terrible. You would be better off swapping the springs front to back (and then just keep your stock swaybars).
But it doesn't really matter what bar you go with if you stick with those spring rates. Those rates are going to be pretty terrible. You would be better off swapping the springs front to back (and then just keep your stock swaybars).
500/700, HF front bar, ST rear bar, 1/8 toe in rear, 0 toe front.
do that and your golden for a while. Otherwise follow this st guideline.
http://redshiftmotorsports.com/RedSh...ech%20Page.htm
do that and your golden for a while. Otherwise follow this st guideline.
http://redshiftmotorsports.com/RedSh...ech%20Page.htm
Trending Topics
Swapping springs, in my opinion, is a pretty bad idea given these very soft rates. Have you tried it with these kind of rates ? It sounds good on the internet, but 336/560 SR will feel pretty crappy....worst than 560/336 if you ask me. A rear bias can be fun/optimal, but not before you have some kind of front roll resistance....otherwise it's far from optimal, from what I have tried.
I also thought that the Progress/ST swaybar design were STIFFER than OEM style.....would someome care to explain what they affirm ?
Always thought that the straighter a bar is (for our Civic), the harder it is gonna be to twist it. The longer, 90 degrees arms of the OEM shape would be easier/weaker to twist than the progress design....no ???
I've had a 24mm progress, and I must say that it was incredibly stiff...very nice product. I've never tried the 24mm ASR in comparison though...please share !
I also thought that the Progress/ST swaybar design were STIFFER than OEM style.....would someome care to explain what they affirm ?
Always thought that the straighter a bar is (for our Civic), the harder it is gonna be to twist it. The longer, 90 degrees arms of the OEM shape would be easier/weaker to twist than the progress design....no ???
I've had a 24mm progress, and I must say that it was incredibly stiff...very nice product. I've never tried the 24mm ASR in comparison though...please share !
swapping aprings to 336 in front will suck. the softest i ever ran was 450 and that was too soft. 500-550 was nice.
as for the bar design, the st compared to the stock bar design is pritty close. there isnt much else to do design wise and still fit around the shock bodies and run an exhaust. obviousy its way larger than the coat hanger honda put back there.
as for the bar design, the st compared to the stock bar design is pritty close. there isnt much else to do design wise and still fit around the shock bodies and run an exhaust. obviousy its way larger than the coat hanger honda put back there.
I do agree that 330 front and 560 rear would suck. But with stock bars it could be pretty fast.
On the other hand 560 front and 330 rear would suck even more. And be REALLY slow no matter what bars you put on it. (EDIT - On second thought you might be able to make this work with either full toe out in the rear, or put crappy tires on the rear)
I think we would all agree that the best way to go is just to replace those 330lb springs. That would be a better investment than any swaybar!
On the other hand 560 front and 330 rear would suck even more. And be REALLY slow no matter what bars you put on it. (EDIT - On second thought you might be able to make this work with either full toe out in the rear, or put crappy tires on the rear)
I think we would all agree that the best way to go is just to replace those 330lb springs. That would be a better investment than any swaybar!
Last edited by Davidss; Jan 8, 2010 at 09:36 PM.
I wouldnt bother with the expense of the AST bar (and the exhaust compromise) unless the car was a trailered, nationally competitive car, and I was a nationally competitive driver.
The ST bar is a HUGE improvement over stock, its relatively cheap, and it works with most street exhausts. Put it on its stiffest setting, and enjoy.
The ST bar is a HUGE improvement over stock, its relatively cheap, and it works with most street exhausts. Put it on its stiffest setting, and enjoy.
Thanks for comments, I will replace my rear spring rates with something stiffer, get an ST rear sway bar and start searching for an hf front. Then I should be pretty golden. What about shock settings do I want them stiffer/softer f/r Thanks
-Casey
-Casey
If you're going to get some different springs, I'd recommend the 450#-500# range. I still think with 560# in the front no sway bar might be faster than hf, but you'll have to experiment to find out what works best for you.
Set the front shocks almost fully soft and the rears almost fully firm.
Set the front shocks almost fully soft and the rears almost fully firm.
just a note, when you install the ST bar, add and extra washer in between the U bracket so it spaces it out a bit more, and the bushing isnt binding the swaybar. it should be freely rotating by hand.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
PRKI-VTI
Road Racing / Autocross & Time Attack
4
Dec 16, 2007 10:05 AM
UltimX
Road Racing / Autocross & Time Attack
12
Jul 23, 2006 08:36 AM
ACRXGuy
Road Racing / Autocross & Time Attack
7
Mar 28, 2003 09:22 PM





