first event on new suspension: write-up
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
first event on new suspension: write-up
to those of you who care:
1994 Integra RS
STS
old suspension:
tokico blues with 253/123
ST 25mm/19mm sway bars
new suspension:
eibach/koni coil-overs
same sway bars
conclusions:
car has nill body roll...ok maybe a bit. but compared to my old set-up it feels like nothing. the car transitions better, maintains steady-state corning better, responds better to mid-corner inputs, overall just feels more buttoned-down and willing to do what i tell it to do.
only gripe i have is i have somehow developed a high speed (for autoX anyways) push. any suggestions on how to eliminate this? on the real i haven't even messed with shock settings, they are a 1/4 turn off soft in front and half-turn off hard in the rear. keep in mind this is the first time i have had any form of adjustment aside from tire-pressures and the nut behind the wheel
i was thinking that maybe i can solve some of my problems by swapping to a stock front sway bar or a stocker from a 92 Si...does anyone happen to know the sizes for either? i may just pull the endlink from one side thereby effectively eliminating the front sway bar at the next event.
anyways, that's that for anyone who is interested
cliffnotes:
new suspension in that i already liked on the street, i now love on the autoX course
1994 Integra RS
STS
old suspension:
tokico blues with 253/123
ST 25mm/19mm sway bars
new suspension:
eibach/koni coil-overs
same sway bars
conclusions:
car has nill body roll...ok maybe a bit. but compared to my old set-up it feels like nothing. the car transitions better, maintains steady-state corning better, responds better to mid-corner inputs, overall just feels more buttoned-down and willing to do what i tell it to do.
only gripe i have is i have somehow developed a high speed (for autoX anyways) push. any suggestions on how to eliminate this? on the real i haven't even messed with shock settings, they are a 1/4 turn off soft in front and half-turn off hard in the rear. keep in mind this is the first time i have had any form of adjustment aside from tire-pressures and the nut behind the wheel
i was thinking that maybe i can solve some of my problems by swapping to a stock front sway bar or a stocker from a 92 Si...does anyone happen to know the sizes for either? i may just pull the endlink from one side thereby effectively eliminating the front sway bar at the next event.
anyways, that's that for anyone who is interested
cliffnotes:
new suspension in that i already liked on the street, i now love on the autoX course
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re: first event on new suspension: write-up (Watkinsm3)
no you're not blind, i forgot to put them up....it's 380 in the front and 450 in the rear.
ok here's the thing, since i'm kinda on a limited budget here i'd like to try and work with what i have at my resources (READ: what i can get for free) which would be a smaller front sway bar or no sway bar at all.
i actually talked to a few of the local hot shoes (one of them was 2nd in STX at the Pro Finale) and he suggested running LESS pressure in the front and rear (i'm on azenis)
he suggested 30/32 for the pressures when i have been more at 40 in the front and 38 in the rear.
and i also have another question. all this talk of people being on their bumpstops and such (solo-x comes to mind as well as soloEF) my car is a half-inch lower than it was with the previous suspension and i am not even close to my bumpstops....does the DC2 and EG (i ran an EG at the divisional last week similiarly set-up to mine and it also has no bumpstop issues) just have more travel than an EF? or nate did you just lower your car more than stock koni's good handle?
<-----confused in St. Louis
ok here's the thing, since i'm kinda on a limited budget here i'd like to try and work with what i have at my resources (READ: what i can get for free) which would be a smaller front sway bar or no sway bar at all.
i actually talked to a few of the local hot shoes (one of them was 2nd in STX at the Pro Finale) and he suggested running LESS pressure in the front and rear (i'm on azenis)
he suggested 30/32 for the pressures when i have been more at 40 in the front and 38 in the rear.
and i also have another question. all this talk of people being on their bumpstops and such (solo-x comes to mind as well as soloEF) my car is a half-inch lower than it was with the previous suspension and i am not even close to my bumpstops....does the DC2 and EG (i ran an EG at the divisional last week similiarly set-up to mine and it also has no bumpstop issues) just have more travel than an EF? or nate did you just lower your car more than stock koni's good handle?
<-----confused in St. Louis
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,569
Likes: 0
From: MA
Re: first event on new suspension: write-up (carl_aka_carlos)
how do you know you're not even close to your bumpstops? if you are lowered any at all, i'd hazard a guess you're a lot closer then you think.
here's my take on what is going on. in short radius turns or transitions, your shocks are acting like added spring rate because the shock is resisting the short term chassis roll. you get the car into a steady state turn and about mid-corner the shocks have stabilized at whatever steady state terminal roll angle. unfortunately, this also means they've stopped acting like added spring rate. not enough front roll stiffness+not enough front bump travel=mid corner understeer. the car works fine in shorter radius turns and slaloms because the shock stiffness is keeping it off the bumpstops. make sense?
be careful who you talk to about sts cars. r-compound tires are very different then falkens, and unless you want _less_ turn in response i would stay away from lowering the tire pressures. for the weight of car you have, 40psi front sounds right. oh, and same thing applies to the front swaybar. you will find that if you go to a smaller front bar or no bar at all your car will respond slowly, understeer more (remember, you already have insufficient front roll stiffness), and basically handle like pooh on a stick. also, keep front toe out to a minimum. excessive front toe out can create a mid-corner understeer situation too.
some tips to make it rotate more: rear toe out. works wonders.
nate
here's my take on what is going on. in short radius turns or transitions, your shocks are acting like added spring rate because the shock is resisting the short term chassis roll. you get the car into a steady state turn and about mid-corner the shocks have stabilized at whatever steady state terminal roll angle. unfortunately, this also means they've stopped acting like added spring rate. not enough front roll stiffness+not enough front bump travel=mid corner understeer. the car works fine in shorter radius turns and slaloms because the shock stiffness is keeping it off the bumpstops. make sense?
be careful who you talk to about sts cars. r-compound tires are very different then falkens, and unless you want _less_ turn in response i would stay away from lowering the tire pressures. for the weight of car you have, 40psi front sounds right. oh, and same thing applies to the front swaybar. you will find that if you go to a smaller front bar or no bar at all your car will respond slowly, understeer more (remember, you already have insufficient front roll stiffness), and basically handle like pooh on a stick. also, keep front toe out to a minimum. excessive front toe out can create a mid-corner understeer situation too.
some tips to make it rotate more: rear toe out. works wonders.
nate
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re: first event on new suspension: write-up (solo-x)
ok....i don't quite understand how a shock can act like added spring rate?
and about the sway bar delete i had good results when we disconnected the front sway bar on the 92 Si, *but* we are running 70 lbs more spring in the front *BUT* it is lower than mine in the front.
i only have 1/8 overall toe out in the front, so it is pretty minimal.
maybe for the next even i'll try raising the car a half-inch and putting zip ties on the shaft to see just how close i'm getting?
and about the sway bar delete i had good results when we disconnected the front sway bar on the 92 Si, *but* we are running 70 lbs more spring in the front *BUT* it is lower than mine in the front.
i only have 1/8 overall toe out in the front, so it is pretty minimal.
maybe for the next even i'll try raising the car a half-inch and putting zip ties on the shaft to see just how close i'm getting?
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re: first event on new suspension: write-up (carl_aka_carlos)
oh yeah, the pressure advice came from someone running an STX car on the exact same tires as me. so he has obviously had some success
Trending Topics
Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
From: Johntown, NY, USA
Re: first event on new suspension: write-up (carl_aka_carlos)
I would agree with Nate on the understeer being from bottoming the suspension on the bump stops. I had that on my DSP Integra and kept adding front spring rate until it stopped.
I think what he means about the shocks acting as springs, is the compression damping slows down the suspension on the outside and the rebound slows down the extension on the outside. So long as it is still moving, the suspension has not hit the bump stop. In a short corner there is not time for the stiff shocks to reach their limits, so the spring does not bottom. In a long turn there is time and enough load for the suspension to reach a steady state.
Raising the front height or spring rate will eliminate the bottoming. Changing the back with toe out or stiffer sway bar will make it more unstable in quick manouvers(sp?) and may not be enough to stop the mid corner understeer. You would probably find it spins in quick offsets and still understeers in the big turns. It's what I tried on my car before changing springs and it became a spinmeister until I corrected the front.
Fix the end that is causing the problem. The front understeers, so stiffen it or raise it. If the car would not rotate, then stiffen the back or change rear toe.
I think what he means about the shocks acting as springs, is the compression damping slows down the suspension on the outside and the rebound slows down the extension on the outside. So long as it is still moving, the suspension has not hit the bump stop. In a short corner there is not time for the stiff shocks to reach their limits, so the spring does not bottom. In a long turn there is time and enough load for the suspension to reach a steady state.
Raising the front height or spring rate will eliminate the bottoming. Changing the back with toe out or stiffer sway bar will make it more unstable in quick manouvers(sp?) and may not be enough to stop the mid corner understeer. You would probably find it spins in quick offsets and still understeers in the big turns. It's what I tried on my car before changing springs and it became a spinmeister until I corrected the front.
Fix the end that is causing the problem. The front understeers, so stiffen it or raise it. If the car would not rotate, then stiffen the back or change rear toe.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,569
Likes: 0
From: MA
Re: first event on new suspension: write-up (Mohudsolo)
raising the front might make the car feel better, but it will probably be slower. i say this because raising the car will reduce the amount of negative camber you have, reducing the amount of grip you can generate, reducing the amount of body roll and thus reducing the outside front bottoming, instead of the correct approach of increasing front roll stiffness.
how important is camber? i run a tad over -2.0* and can generate enough grip and body roll with 700lb front springs and a 24mm front bar that -2.0 isn't enough static negative camber. however, having the camber and fighting bottoming induced understeer was better then having less negative camber and more suspension travel. enough so that i was 1.5s faster on a 70s course.
if you had success on the 92si with no front bar and that soft of a spring, please come show me how you did it. i've tried to run without a swaybar on multiple occasions, and even though i could run the same times i did with the bar attached, driving the car with a front swaybar was 10x's easier.
thanks for clarifying for me mohudsolo. you did a much better job then i!
i've found with my car and my driving style that the car is no more unstable with the rear toe out then it was with toe in. of course, i strive to be on throttle any time i have the wheel turned and only brake in a straight line. (even then i spend a considerable amount of time with the back of the car sliding.) for my car, rear shock rebound and tire pressure effects the transient stability much more then my alignment. (but my alignment isn't really that aggressive. just a tad toe out at both ends) i've found that i have to run the rear shocks much softer on courses with quick transitions as well as high rear tire pressures. slower speed stuff i can get away with a lot of rear shock and really low rear tire pressures.
this stx guy wasn't kC was it? silver wrx wagon? i've yet to hear of any nationally competitive stx cars running 30psi in their front tires, but i suppose it could happen. i have a picture of one of my rear tires being deflected about 1/2" inboard from the outside edge of the wheel when i had 28psi in it. that alone is enough for me to not try that low on the front tires. don't the dsp guys run like 38 psi up front on hoosiers? and that's with a _much_ stiffer sidewall.
nate
how important is camber? i run a tad over -2.0* and can generate enough grip and body roll with 700lb front springs and a 24mm front bar that -2.0 isn't enough static negative camber. however, having the camber and fighting bottoming induced understeer was better then having less negative camber and more suspension travel. enough so that i was 1.5s faster on a 70s course.
if you had success on the 92si with no front bar and that soft of a spring, please come show me how you did it. i've tried to run without a swaybar on multiple occasions, and even though i could run the same times i did with the bar attached, driving the car with a front swaybar was 10x's easier.
thanks for clarifying for me mohudsolo. you did a much better job then i!
i've found with my car and my driving style that the car is no more unstable with the rear toe out then it was with toe in. of course, i strive to be on throttle any time i have the wheel turned and only brake in a straight line. (even then i spend a considerable amount of time with the back of the car sliding.) for my car, rear shock rebound and tire pressure effects the transient stability much more then my alignment. (but my alignment isn't really that aggressive. just a tad toe out at both ends) i've found that i have to run the rear shocks much softer on courses with quick transitions as well as high rear tire pressures. slower speed stuff i can get away with a lot of rear shock and really low rear tire pressures.
this stx guy wasn't kC was it? silver wrx wagon? i've yet to hear of any nationally competitive stx cars running 30psi in their front tires, but i suppose it could happen. i have a picture of one of my rear tires being deflected about 1/2" inboard from the outside edge of the wheel when i had 28psi in it. that alone is enough for me to not try that low on the front tires. don't the dsp guys run like 38 psi up front on hoosiers? and that's with a _much_ stiffer sidewall.
nate
New User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
From: STL, MO, USA
Re: first event on new suspension: write-up (carl_aka_carlos)
for what its worth, I like the new setup.....I want one....
Its good to ride in an "autocross" car and see why these people keep talking about 450, 500, and higher rear spring rates.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
From: sd, ca, usa
Re: first event on new suspension: write-up (MattG)
Try going back to a stock front bar if you still have it. My Rex likes the Azenis around 38-40 front and about 34 or so rear. Still figuring out the victoracers. Running SM2 here.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re:
ok...so before when i had my car at 5.25 inches ride height from the jack tabs i only had 1.4 degrees of negative camber....now i'm 4.5 inches in the front and 5.25 in the rear so i obviously have more negative camber than before. my point here is that on my old set-up my car has worn the fronts pretty evenly telling me that something was working right. while body roll is our enemy, and correct me if i'm wrong here, don't those of us equipped with double wishbones benefit from a tad bit of body roll aka the camber curve??
i dunno...for sure i'm gonna try the free mods first aka 1) raise the car a tad and 2) disconnect the front sway bar, though i will admit i am very hesitant to do that dispite the success i had in the hatch. i don't know if i liked the trade-off in quick transistional response
on the whole i am very pleased with the new set-up. it's not like it pushes any more than it did before, it actually pushes less. and you can never really fully eliminate push on a FWD car, especially when we aren't allowed to run LSD's in STS
i dunno...for sure i'm gonna try the free mods first aka 1) raise the car a tad and 2) disconnect the front sway bar, though i will admit i am very hesitant to do that dispite the success i had in the hatch. i don't know if i liked the trade-off in quick transistional response
on the whole i am very pleased with the new set-up. it's not like it pushes any more than it did before, it actually pushes less. and you can never really fully eliminate push on a FWD car, especially when we aren't allowed to run LSD's in STS
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,569
Likes: 0
From: MA
Re: Re: (carl_aka_carlos)
are you using ots koni yellows? on my car, 5.25" measured to the jack tabs gave me somewhere between 1/4" and 1/2" bump travel measured at the wheel with ots koni yellows. i also had the bumpstops cut in half with that setup. with the shortened shocks and bumpstops that are trimmed only 1/4" i now have about 1.5" bump travel and my ride height now is 5".
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">and correct me if i'm wrong here, don't those of us equipped with double wishbones benefit from a tad bit of body roll aka the camber curve??</TD></TR></TABLE>
sort of. the camber curve we enjoy isn't as bad as a mac strut car, but it still isn't good enough that we gain the same amount of camber in roll that we loose. therefore we can run the front of our car's suspension a little softer then can someone with mac struts.
i'll stress one more time. reducing front roll stiffness to improve mid corner rotation will only work if you have excessive front roll stiffness in relation to rear roll stiffness to begin with. i strongly beleive your problem stems from insufficient front roll stiffness and bump travel. reducing your front roll stiffness will only make the car slower and understeer more. but, this is all just my personal opinion and should be treated as nothing more then that. i'm a strong supporter of trying different chit out.
nate
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">and correct me if i'm wrong here, don't those of us equipped with double wishbones benefit from a tad bit of body roll aka the camber curve??</TD></TR></TABLE>
sort of. the camber curve we enjoy isn't as bad as a mac strut car, but it still isn't good enough that we gain the same amount of camber in roll that we loose. therefore we can run the front of our car's suspension a little softer then can someone with mac struts.
i'll stress one more time. reducing front roll stiffness to improve mid corner rotation will only work if you have excessive front roll stiffness in relation to rear roll stiffness to begin with. i strongly beleive your problem stems from insufficient front roll stiffness and bump travel. reducing your front roll stiffness will only make the car slower and understeer more. but, this is all just my personal opinion and should be treated as nothing more then that. i'm a strong supporter of trying different chit out.
nate
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Doylestown, PA
Re: Re: (solo-x)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by solo-x »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
i strongly beleive your problem stems from insufficient front roll stiffness and bump travel. reducing your front roll stiffness will only make the car slower and understeer more. but, this is all just my personal opinion and should be treated as nothing more then that. i'm a strong supporter of trying different chit out.
nate</TD></TR></TABLE>
I second that...
I had similar problem last year.
i strongly beleive your problem stems from insufficient front roll stiffness and bump travel. reducing your front roll stiffness will only make the car slower and understeer more. but, this is all just my personal opinion and should be treated as nothing more then that. i'm a strong supporter of trying different chit out.
nate</TD></TR></TABLE>
I second that...
I had similar problem last year.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re: Re: (Watkinsm3)
ok....i can't tell you guys how much i appreciate all your input....
now....nate, you say you only had 1/4-1/2 bump travel? i just measured the bump travel on my car...a full 2 inches. i also have my bumpstops cut in half. so i'm starting to agree with you guys that i need more front roll-stiffness *BUT* how much do i want to put my ots koni's through? if i throw some 400s or 450s up front won't that make my roll couple dist. more towards the front? isn't that what we want to avoid. i was under the impression that we want the rear stiffer. period.
and how much spring rate is tolerable for a daily driver? are you pissin' blood yet nate? i'm willing to run only as much rate as my koni's can handle *AND* still allow me some rebound adjustment.
now....nate, you say you only had 1/4-1/2 bump travel? i just measured the bump travel on my car...a full 2 inches. i also have my bumpstops cut in half. so i'm starting to agree with you guys that i need more front roll-stiffness *BUT* how much do i want to put my ots koni's through? if i throw some 400s or 450s up front won't that make my roll couple dist. more towards the front? isn't that what we want to avoid. i was under the impression that we want the rear stiffer. period.
and how much spring rate is tolerable for a daily driver? are you pissin' blood yet nate?
i'm willing to run only as much rate as my koni's can handle *AND* still allow me some rebound adjustment.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re: Re: (carl_aka_carlos)
i just realized something...even if i had 450's all around the rear roll stiffness would still be higher due to the motion ratios. the wheel rates for the rear are gonna be higher. maybe i'll try some 450's up front. anyone got a set on the cheap?
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
From: Doylestown, PA
Re: Re: (carl_aka_carlos)
Thinking about it I am definitly starting to think that 2 inches of travel for a 380 might be a little soft. The easiest way to test is the zip tie method you mentioned. The conditions you described are definitly indicative of the front washing out.
For starters... just throw some zip ties on the front for a day during the week and you'll get a general idea of what kind of motion you're getting. If the zip ties are close/at the bump stops from just cruising on the street then you can be certain that you're all over them at an autox.
As for raising the front rates? I'm not sure 450 will help. Granted your RS is lighter then my GS-R but I was running 500 up front and the shocks (Konis at the time) were still bottoming out. Granted I think I had less suspension travel then 2 inches at the time... Let me look around the garage tonight and see what I have for springs. PM/IM tonight or something to remind me... I'm forgetful!
For starters... just throw some zip ties on the front for a day during the week and you'll get a general idea of what kind of motion you're getting. If the zip ties are close/at the bump stops from just cruising on the street then you can be certain that you're all over them at an autox.
As for raising the front rates? I'm not sure 450 will help. Granted your RS is lighter then my GS-R but I was running 500 up front and the shocks (Konis at the time) were still bottoming out. Granted I think I had less suspension travel then 2 inches at the time... Let me look around the garage tonight and see what I have for springs. PM/IM tonight or something to remind me... I'm forgetful!
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re: Re: (Watkinsm3)
well....i may pick up a set of 550's for the rear and put my 450's up front...but we'll see.
i did acutally raise the car while i was measuring bump travel, so now i a hair under 5 inches from the front jack tabs.
i think right now i'm just nit-picking....the car is infinitely better than before, oh well...at least it's easy to sway springs
i did acutally raise the car while i was measuring bump travel, so now i a hair under 5 inches from the front jack tabs.
i think right now i'm just nit-picking....the car is infinitely better than before, oh well...at least it's easy to sway springs
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,569
Likes: 0
From: MA
Re: Re: (carl_aka_carlos)
and up the spring rate ladder you go... no, i'm not pissin blood yet, but it's not the most cushy ride either.
how did you measure your front bump travel? i'm just curious because my car doesn't have that much bump travel at the stock right height with standard length shocks. with the shortened shocks i have just a tad under 1.5" bump travel and i'm at a 5" ride height.
nate
no, i'm not pissin blood yet, but it's not the most cushy ride either.how did you measure your front bump travel? i'm just curious because my car doesn't have that much bump travel at the stock right height with standard length shocks. with the shortened shocks i have just a tad under 1.5" bump travel and i'm at a 5" ride height.
nate
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re: Re: (solo-x)
maybe i measured the bump travel wrong, but with the front in the air and the wheel off i measured from the hub to the ground, the jacked up the front suspension until my bumpstops touched the top of the shock body and measured at the hub again....did a little subtraction and viola 2 inches.
well, i have definetly come to the conclusion that to properly set-up a DC2 chassis (w/o an LSD) i will have relatively high spring rates. the question is how much to i want to push on my koni's until i send them off for a rebuild?
well, i have definetly come to the conclusion that to properly set-up a DC2 chassis (w/o an LSD) i will have relatively high spring rates. the question is how much to i want to push on my koni's until i send them off for a rebuild?
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,569
Likes: 0
From: MA
Re: Re: (carl_aka_carlos)
yeah, you measured your total bump travel (really your suspension's entire articulation range) instead of the available bump travel at your static ride height. to measure that, first measure the distance from the center of the hub to the lip of the fender with the car sitting on the ground. then jack the car up, remove the wheel and the spring, then jack the suspension up until it hits the bump stop and measure from the center of the hub to the fender lip. the difference between these two numbers is your available bump travel once the suspension is compressed to the normal ride height, the number were _really_ interested in.
as for how high of a spring to run, i would say around 500-600lb-in on either end. i ran all the way up to 700lb rear springs on the ots valving and never felt short changed by the valving. ultimately i sent my shocks out because i wanted more suspension travel and while they were doing that i figured i would get the better valving too. don't get me wrong, the spss valving is frickin awesome and well worth the money, but it isn't immediately necessary. if i were you, one thing i would skip lunch for a couple weeks so i could afford would be the gc upper strut mounts. at only $75/pr they are an excellent way to increase available suspension travel without having to send the shocks out to have them shortened. and they have quite the bling factor.
nate
as for how high of a spring to run, i would say around 500-600lb-in on either end. i ran all the way up to 700lb rear springs on the ots valving and never felt short changed by the valving. ultimately i sent my shocks out because i wanted more suspension travel and while they were doing that i figured i would get the better valving too. don't get me wrong, the spss valving is frickin awesome and well worth the money, but it isn't immediately necessary. if i were you, one thing i would skip lunch for a couple weeks so i could afford would be the gc upper strut mounts. at only $75/pr they are an excellent way to increase available suspension travel without having to send the shocks out to have them shortened. and they have quite the bling factor.
nate
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,014
Likes: 2
From: Shiny side up dammit, MO
Re: Re: (solo-x)
i am definetly eye-ballin' the gc mounts. well, i have pretty much bought another set of 500s (just haven't sent the $$ yet) so i think i will next try 500 all around or just throw the 500s on the front since MY 500s are on my buddies civic and he is content with his set-up so i will be a nice guy and let him keep using them lol
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 6,805
Likes: 1
From: building H2 cars, NY
Re: Re: (carl_aka_carlos)
love the tech threads all this talk about bumpstop action got me thinking. when i installed my gc mounts, i could have swarn the car felt like it had more rotation and responded better to mid corner imputs (esp in sweepers). but i thought it was just me. i also remember the first event on the new set-up and the car felt awsome in sloloms, but crappy in sweepers. now i know why. i was on the bumpstops up front for sure. i run 400 up front with tokico illumina and the gc mount. it feels ok, but every time i autox it i swear i need more dampening and maybe more spring in the rear (300 now). but my local lot is very bumpy. i have yet to run a good course in a smooth lot this year with the sus sorted and me used to it. i'll have to measure my rideheight from the jack tab next week when i have the 15's back on and see how low i am in refferance to everyone else. a good way to find out how much travel u have is to put a small wheel ont he carlucky for me i can fit 13's on and see the top of the shock.
i'll hopefully be testing some coilovers for a friend's company and i think there gonna order them the way i want them, spring rate wise. so hopefully they will give me more insite to how i need to improve my set-up.
-spenc....workin on the set-up
all this talk about bumpstop action got me thinking. when i installed my gc mounts, i could have swarn the car felt like it had more rotation and responded better to mid corner imputs (esp in sweepers). but i thought it was just me. i also remember the first event on the new set-up and the car felt awsome in sloloms, but crappy in sweepers. now i know why. i was on the bumpstops up front for sure. i run 400 up front with tokico illumina and the gc mount. it feels ok, but every time i autox it i swear i need more dampening and maybe more spring in the rear (300 now). but my local lot is very bumpy. i have yet to run a good course in a smooth lot this year with the sus sorted and me used to it. i'll have to measure my rideheight from the jack tab next week when i have the 15's back on and see how low i am in refferance to everyone else. a good way to find out how much travel u have is to put a small wheel ont he carlucky for me i can fit 13's on and see the top of the shock.i'll hopefully be testing some coilovers for a friend's company and i think there gonna order them the way i want them, spring rate wise. so hopefully they will give me more insite to how i need to improve my set-up.
-spenc....workin on the set-up
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Superhatch
Honda CRX / EF Civic (1988 - 1991)
5
Dec 22, 2011 05:20 PM
thehatchninja
Honda Civic / Del Sol (1992 - 2000)
10
Dec 23, 2002 12:08 AM