STR Prep - Suspension and Alignment
01-31-2012, 08:04 PM
#121
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Link to konis "how to tune shocks" page?
To be 65% critical on my car I'm in the 11-12/14 range on the front and 9-10/14 range on the rear on rebound. This is on my JRZ triples. Granted we have different shocks but I would guess you need to be in the upper range of your adjustment 9+/15. This is just a guess though.
To be 65% critical on my car I'm in the 11-12/14 range on the front and 9-10/14 range on the rear on rebound. This is on my JRZ triples. Granted we have different shocks but I would guess you need to be in the upper range of your adjustment 9+/15. This is just a guess though.
It's a proven magic number in track/steady state environments, but remember, with the highly transitional nature of autocross, close to 100% critical may not be a bad bet.... 
Ya can't go terribly wrong either way IMHO, in the range of 65% critical to around 120% overdamped, depending on how much of a madman you are in slaloms and how you like the balance for your driving style, in an autox cross environment. Works good in stock class.
But personally, I don't like the feel over damped shocks. I was right around 85% critical in my BS AP1 and that was a good balance between transitional stability and getting rid of terrible inside wheelspin.
01-31-2012, 08:13 PM
#122
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Frankfort, KY
Posts: 4,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
01-31-2012, 08:33 PM
#123
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 762' timestamp='1328063548' post='21371587
car being "bouncy" seems more like rebound to me then compression.
If compression gets too high the tire can be overloaded and break loose. Compression is usually how I adapt to different surfaces, Lincoln and BDI Airports gets more compression than our local Marana Airport pavement. When it rains the compression goes down some.
In general adjust compression until the tires start loosing grip (gets over loaded) and then back off a bit. Then adjust rebound to control the energy that a particular compression setting allows to get into the spring.
I have a setting that seems to work, but I don't quite know the effect a change in rear compression has vs. the change in front rebound.
I know compression loads the tire quickly, but if I soften front rebound more weight will transfer to the rear and make the car less "loose". In my mind, lowering rear compression would produce a similar effect, but I know it is not that simple.
01-31-2012, 08:56 PM
#124
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Frankfort, KY
Posts: 4,340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this shock talk makes me want to get my shocks on and play with the knobs! Is it a good Idea to balance a car with springs/swaybar/alignment with the shocks on soft than crank up to bump/rebound?
Does adding low speed compression directly simulate increase in swaybar rate? For example is taking out front bar but adding low speed compression result in the same transitional feel?
I wish I had somewhere I could go and spend the day testing the car. 6 runs a day at a autocross makes it very hard to test different settings.
Does adding low speed compression directly simulate increase in swaybar rate? For example is taking out front bar but adding low speed compression result in the same transitional feel?
I wish I had somewhere I could go and spend the day testing the car. 6 runs a day at a autocross makes it very hard to test different settings.
01-31-2012, 09:20 PM
#125
edit: the SPC joint is legal (leaving orginal context for discussion purposes)
01-31-2012, 09:53 PM
#126
I would guess 50% of the people running in STR have these camber ball joints. Your telling half of the people in STR they spent $200+ on a part that isn't legal and is now a paper wieght. On top of that honda doesnt sell replacement ball joints so the only way to replace the ball joint is to buy all new upper arms. Which are $115 or so each. So basicly anyone that has spc ball joints now has a $200 paper weight and needs to spend $230-460 on new upper arms depending on if they did the fronts and/or the rears. The end result after spending a total of $430-630 is they have a stock S2000 and still need to spend another $300 or so on camber joints. Long story short Robert pointing that out is going to result in everyone with them investing a total of $730-930 to fix thier cars and buy new camber joints or risk a protest.
If someone honestly protested that they are a winnie. That'd be so lame. In all honestly it's not funny. It's actually very crappy, thankfully I got the j's camber joint. Good luck selling your over priced STR wheels robert, I'm sure you'll sell them very quickly after just pointing out 50% of all the people in STR are illegal.
End of rant
If someone honestly protested that they are a winnie. That'd be so lame. In all honestly it's not funny. It's actually very crappy, thankfully I got the j's camber joint. Good luck selling your over priced STR wheels robert, I'm sure you'll sell them very quickly after just pointing out 50% of all the people in STR are illegal.
End of rant
02-01-2012, 05:41 AM
#127
Winnie? Is that someone who wins? I hope to be a winnie.
I don't see how the SPC ball joint is illegal. The ball joint is in the same place as stock and of course the upper arm continues to mount in the stock location. That's it. 3 points all of which are identical to stock. Now, if the ball joint sat higher up on the knuckle it would be illegal because it would alter the location of the joint. The extra material between the ball joint and the upper control arm that makes the arm sit at a steeper incline does not effect the relationship of the any of the suspension components. The plane formed by the three connection points of the joints is the same as it ever was regardless of the position of the UCA.
Right?
I don't see how the SPC ball joint is illegal. The ball joint is in the same place as stock and of course the upper arm continues to mount in the stock location. That's it. 3 points all of which are identical to stock. Now, if the ball joint sat higher up on the knuckle it would be illegal because it would alter the location of the joint. The extra material between the ball joint and the upper control arm that makes the arm sit at a steeper incline does not effect the relationship of the any of the suspension components. The plane formed by the three connection points of the joints is the same as it ever was regardless of the position of the UCA.
Right?
02-01-2012, 05:46 AM
#128
I would agree with Matt above. You would have to measure the actual position of the knuckle. The taper may allow it to sit in the exact same location - notwithstanding the height difference. More investigation is necessary than what has been done. The measurements taken were merely overall length - not whether the geometry is different as a result.
02-01-2012, 06:03 AM
#129
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Pewaukee, WI
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the exact same issue that came up in ST right before Nationals in 2010 I think. It was deemed illegal since the control arm is not in the same place in relation to the knuckle since the ball joint is taller. Either way though I think the lower ball joints is such a better option I'm not sure why everyone wouldn't go that route anyway?
Winnie is a bear, he likes honey.
Winnie is a bear, he likes honey.
02-01-2012, 06:32 AM
#130
You might want to verify that, Colin.
Wasn't the illegal part in ST the Ingals joints which are located at the body side (as opposed to knuckle side) of the upper control arm and didn't they effectively drop the location of the pick up point relative to stock? Isn't that why people were scrambling to get the Skunk2 upper arms?
It doesn't matter if the control arm is vertical, horizontal or pointing in any other direction. The control arm could be shaped like a boomerang or a bowl of chili. The only thing that will influence the suspension is the location of the center of the ball joints and the centers of the regular control arm joints. The lines that are projected to determine suspension motions are drawn through the center of the joints. The angle of the control arm has nothing to do with where the center of the joints are.
Wasn't the illegal part in ST the Ingals joints which are located at the body side (as opposed to knuckle side) of the upper control arm and didn't they effectively drop the location of the pick up point relative to stock? Isn't that why people were scrambling to get the Skunk2 upper arms?
It doesn't matter if the control arm is vertical, horizontal or pointing in any other direction. The control arm could be shaped like a boomerang or a bowl of chili. The only thing that will influence the suspension is the location of the center of the ball joints and the centers of the regular control arm joints. The lines that are projected to determine suspension motions are drawn through the center of the joints. The angle of the control arm has nothing to do with where the center of the joints are.