Spring rate stagger

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

11-11-2012, 08:08 PM

#31

CKit

Former Moderator

Join Date: Aug 2004

Posts: 14,730

Likes: 0

Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts

Note that OEM spring rates were initially designed for staggered tires / wheels.

The handling balance will change (from OEM) depending on tire compound and stagger.

Recapitulating OEM balance when changing tires may take adjustment to the spring ratio.

Reply Like

11-12-2012, 08:19 AM

#32

dan_uk

Join Date: Dec 2007

Location: Savannah, GA, USA

Posts: 4,526

Likes: 4

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewhake

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan_uk' timestamp='1352465591' post='22140257

[quote name='andrewhake' timestamp='1352410363' post='22139083']
Honda does higher spring rate in the rear from the factory on all S2000s but the CR I believe. Most JDM tuners seem to run equal rates F & R or a slight stagger towards the rear. The alignment is the key factor in the equation though.

no they only did it on the 00-01 - every year after that the rates are front biased
Going from an 00 car in uk to an 03 the 03 was much easier to slide around and not end up facing the wrong way.

Over the years I've run:
550/500 lowerring springs and a saner bar
600/500 konis + stock bars
700/600 konis + stock bars
700/650 konis + stock bars

I think I could go even on the springs and set the wing to balance the car but its loose at low speed its loose now, I don't think I'd go rear biased.

Not true.

https://www.s2ki.com/s2000/topic/818...nsion-springs/

Code:

              |  Front   Rear    |  Front    Rear
Model Year    |  Spring  Spring  |  Sway Bar Sway Bar
--------------+------------------+--------------------
2000-2001     |   219     291    |   393      427
2002-2003     |   246     309    |   300      396
2004-2005     |   262     278    |   300      311
2006-2007     |   262     269    |   300      311
2008-2009     |   280     294    |   354      311
2008-2009 CR  |   384     343    |   392      362

Note 1: All figures are in lb/in. Divide by 56 to get kg/mm.
Note 2: Edited 17Nov2010 with slight updates to spring rates per rev1 of paper.

[/quote]

oh wow sorry, I don't think I ever saw these before pretty interesting
look how high the rear-swaybar is on the 00-01 vs the Ap2's I thought my 03 bar was bad

Reply Like

11-12-2012, 08:35 AM

#33

andrewhake

Join Date: Jan 2011

Location: Mt. ________

Posts: 5,649

Likes: 8

Received 98 Likes on 73 Posts

Yeah it really makes me curious to try the different AP1s! You have to consider the difference in tire size as well and the different suspension geometry which emphasizes the front/rear difference more apparently. The 00-01 bias is very different, but every other model is actually stiffer overall when it comes to springrate, so the much higher sway bar rates make sense.

I want to try an 08 front sway (354) bar and CR rear sway bar (362) on my 06 AP2 with stock suspension as the front/rear balance stays close to stock (a tiny bit more rear bias) but the overall rate increased by a good amount. I wonder if it would be a good match with the stock springs though?

Reply Like

11-12-2012, 09:19 AM

#34

josh7owens

Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2009

Location: Frankfort, KY

Posts: 4,340

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Lets also not forget about the motion ratios are different front and rear. So the spring rates arnt the best indicators of spring bias due to the fact no one has mentioned the motion ratios relationship to wheel rate.

(If I remember correctly off the top of my head)

Front MR .7
Rear MR .67

Wheel Rate= Spring Rate X MR^2