Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Collecting suggestions and so far they are.

- Raise ride height to get LCAs back to parallel

- Increase camber to around -3.5 front and -2-2,5 rear
- Add adjustable caster arms and aim for around 5-6degrees (which will help camber also)
- Drop spring rates to 6/4.5.
- Return to stock swaybars.

A friend of mine who is running Tiens with 8/6 rates and similar bars has the above done (but is also running AD08R and in wider sizes) and his car is far more balanced.

Thoughts?

Probably not bad. The amount of camber that is good for you will of course depend somewhat on the tyre you're running.

I wouldn't be afraid the keep the big ARBs if you back off the spring rates.

The other thing you need to put in your list is my first suggestion, to add some bloody damping back into the suspension!

Looking at your setup, it seems like you have a really thick rear swaybar compared to what you have at the front

Looking at the Whiteline s13 swaybar sizes:

They have 27mm front and 22/24mm rear

Currently you are running 26mm (softest) front and 25mm rear

Generally on the s-chassis, you would want to set the front to full hard (for swaybar) and tune the rear to suit

In regards to the lower control arm, as long as you have it parallel to the ground, it will be sufficient and roll center do not suffer

I run -2.5 front, 7 degree castor and -2 rear 1mm toe in if that helps

Plenty of grip however i also run 245/255 tyre size

I am running 27mm front, softest setting, and 25mm hollow gtr rear, which roughly equates to 19-22mm solid I read. The whiteline rear bars are solid. So stiffer again.

Thanks for info.

Interesting about your comment re hardest front as I imagine that would cause it to understeer more.

27mm is the middle bolt on the swaybar, when you soften it, it means it's -1 mm so it means you're running 26mm ;)

Your older video, is that on brand new tyres? And how long have you had these tyres for?

Collecting suggestions and so far they are. [/size]- Raise ride height to get LCAs back to parallel[/size]

- Increase camber to around -3.5 front and -2-2,5 rear

- Add adjustable caster arms and aim for around 5-6degrees (which will help camber also)

- Drop spring rates to 6/4.5.- Return to stock swaybars.

A friend of mine who is running Tiens with 8/6 rates and similar bars has the above done (but is also running AD08R and in wider sizes) and his car is far more balanced.

Thoughts?

-3.0 to -3.5 on the front -1.5 on the rear.

Yes to castor arms, I think mine is around 6 degrees maxed out

Forget changing spring rates, mine are tein monoflex 8/6 and are fine. Play with the dampening. I wind my fronts to about 90% hard, rears 30%

Toe has already been mentioned- the 1mm mark is about right.

Don't return to stock sways, just drop the link of the rear bar altogether and see how that goes.

Also, have the car corner weighted if not done already. Winding heights up and down can really stuff up the balance.

I'll post a vid of my 180 at the track for ..... Science!

Much better tyres than mine.

Most of the advice in getting about more camber or harder dampers is from people running much wider and grippier tyres so I'm in too minds about how much it applies to me.

The tyres are shot honestly, they are hard as. They measure 235/45 in the conventional sense. Michelin just decides to put more number on them.

I've got 235/45 RSRs as well. They are on my road wheels, and I've tracked them too. They aren't awesome but they don't suck. What your struggling for is balance in my eyes. Your front end is out performing the rear end. So you need to increase the rear grip, and limit the front ends impact.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what tyres you run, having the car setup to extract the maximum grip from whatever is available in the tyre is the goal.

It would be worth sending the car to a suspension tuning workshop with track car experience and explaining what your feeling on the track.

Running harder damping has nothing to do with the tyres though. It's all about making sure the damping is sufficient for the springs.

Let's put it this way. You used to run softer bars and needed the dampers wound down to make it work. You've added spring rate through stuffer bars and now it's not happy, with your description of how it drives sounding like it's underdamped. Therefore, potential solution is to add damping.

The front-rear balance stuff is a whole 'nother issue. As is changing camber. Adding roll stiffness to the chassis can actually well require you to add camber anyway, so it is definitely something that might need a tweak as part of the exercise. If any of the other advice makes you go faster, then you are going to need more camber.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • @Haggerty this is your red flag. In MAP based ECU's the Manifold pressure X RPM calculation is how the engine knows it is actually...running/going through ANY load. You are confusing the term 'base map' with your base VE/Fuel table. When most people say 'base map' they mean the stock entire tune shipped with the ECU, hopefully aimed at a specific car/setup to use as a base for beginning to tune your specific car. Haltech has a lot of documentation (or at least they used to, I expect it to be better now). Read it voraciously.
    • I saw you mention this earlier and it raised a red flag, but I couldn't believe it was real. Yes, the vacuum signal should vary. It is the one and only load signal from the engine to the ECU, and it MUST vary. It is either not connected or is badly f**ked up in some way.
    • @Haggerty you still haven't answered my question.  Many things you are saying do not make sense for someone who can tune, yet I would not expect someone who cannot tune to be playing with the things in the ECU that you are.  This process would be a lot quicker to figure out if we can remove user error from the equation. 
    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
×
×
  • Create New...