Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 4,406
Likes: 0
From: Brooklyn, NY
Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates
I've noticed two schools of thought for spring rates on the Type-R. One school of thought is to make the rears anywhere from 0%-57% lighter than the fronts. The other school of thought is to make the rears 25% or so heavier.
Both cannot be right can they?
Stock: 246lbs-front and 161/246-rear <-- 50%-0% lighter rear
Tein Flex: 504/224 <-- 44% lighter rear
Tein RE: 743/559 <-- 32% lighter rear
Mugen Lowdown: 385/245 <-- 57% lighter rear
Buddy Club coilovers: 672/448 <-- 50% lighter rear
Typical GC/Koni Setup: 400-front and 500-rear <-- 25% heavier rear
My first question is why did the honda engineers pick to use progressive rates on the rear? I'm guessing what this does, is on hard sweeping turns, the rear will lower an inch or so until it gets to the 246lbs part of the spring. The rear being lower will create more traction for the rear, lowering the likelihood you will spin your car.
My second question is why dont aftermarket vendors use progressives on the rear? I could understand if the coilover vendors picked to have equal spring rates all around, but most are choosing a much lighter spring rate for the rear, similar to the % that the stock ones start at. This seems like it would cause the ITR to go from its natural neutral feel to understeering.
My third question is, why do GC users pick heavier rears? I understand the need to have the car rotate, but isn't that the job of swaybars? I would think that having too heavy in the rear on the street would cause the rear tires to lose contact with the road when there are imperfections in the pavement. Wouldn't it be better to run around 400/400 or a 400/300 with a slightly bigger rear swaybar?
Both cannot be right can they?
Stock: 246lbs-front and 161/246-rear <-- 50%-0% lighter rear
Tein Flex: 504/224 <-- 44% lighter rear
Tein RE: 743/559 <-- 32% lighter rear
Mugen Lowdown: 385/245 <-- 57% lighter rear
Buddy Club coilovers: 672/448 <-- 50% lighter rear
Typical GC/Koni Setup: 400-front and 500-rear <-- 25% heavier rear
My first question is why did the honda engineers pick to use progressive rates on the rear? I'm guessing what this does, is on hard sweeping turns, the rear will lower an inch or so until it gets to the 246lbs part of the spring. The rear being lower will create more traction for the rear, lowering the likelihood you will spin your car.
My second question is why dont aftermarket vendors use progressives on the rear? I could understand if the coilover vendors picked to have equal spring rates all around, but most are choosing a much lighter spring rate for the rear, similar to the % that the stock ones start at. This seems like it would cause the ITR to go from its natural neutral feel to understeering.
My third question is, why do GC users pick heavier rears? I understand the need to have the car rotate, but isn't that the job of swaybars? I would think that having too heavy in the rear on the street would cause the rear tires to lose contact with the road when there are imperfections in the pavement. Wouldn't it be better to run around 400/400 or a 400/300 with a slightly bigger rear swaybar?
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 30,826
Likes: 0
From: RIP Craig Jones
Re: Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates (jond)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by jond »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My first question is why did the honda engineers pick to use progressive rates on the rear?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Ride quality
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My second question is why dont aftermarket vendors use progressives on the rear? </TD></TR></TABLE>
Handling
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">but most are choosing a much lighter spring rate for the rear,</TD></TR></TABLE>
Safety (oversteering street cars in the hands of ham-fisted stunnas is bad)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My third question is, why do GC users pick heavier rears?</TD></TR></TABLE>
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=285747
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I would think that having too heavy in the rear on the street would cause the rear tires to lose contact with the road when there are imperfections in the pavement.</TD></TR></TABLE>
The inside tire is unloaded, doesnt matter whether its rolling on the ground or in the air.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Wouldn't it be better to run around 400/400 or a 400/300 with a slightly bigger rear swaybar?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Would be better to run both heavy rates and big bar
Ride quality
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My second question is why dont aftermarket vendors use progressives on the rear? </TD></TR></TABLE>
Handling
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">but most are choosing a much lighter spring rate for the rear,</TD></TR></TABLE>
Safety (oversteering street cars in the hands of ham-fisted stunnas is bad)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My third question is, why do GC users pick heavier rears?</TD></TR></TABLE>
https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=285747
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I would think that having too heavy in the rear on the street would cause the rear tires to lose contact with the road when there are imperfections in the pavement.</TD></TR></TABLE>
The inside tire is unloaded, doesnt matter whether its rolling on the ground or in the air.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Wouldn't it be better to run around 400/400 or a 400/300 with a slightly bigger rear swaybar?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Would be better to run both heavy rates and big bar
ProFunction/GT Motoring
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 0
From: IL
Don't forget that spring bias is only a small part of the equation.
Ride height, tire size(s), alignment settings, wheel offset, spacers would all affect the cornering behavior of a car as much, if not more, than spring bias alone.
Ride height, tire size(s), alignment settings, wheel offset, spacers would all affect the cornering behavior of a car as much, if not more, than spring bias alone.
Member
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 6,131
Likes: 0
From: Santa Rosa
Re: Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates (.RJ)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by .RJ »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
[quote=jond]
My second question is why dont aftermarket vendors use progressives on the rear
Handling
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Makes alot of sense, you wouldn't want the spring rates changing mid corner, causing any twitching or ???? Or am I way off?
[quote=jond]
My second question is why dont aftermarket vendors use progressives on the rear
Handling
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Makes alot of sense, you wouldn't want the spring rates changing mid corner, causing any twitching or ???? Or am I way off?
H-T Order of Merit
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 96,482
Likes: 38
From: Siege Perilous
Both schools of thought (heavy front vs heavy rear) are correct, depending on how you execute the rest of the design.
It's tempting to point to the nose heavy Spoon ITR as the ideal, because of their experience, but then you notice that they have 2.75 negative camber on the front and a huge swaybar on the rear.
For me (IMHO), it was just cheaper to go w/the heavier springs on the rear and let the front camber be decided by the drop.
Please note, however, that I am not exactly in the highest league of road course drivers. I'm just explaining what I did and you need to research what's best for you considering your budget and your intentions.
By the way, the Spoon DC5, EP3 designs are heavy springs in the rear. No idea if this has more to do w/economics or more to do w/the different suspension design.
How are King, Spoon and RTR setting up their TSX suspensions? Anybody know?
It's tempting to point to the nose heavy Spoon ITR as the ideal, because of their experience, but then you notice that they have 2.75 negative camber on the front and a huge swaybar on the rear.
For me (IMHO), it was just cheaper to go w/the heavier springs on the rear and let the front camber be decided by the drop.
Please note, however, that I am not exactly in the highest league of road course drivers. I'm just explaining what I did and you need to research what's best for you considering your budget and your intentions.
By the way, the Spoon DC5, EP3 designs are heavy springs in the rear. No idea if this has more to do w/economics or more to do w/the different suspension design.
How are King, Spoon and RTR setting up their TSX suspensions? Anybody know?
ProFunction/GT Motoring
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 0
From: IL
Re: (George Knighton)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's tempting to point to the nose heavy Spoon ITR as the ideal, because of their experience, but then you notice that they have 2.75 negative camber on the front and a huge swaybar on the rear.</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's more like -4.5 degree up front.
And surprisingly, it runs 24mm rear sway, not a typical 26mm or larger bar that most of us would have thought. The car corners very well, and the tail could get twitchy sometimes.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">By the way, the Spoon DC5, EP3 designs are heavy springs in the rear. No idea if this has more to do w/economics or more to do w/the different suspension design.</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's because of the front suspension being MacPherson strut. Compare to DC2 double wishbone, the front spring rates on the DC5 is at least 2+ times more effective than the DC2. That explains why the DC5 and EP3 are having heavier springs in the rear even in Japan.
It's more like -4.5 degree up front.
And surprisingly, it runs 24mm rear sway, not a typical 26mm or larger bar that most of us would have thought. The car corners very well, and the tail could get twitchy sometimes.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">By the way, the Spoon DC5, EP3 designs are heavy springs in the rear. No idea if this has more to do w/economics or more to do w/the different suspension design.</TD></TR></TABLE>
It's because of the front suspension being MacPherson strut. Compare to DC2 double wishbone, the front spring rates on the DC5 is at least 2+ times more effective than the DC2. That explains why the DC5 and EP3 are having heavier springs in the rear even in Japan.
Trending Topics
H-T Order of Merit
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 96,482
Likes: 38
From: Siege Perilous
Re: (Wai)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Wai »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
It's more like -4.5 degree up front.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Oops. Sorry. LOL...
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Wai »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's because of the front suspension being MacPherson strut. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Whatcha think about the TSX, then?
It's more like -4.5 degree up front.
</TD></TR></TABLE>Oops. Sorry. LOL...
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Wai »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's because of the front suspension being MacPherson strut. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Whatcha think about the TSX, then?
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,229
Likes: 0
Re: Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates (jond)
I think the majority of front bias (heavier rates up front) schooling comes from overseas. You will notice that almost all of the JDM setups are heavier up front off the shelf.
The majority of rear bias (heavier rates/thicker sway in rear.) schooling comes from the US.
The main reason IMO is a difference in driving style. The "JDM" drivers tend to switch up the driving technique in order to get the car to rotate. They do lots of trailbraking/left foot braking etc, no to mention they are from the land of Dorifto! They don't mind driving @the limit whatsoever.
The "US" drivers tend to run heavier rates in the rear, because the majority of us have been taught the traction compromise, the hand attached to foot w/string, don't brake/turn or brake/accelerate @once idea. Bascially we don't like to upset the vehicle.
What's best is to figure out your driving style, and setup your car accordingly.
The majority of rear bias (heavier rates/thicker sway in rear.) schooling comes from the US.
The main reason IMO is a difference in driving style. The "JDM" drivers tend to switch up the driving technique in order to get the car to rotate. They do lots of trailbraking/left foot braking etc, no to mention they are from the land of Dorifto! They don't mind driving @the limit whatsoever.
The "US" drivers tend to run heavier rates in the rear, because the majority of us have been taught the traction compromise, the hand attached to foot w/string, don't brake/turn or brake/accelerate @once idea. Bascially we don't like to upset the vehicle.
What's best is to figure out your driving style, and setup your car accordingly.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 14,274
Likes: 0
Re: (George Knighton)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Both schools of thought (heavy front vs heavy rear) are correct, depending on how you execute the rest of the design.
It's tempting to point to the nose heavy Spoon ITR as the ideal, because of their experience, but then you notice that they have 2.75 negative camber on the front and a huge swaybar on the rear.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Oops- didn't see Wai's posts.
Actually, like wai said, about -4.5* camber in front. Heck, I had 3* camber on my car on all four corners (slightly less in the rear, but not by much)
And the rear sway bar isn't huge - it is a 24mm Mugen.
Wai's old 20k/16k and 26mm rear sway with 3+ camber in front and 2-ish in rear and the staggered tires handled very well. Trail braking was fantastic The only thing I would want to work on was that the car tended to understeer a bit on corner entry, but was fantastic once you got to the apex and corner exit. I'm not sure how that is fixed - but its the only issue I saw with this particular front-bias setup.
It's VERY different than driving a rear bias setup, IMO.
Chris - going to end up with 14k/10k finally.
It's tempting to point to the nose heavy Spoon ITR as the ideal, because of their experience, but then you notice that they have 2.75 negative camber on the front and a huge swaybar on the rear.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Oops- didn't see Wai's posts.
Actually, like wai said, about -4.5* camber in front. Heck, I had 3* camber on my car on all four corners (slightly less in the rear, but not by much)
And the rear sway bar isn't huge - it is a 24mm Mugen.
Wai's old 20k/16k and 26mm rear sway with 3+ camber in front and 2-ish in rear and the staggered tires handled very well. Trail braking was fantastic The only thing I would want to work on was that the car tended to understeer a bit on corner entry, but was fantastic once you got to the apex and corner exit. I'm not sure how that is fixed - but its the only issue I saw with this particular front-bias setup.
It's VERY different than driving a rear bias setup, IMO.
Chris - going to end up with 14k/10k finally.
ProFunction/GT Motoring
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 0
From: IL
Re: (George Knighton)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by George Knighton »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Whatcha think about the TSX, then?</TD></TR></TABLE>
I haven't really seen any detail information on how the teams setup their CL7. Since it's still so new, I guess they would keep it secret for now. I'm also very interested in knowing the details.
I haven't really seen any detail information on how the teams setup their CL7. Since it's still so new, I guess they would keep it secret for now. I'm also very interested in knowing the details.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 7,536
Likes: 1
From: Edgewater, MD / La Jolla, CA
Re: (opie)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by opie »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">OMG GK! 
</TD></TR></TABLE>
So much for a scrambled password...looks like GK has spent the last couple weeks trying to figure out what it was... 
</TD></TR></TABLE>So much for a scrambled password...looks like GK has spent the last couple weeks trying to figure out what it was...
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 14,274
Likes: 0
Re: (d8168055)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by d8168055 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i heard of ppl swapping the rear springs and the front springs found in the japanese coilovers to get the stiffer spring rate in the rear... is this advisable?</TD></TR></TABLE>
Some of the jdm shocks are valved higher in front than in rear.
I know this is the case on the KYB SSGs that wai had - so ride quality and the effectiveness of the damper might be comprimised by swapping f/r, but i have no personal experience with this.
All other JDM coilover systems - mugen n1/nz, tein ra/re/rs, zeal s6/b6/super, bc.... all have the fronts valved higher than the rear and come with front bias spring rates.
anyone swapped springs?
Some of the jdm shocks are valved higher in front than in rear.
I know this is the case on the KYB SSGs that wai had - so ride quality and the effectiveness of the damper might be comprimised by swapping f/r, but i have no personal experience with this.
All other JDM coilover systems - mugen n1/nz, tein ra/re/rs, zeal s6/b6/super, bc.... all have the fronts valved higher than the rear and come with front bias spring rates.
anyone swapped springs?
ProFunction/GT Motoring
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 0
From: IL
Re: Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates (Doctor CorteZ)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Doctor CorteZ »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Wai touched on track width which can play a large part also...</TD></TR></TABLE>
I found that in the US, the general impression for using spacers is bad. IMO if extended wheel studs were used, it would be no different from running a low offset wheel for increased track width.
I think it is particularly useful when you find that the track and weather condition are not exactly in favor of your setup.
I found that in the US, the general impression for using spacers is bad. IMO if extended wheel studs were used, it would be no different from running a low offset wheel for increased track width.
I think it is particularly useful when you find that the track and weather condition are not exactly in favor of your setup.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 14,274
Likes: 0
Re: Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates (Doctor CorteZ)
Jamie, Wai -
Does widening the track width via spacers when using this kind of setup put any undue stress on the wheel bearings, or on anything else? Does it negatively affect the wheel rate, etc?
Does widening the track width via spacers when using this kind of setup put any undue stress on the wheel bearings, or on anything else? Does it negatively affect the wheel rate, etc?
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,400
Likes: 0
From: ...
Re: Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates (Chris N)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Chris N »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Does widening the track width via spacers when using this kind of setup put any undue stress on the wheel bearings, or on anything else? </TD></TR></TABLE>
it does change the load on the bearing , but wheel bearings arent longlife items anyway due to the extreme heat they're subjected to on track...
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Chris N »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Does it negatively affect the wheel rate, etc?</TD></TR></TABLE>
that just depends , it affects it , whether its positively or negatively depends on setup details...
I'm a large proponent of staggering track and wheel widths , but then again I dont really follow the mold around here
hell , I think I'm by myself because I preach the huge benefits of caster.
Does widening the track width via spacers when using this kind of setup put any undue stress on the wheel bearings, or on anything else? </TD></TR></TABLE>
it does change the load on the bearing , but wheel bearings arent longlife items anyway due to the extreme heat they're subjected to on track...
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Chris N »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Does it negatively affect the wheel rate, etc?</TD></TR></TABLE>
that just depends , it affects it , whether its positively or negatively depends on setup details...
I'm a large proponent of staggering track and wheel widths , but then again I dont really follow the mold around here
hell , I think I'm by myself because I preach the huge benefits of caster.
ProFunction/GT Motoring
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 0
From: IL
Re: Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates (Chris N)
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Chris N »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Does widening the track width via spacers when using this kind of setup put any undue stress on the wheel bearings, or on anything else? Does it negatively affect the wheel rate, etc?</TD></TR></TABLE>
It would definitely increase the stress on the wheel bearings. And another drawback is that the scrub radius would be increased so the turn-in would be a little slow.
You gain something and loose something....
It would definitely increase the stress on the wheel bearings. And another drawback is that the scrub radius would be increased so the turn-in would be a little slow.
You gain something and loose something....
Wrong-Way Wang
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 0
Re: Suspension Theory -- Rear Spring Rates (jond)
You can setup the car just about any way you want, and it'll handle great for 4-5 laps. That's just the tires working their asses off.
Rail on it for 10 minutes, HARD, and guess what? The front end is going to start washing out. I don't care how much camber you have. I regularly run up to -3.5 up front. I have a 1 inch rear swaybar and I run 14k front and 22k rear.
The solution? Setup the car so that it's downright scary to drive for the first few laps, and then it should balance out after 2-3 laps. As a session goes on, you'll end up with a car that still turns well at the end.
As far as the rear end of a car getting "squirrely". Most people's perception of loose is not loose. It's probably just neutral. Loose is when you have a fwd car floored, and the rear end still walks out. Yeeeha. Loose is when you fear breathing off the throttle midcorner. I consider my car neutral, though I had it accidently setup for wicked oversteer on right handers at CMP. Not entirely on purpose, but it worked.
p.s. If you crash because of any setup issues. It's not my damn fault you can't drive.
Love,
Warren
Rail on it for 10 minutes, HARD, and guess what? The front end is going to start washing out. I don't care how much camber you have. I regularly run up to -3.5 up front. I have a 1 inch rear swaybar and I run 14k front and 22k rear.
The solution? Setup the car so that it's downright scary to drive for the first few laps, and then it should balance out after 2-3 laps. As a session goes on, you'll end up with a car that still turns well at the end.
As far as the rear end of a car getting "squirrely". Most people's perception of loose is not loose. It's probably just neutral. Loose is when you have a fwd car floored, and the rear end still walks out. Yeeeha. Loose is when you fear breathing off the throttle midcorner. I consider my car neutral, though I had it accidently setup for wicked oversteer on right handers at CMP. Not entirely on purpose, but it worked.
p.s. If you crash because of any setup issues. It's not my damn fault you can't drive.
Love,
Warren