H&R Springs R1 Shocks Justification
01-13-02, 10:05 AM
#1
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
H&R Springs R1 Shocks Justification
This is a response to a forum member's question regarding my using H&R springs and R1 shocks, and why I'm NOT interested in 2.5-inch coil springs, ride height-adjustable, valve-adjustable shocks. He also asked my opinion of Racing Beat springs and Bilstein Heavy Duty shocks.
In case others had the same question, I posted my response to the forum member below for everyone else's benefit
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I drive my FD daily, year round (snow too). During the racing season, I attend 10 to 15 high speed driving events at various race circuits, and a few slalom races at a local southern Indiana air port.
Because the FD serves as a daily driver first, I need a suspension that can deal with bumpy surfaces with reasonable comfort for the occupants; and provide enough suspension travel for really deep chuck holes.
For the weekend racing, I need a suspension that will allow the FD to corner as flat as possible, and allow a PROGRESSIVE rate of loading on the tires for smooth weight transfer transitions, yielding better overall stick and handling for most type of circuit corners.
I believe my current suspension fits that bill beautifully. The H&Rs are progressive rate springs, which provide comfort for the daily grind, and also allow progressive tire loading during weight transfer transitions that occur during circuit racing (braking, cornering, accelerating). The stock R1 "Hard" shocks provide excellent dampening control over the H&Rs to complement the H&R springs', soft-but-gradually-stiffening spring rate. The stock R1 shocks' valving between fr/rr is ideally setup for the FD R1, so there are no worries with trying to find the right valve adjustment (the Mazda engineers spent countless hours trying to figure that out for us!).
The Eibach sway bars, 1.25-inch outer diameter front, and 3/4-inch OD in back provide excellent body roll control through the high speed turns. As you know performance springs only decrease nose-dive under braking, and rear-end squat under heavy acceleration. Performance springs have little effect on lateral body roll. Lateral body roll is what performance sway bars control, by effectively coupling the right and left sides of the axle, almost making each end of the suspension a "solid beam" (but not quite). Too fat a sway bar will decrease the independence of an independent suspension, thus the 1.25-inch and 3/4-inch fr/rr respective ODs are as large as you want to go to keep the independent suspension characteristics intact!
My previous suspension set up were Tokico 5-way Illuminas and Racing Beat springs. Previous to that, Racing Beat Springs and R1 shocks.
The RBs are linear rate springs and were not ideal for my needs. They're too stiff for the public roads, and they load the tires too quickly during weight transfer transitions at high-speed events, thus shocking the tire's grip, and causing me to lose control, at speed, more frequently. Coupled with the R1 shocks the RBs were fantastic for slalom racing use, but not ideal for high speed events. Public road ride with RB/R1 was punishing. I switched to Tokico Illuminas for road ride softening. Unfortunately, I found that there were only 2 settings that complemented the RB springs--settings 3 or 4. Both 1 and 2 were too soft to control the RB springs, thus the car oscillated over bumps (like having worn-out shocks). Setting 5 was too stiff--like there were no springs at all! I was still not happy with the Tokicos valving for the speed events, as I felt the R1 shocks were superior in that respect (at least for circuit use).
Thus I switched back to the R1 shocks (newer USED R1 shocks), and tried the H&R springs. I've been happy since. I thought briefly about Eibach springs, but thought their lowering was too conservative at 3/4 inches. The H&Rs drop the car over an inch. I like the lower drop NOT for aesthetics, BUT for lowering the center of gravity, and the chassis roll center for a more stable feel through high speed turns.
I'm not interested in 2.5-inch springs and ride-height adjustability at this point, because I'm very happy with my current setup. IMO, the beneifits these aftermarket 2.5-inch OD springs, and ride-height adjustable, valve-adjustable suspension setups offer, are mainly suited for racing applications. The 2.5-inch springs allow more clearance inside the wheel wells for wider tires. The ride adjustabililty allow you to corner-weigh the car for optimum weight distribution at four corners. The adjustments for compression and rebound let you optimize the shocks' dampening rate based on the racing surfaces' characteristics. If you never plan to use all of these adjustments, you're just wasting money, IMO.
The RBs and Bilstein Heavy Duty shocks would be great for slalom racing (autocross), but not ideal for public roads or high speed events. The main problem is the RB spring. It's a linear rate, and doesn't allow you the ride comfort or progressive tire loading you need for speed events. The Bilstein HDs are outstanding shocks. They're self adjusting, so no need to worry about valving. They'll adjust to the road surface!
My recommendation is to try the H&R springs with the Bilstein Heavy Duties.
Good luck!
In case others had the same question, I posted my response to the forum member below for everyone else's benefit
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I drive my FD daily, year round (snow too). During the racing season, I attend 10 to 15 high speed driving events at various race circuits, and a few slalom races at a local southern Indiana air port.
Because the FD serves as a daily driver first, I need a suspension that can deal with bumpy surfaces with reasonable comfort for the occupants; and provide enough suspension travel for really deep chuck holes.
For the weekend racing, I need a suspension that will allow the FD to corner as flat as possible, and allow a PROGRESSIVE rate of loading on the tires for smooth weight transfer transitions, yielding better overall stick and handling for most type of circuit corners.
I believe my current suspension fits that bill beautifully. The H&Rs are progressive rate springs, which provide comfort for the daily grind, and also allow progressive tire loading during weight transfer transitions that occur during circuit racing (braking, cornering, accelerating). The stock R1 "Hard" shocks provide excellent dampening control over the H&Rs to complement the H&R springs', soft-but-gradually-stiffening spring rate. The stock R1 shocks' valving between fr/rr is ideally setup for the FD R1, so there are no worries with trying to find the right valve adjustment (the Mazda engineers spent countless hours trying to figure that out for us!).
The Eibach sway bars, 1.25-inch outer diameter front, and 3/4-inch OD in back provide excellent body roll control through the high speed turns. As you know performance springs only decrease nose-dive under braking, and rear-end squat under heavy acceleration. Performance springs have little effect on lateral body roll. Lateral body roll is what performance sway bars control, by effectively coupling the right and left sides of the axle, almost making each end of the suspension a "solid beam" (but not quite). Too fat a sway bar will decrease the independence of an independent suspension, thus the 1.25-inch and 3/4-inch fr/rr respective ODs are as large as you want to go to keep the independent suspension characteristics intact!
My previous suspension set up were Tokico 5-way Illuminas and Racing Beat springs. Previous to that, Racing Beat Springs and R1 shocks.
The RBs are linear rate springs and were not ideal for my needs. They're too stiff for the public roads, and they load the tires too quickly during weight transfer transitions at high-speed events, thus shocking the tire's grip, and causing me to lose control, at speed, more frequently. Coupled with the R1 shocks the RBs were fantastic for slalom racing use, but not ideal for high speed events. Public road ride with RB/R1 was punishing. I switched to Tokico Illuminas for road ride softening. Unfortunately, I found that there were only 2 settings that complemented the RB springs--settings 3 or 4. Both 1 and 2 were too soft to control the RB springs, thus the car oscillated over bumps (like having worn-out shocks). Setting 5 was too stiff--like there were no springs at all! I was still not happy with the Tokicos valving for the speed events, as I felt the R1 shocks were superior in that respect (at least for circuit use).
Thus I switched back to the R1 shocks (newer USED R1 shocks), and tried the H&R springs. I've been happy since. I thought briefly about Eibach springs, but thought their lowering was too conservative at 3/4 inches. The H&Rs drop the car over an inch. I like the lower drop NOT for aesthetics, BUT for lowering the center of gravity, and the chassis roll center for a more stable feel through high speed turns.
I'm not interested in 2.5-inch springs and ride-height adjustability at this point, because I'm very happy with my current setup. IMO, the beneifits these aftermarket 2.5-inch OD springs, and ride-height adjustable, valve-adjustable suspension setups offer, are mainly suited for racing applications. The 2.5-inch springs allow more clearance inside the wheel wells for wider tires. The ride adjustabililty allow you to corner-weigh the car for optimum weight distribution at four corners. The adjustments for compression and rebound let you optimize the shocks' dampening rate based on the racing surfaces' characteristics. If you never plan to use all of these adjustments, you're just wasting money, IMO.
The RBs and Bilstein Heavy Duty shocks would be great for slalom racing (autocross), but not ideal for public roads or high speed events. The main problem is the RB spring. It's a linear rate, and doesn't allow you the ride comfort or progressive tire loading you need for speed events. The Bilstein HDs are outstanding shocks. They're self adjusting, so no need to worry about valving. They'll adjust to the road surface!
My recommendation is to try the H&R springs with the Bilstein Heavy Duties.
Good luck!
Last edited by SleepR1; 01-13-02 at 10:12 AM.
01-14-02, 02:28 PM
#2
Rotary Enthusiast
hey sleepr1, thx for the reply, this kind of 1st hand information was exactly wat i was looking for.
another question for you, do you have any experience with racingbeat swaybars? how do they compare to eibach sway bars?
thanks
another question for you, do you have any experience with racingbeat swaybars? how do they compare to eibach sway bars?
thanks
01-14-02, 03:30 PM
#3
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
RB Sway Bars
No first-hand experience with these. I know FD owners that have them. The front sway bar is a nice piece. The rear sway bar is non-adjustable and has the same moment arm-length as the stock rear sway bar. The difference is the 19 mm diameter which is thicker than stock. This means it will be stiffer than stock. The RB rear bar complements the RB front bar which is completely adjustable.
FWIW If I had to do sway bars over, I'd do the Racing Beats. I had to do mod the Eibachs to make them work properly.
Eibach sent rear bushings that were too short, so I had to make up the thickness difference with a section of the old rubber bushing pressure fitted and silicone sealed to the polyurethane bushing they sent.
Eibach had no provisions for stopping their sway bars from moving from side-to-side under cornering; without the stops the side-to-side motion causes broken rear sway bar end links.
I had to fashion my own set of swaybar stops with hose clamps clamped over rubber hoses, which are positioned on either side of the bar bushings.
The Eibach bars are apparently solid rather than tubular making them much heavier, and much stiffer than stock. The RBs are tubular, and thus lighter.
Which ever sway bars you get, make sure you reinforce the front sway bar mounts. They'll break or bend under HARD cornering forces. I have direct experience with this (see my AIM Tuning gallery for pics of broken sway bar mounts). I have the Tri-Point braces. RB offers a sway bar mount reinforcer which couples the the front sway bar mounts to the subframe where the steering rack is bolted.
FWIW If I had to do sway bars over, I'd do the Racing Beats. I had to do mod the Eibachs to make them work properly.
Eibach sent rear bushings that were too short, so I had to make up the thickness difference with a section of the old rubber bushing pressure fitted and silicone sealed to the polyurethane bushing they sent.
Eibach had no provisions for stopping their sway bars from moving from side-to-side under cornering; without the stops the side-to-side motion causes broken rear sway bar end links.
I had to fashion my own set of swaybar stops with hose clamps clamped over rubber hoses, which are positioned on either side of the bar bushings.
The Eibach bars are apparently solid rather than tubular making them much heavier, and much stiffer than stock. The RBs are tubular, and thus lighter.
Which ever sway bars you get, make sure you reinforce the front sway bar mounts. They'll break or bend under HARD cornering forces. I have direct experience with this (see my AIM Tuning gallery for pics of broken sway bar mounts). I have the Tri-Point braces. RB offers a sway bar mount reinforcer which couples the the front sway bar mounts to the subframe where the steering rack is bolted.
Last edited by SleepR1; 01-14-02 at 03:39 PM.
01-14-02, 05:22 PM
#5
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
R1s/R2s come stock with strut braces front AND rear...
For public road work, I use SSR Integral A2s in 8 x 16 with 38 mm offset, shod with 225/50-16 Pirelli P-Zero Aimmetricos (soon-to-be-replaced with same size Bridgestone Potenza S-03s). For the race circuits, I use SSR Competitions in 8.5 x 17 fr and 9.5 x 17 rr, 42 mm offsets. The 8.5 x 17s get 245/45-17s and the 9.5 x 17s get 275/40-17s. The tires are Hoosier R3S03 sports car DOT racing radials. They have a shorter-than-normal overall diameter of 25.3 inches. No rubbing with either setup.
Originally posted by 3rdGenLuvr
Hey SleepR1....do use a strut tower bar front and rear?
And what tire sizes are you running w/ the H&R's? Any rubbing?
Hey SleepR1....do use a strut tower bar front and rear?
And what tire sizes are you running w/ the H&R's? Any rubbing?
01-16-02, 12:17 PM
#6
Formula Mazda Driver
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good information, but I have to disagree with you on a few points. Stiffer springs help reduce lateral body roll just as much diving and squatting under braking and acceleration(respectively). Yes sway bars also reduce lateral body roll, and probably better than springs since that is ALL they are designed for. When I added my 2.5" 6" Eibach Linear rate springs that came with the GC coilover set, my body roll went to almost 0, and I have the stock sway bars still. I agree that progressive rate springs are better for most people who use their car as a daily driver, but when it comes to the track, there is no substitute for linear rate springs. Progressive rate springs tend to feel soft while just starting to turn into a corner, and then progressive stiffen as lateral forces increase. The is great for steady-state cornering, but its not as good for emergency manuevers, chicanes, decreasing radius corners, etc...Progressive rate springs are meant to be a compromise between high-performance and comfortability on the street. Anyways, this is just how I feel, not meaning to flame or anything.
01-16-02, 01:25 PM
#7
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
Good to disagree, but
we do two different types of racing, and are two different racers. I do high speed road racing stuff. The slowest turn I negotiate is 55 mph. The fastest is 95 mph. If the tires load too quickly at these speeds (with too stiff a linear rate spring), while cornering at THE limit, available grip runs out, and off you go. Progressive rate springs transfer those cornering loads GRADUALLY to the tires' contact patches, so the available grip isn't exceeded, and you stay planted.
I agree that my first two weeks with the H&Rs after having the RBs for 3 years; turn-in seemed slower, and sloppier with the H&Rs. BUT, I also noticed that during long, high-speed turns (Putnam Park Turns 9-10, steady at 65 mph), the car just seemed to stick better with the H&Rs.
It seems you give up some turn-in response feel for better stick. Given the two options, I'll take the better stick through long turns!
I won't repeat myself, about the RB springs. They're great for quick manuevers that are seen in autocrosses, but not the greatest at high speed tracks. Honestly, I've spun off track many more times with the RB springs, but very few times with the H&Rs. Maybe I got better as a driver? Or maybe, I'm more comfortable with the way H&Rs than I was with the RBs on track? By the same token, my car feels sluggish with the H&Rs (vs. the RBs) through the slalom cones during the few autocrosses I attend. If I were strictly an slalom racer, the RBs would have stayed on the car. Fact is I do 15 track day/weekends and only 2 autocrosses. For my needs the H&Rs are the better springs.
Yes stiffer springs do help with controlling body roll. I didn't intend for my post to say stiffer springs DON'T help with body roll. They do. But if you want the best control, thicker sway bars are the solution!
I agree that my first two weeks with the H&Rs after having the RBs for 3 years; turn-in seemed slower, and sloppier with the H&Rs. BUT, I also noticed that during long, high-speed turns (Putnam Park Turns 9-10, steady at 65 mph), the car just seemed to stick better with the H&Rs.
It seems you give up some turn-in response feel for better stick. Given the two options, I'll take the better stick through long turns!
I won't repeat myself, about the RB springs. They're great for quick manuevers that are seen in autocrosses, but not the greatest at high speed tracks. Honestly, I've spun off track many more times with the RB springs, but very few times with the H&Rs. Maybe I got better as a driver? Or maybe, I'm more comfortable with the way H&Rs than I was with the RBs on track? By the same token, my car feels sluggish with the H&Rs (vs. the RBs) through the slalom cones during the few autocrosses I attend. If I were strictly an slalom racer, the RBs would have stayed on the car. Fact is I do 15 track day/weekends and only 2 autocrosses. For my needs the H&Rs are the better springs.
Yes stiffer springs do help with controlling body roll. I didn't intend for my post to say stiffer springs DON'T help with body roll. They do. But if you want the best control, thicker sway bars are the solution!
Originally posted by SpeedRacer
Good information, but I have to disagree with you on a few points. Stiffer springs help reduce lateral body roll just as much diving and squatting under braking and acceleration(respectively). Yes sway bars also reduce lateral body roll, and probably better than springs since that is ALL they are designed for. When I added my 2.5" 6" Eibach Linear rate springs that came with the GC coilover set, my body roll went to almost 0, and I have the stock sway bars still. I agree that progressive rate springs are better for most people who use their car as a daily driver, but when it comes to the track, there is no substitute for linear rate springs. Progressive rate springs tend to feel soft while just starting to turn into a corner, and then progressive stiffen as lateral forces increase. The is great for steady-state cornering, but its not as good for emergency manuevers, chicanes, decreasing radius corners, etc...Progressive rate springs are meant to be a compromise between high-performance and comfortability on the street. Anyways, this is just how I feel, not meaning to flame or anything.
Good information, but I have to disagree with you on a few points. Stiffer springs help reduce lateral body roll just as much diving and squatting under braking and acceleration(respectively). Yes sway bars also reduce lateral body roll, and probably better than springs since that is ALL they are designed for. When I added my 2.5" 6" Eibach Linear rate springs that came with the GC coilover set, my body roll went to almost 0, and I have the stock sway bars still. I agree that progressive rate springs are better for most people who use their car as a daily driver, but when it comes to the track, there is no substitute for linear rate springs. Progressive rate springs tend to feel soft while just starting to turn into a corner, and then progressive stiffen as lateral forces increase. The is great for steady-state cornering, but its not as good for emergency manuevers, chicanes, decreasing radius corners, etc...Progressive rate springs are meant to be a compromise between high-performance and comfortability on the street. Anyways, this is just how I feel, not meaning to flame or anything.
Trending Topics
01-16-02, 03:18 PM
#8
Formula Mazda Driver
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Posts: 680
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Good to disagree, but
Originally posted by SleepR1
we do two different types of racing, and are two different racers. I do high speed road racing stuff. The slowest turn I negotiate is 55 mph. The fastest is 95 mph. If the tires load too quickly at these speeds (with too stiff a linear rate spring), while cornering at THE limit, available grip runs out, and off you go. Progressive rate springs transfer those cornering loads GRADUALLY to the tires' contact patches, so the available grip isn't exceeded, and you stay planted.
True, so far the only "racing" I have done has been at the Auto-x's. This is only due to lack of funds on my part. I prefer road racing over auto-x by far though. I have done a lot of studying and research when it comes to suspension, and making cars handle better. I do lots of high speed driving on backroads. Living in Oregon they are all over the place. And I agree with what you are saying about stiff linear rate springs transferring load much quicker onto the tires, therefore causing the coefficent of friction to be exceeded more quickly. But at the the same time with progressive rate springs, the car isn't going to rebound as quickly and setup for whatevers next, so setting up for a series of corners or a chicane can be more difficult. Also even though linear rate springs, might cause your car to loose traction more quickly, it allows you have a better feel for when the car is losing traction, and it allows the driver feel the slip angle of the tires and use that to his advantage. There is a long 45mph corner I take everyday on the way to work. I can go into it 90 or so, and smoothly accelerate to about 110 through out it. After 110 the back end starts to drift out, but it is very controllable and gradual. It just takes some finess when entering a corner so as to not lose traction at the beginning of it.
I can see though, how progressive rate springs might make driving easier on a road course for some people.
I agree that my first two weeks with the H&Rs after having the RBs for 3 years; turn-in seemed slower, and sloppier with the H&Rs. BUT, I also noticed that during long, high-speed turns (Putnam Park Turns 9-10, steady at 65 mph), the car just seemed to stick better with the H&Rs.
It seems you give up some turn-in response feel for better stick. Given the two options, I'll take the better stick through long turns!
I won't repeat myself, about the RB springs. They're great for quick manuevers that are seen in autocrosses, but not the greatest at high speed tracks. Honestly, I've spun off track many more times with the RB springs, but very few times with the H&Rs. Maybe I got better as a driver? Or maybe, I'm more comfortable with the way H&Rs than I was with the RBs on track? By the same token, my car feels sluggish with the H&Rs (vs. the RBs) through the slalom cones during the few autocrosses I attend. If I were strictly an slalom racer, the RBs would have stayed on the car. Fact is I do 15 track day/weekends and only 2 autocrosses. For my needs the H&Rs are the better springs.
Yes stiffer springs do help with controlling body roll. I didn't intend for my post to say stiffer springs DON'T help with body roll. They do. But if you want the best control, thicker sway bars are the solution!
[/B]
we do two different types of racing, and are two different racers. I do high speed road racing stuff. The slowest turn I negotiate is 55 mph. The fastest is 95 mph. If the tires load too quickly at these speeds (with too stiff a linear rate spring), while cornering at THE limit, available grip runs out, and off you go. Progressive rate springs transfer those cornering loads GRADUALLY to the tires' contact patches, so the available grip isn't exceeded, and you stay planted.
True, so far the only "racing" I have done has been at the Auto-x's. This is only due to lack of funds on my part. I prefer road racing over auto-x by far though. I have done a lot of studying and research when it comes to suspension, and making cars handle better. I do lots of high speed driving on backroads. Living in Oregon they are all over the place. And I agree with what you are saying about stiff linear rate springs transferring load much quicker onto the tires, therefore causing the coefficent of friction to be exceeded more quickly. But at the the same time with progressive rate springs, the car isn't going to rebound as quickly and setup for whatevers next, so setting up for a series of corners or a chicane can be more difficult. Also even though linear rate springs, might cause your car to loose traction more quickly, it allows you have a better feel for when the car is losing traction, and it allows the driver feel the slip angle of the tires and use that to his advantage. There is a long 45mph corner I take everyday on the way to work. I can go into it 90 or so, and smoothly accelerate to about 110 through out it. After 110 the back end starts to drift out, but it is very controllable and gradual. It just takes some finess when entering a corner so as to not lose traction at the beginning of it.
I can see though, how progressive rate springs might make driving easier on a road course for some people.
I agree that my first two weeks with the H&Rs after having the RBs for 3 years; turn-in seemed slower, and sloppier with the H&Rs. BUT, I also noticed that during long, high-speed turns (Putnam Park Turns 9-10, steady at 65 mph), the car just seemed to stick better with the H&Rs.
It seems you give up some turn-in response feel for better stick. Given the two options, I'll take the better stick through long turns!
I won't repeat myself, about the RB springs. They're great for quick manuevers that are seen in autocrosses, but not the greatest at high speed tracks. Honestly, I've spun off track many more times with the RB springs, but very few times with the H&Rs. Maybe I got better as a driver? Or maybe, I'm more comfortable with the way H&Rs than I was with the RBs on track? By the same token, my car feels sluggish with the H&Rs (vs. the RBs) through the slalom cones during the few autocrosses I attend. If I were strictly an slalom racer, the RBs would have stayed on the car. Fact is I do 15 track day/weekends and only 2 autocrosses. For my needs the H&Rs are the better springs.
Yes stiffer springs do help with controlling body roll. I didn't intend for my post to say stiffer springs DON'T help with body roll. They do. But if you want the best control, thicker sway bars are the solution!
[/B]
01-16-02, 04:22 PM
#9
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
Re: Re: Good to disagree, but
Backroads driving isn't the same as *****-to-the-wall driving on a closed-to-public traffic, road circuit.
Any seasoned autocrosser will tell you that high speed road racing is a totally different animal. You just CANNOT toss your car around the track WITHOUT losing time, or worse--losing IT and going OFF.
Reading about high speed performance driving, ISN'T the same as actually doing it at 10/10ths on track for 30 minutes at a time for 5 sessions.
I have 5 years of high speed road racing (non competitive) experience. I've been to Road America, Road Atlanta, Mid Ohio, Putnam Park, Gingerman, Summit Point.
Mid Ohio's, Summit Point's, and Road Atlanta's "Ses" pose no problems for the H&Rs.
Mid Ohio's "bus stop chicane" poses no problems to the H&Rs.
Believe me, you'll want progressive springs at Summit Point. That place is BUMPY!
Road America's Carousel, is probably the longest sweeper I've done...100 mph steady, and mash the gas without lifting through the "Kink" (if you've got the *****)
Do your first high speed driving school with your stiff springs and shocks at Portland, and let me know how you do...
Any seasoned autocrosser will tell you that high speed road racing is a totally different animal. You just CANNOT toss your car around the track WITHOUT losing time, or worse--losing IT and going OFF.
Reading about high speed performance driving, ISN'T the same as actually doing it at 10/10ths on track for 30 minutes at a time for 5 sessions.
I have 5 years of high speed road racing (non competitive) experience. I've been to Road America, Road Atlanta, Mid Ohio, Putnam Park, Gingerman, Summit Point.
Mid Ohio's, Summit Point's, and Road Atlanta's "Ses" pose no problems for the H&Rs.
Mid Ohio's "bus stop chicane" poses no problems to the H&Rs.
Believe me, you'll want progressive springs at Summit Point. That place is BUMPY!
Road America's Carousel, is probably the longest sweeper I've done...100 mph steady, and mash the gas without lifting through the "Kink" (if you've got the *****)
Do your first high speed driving school with your stiff springs and shocks at Portland, and let me know how you do...
01-16-02, 07:52 PM
#11
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
www.tirerack.com
that's where I got mine 2 years ago. They were $209 a set then. Don't know what they cost now.
Note this is my experience with H&R with R1 shocks. If you like autocrossing, and like stiffer ride, the Racing Beats with R1 shocks are for you!
FWIW, the H&Rs are a much better finished product. When I pulled the RB springs out, to replace them with the new H&Rs, the paint was all chipped, and there was bare metal rusting on the RB springs. This is completely unacceptable in a performance product IMO. I inspect my suspension system regularly, and there's no chipped paint or bare rusting metal to date.
You do know that H&R is a prominent German spring maker, and is better known than Eibach in Germany!
Note this is my experience with H&R with R1 shocks. If you like autocrossing, and like stiffer ride, the Racing Beats with R1 shocks are for you!
FWIW, the H&Rs are a much better finished product. When I pulled the RB springs out, to replace them with the new H&Rs, the paint was all chipped, and there was bare metal rusting on the RB springs. This is completely unacceptable in a performance product IMO. I inspect my suspension system regularly, and there's no chipped paint or bare rusting metal to date.
You do know that H&R is a prominent German spring maker, and is better known than Eibach in Germany!
01-16-02, 11:39 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: SF
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: www.tirerack.com
Originally posted by SleepR1
that's where I got mine 2 years ago. They were $209 a set then. Don't know what they cost now.
Note this is my experience with H&R with R1 shocks. If you like autocrossing, and like stiffer ride, the Racing Beats with R1 shocks are for you!
FWIW, the H&Rs are a much better finished product. When I pulled the RB springs out, to replace them with the new H&Rs, the paint was all chipped, and there was bare metal rusting on the RB springs. This is completely unacceptable in a performance product IMO. I inspect my suspension system regularly, and there's no chipped paint or bare rusting metal to date.
You do know that H&R is a prominent German spring maker, and is better known than Eibach in Germany!
that's where I got mine 2 years ago. They were $209 a set then. Don't know what they cost now.
Note this is my experience with H&R with R1 shocks. If you like autocrossing, and like stiffer ride, the Racing Beats with R1 shocks are for you!
FWIW, the H&Rs are a much better finished product. When I pulled the RB springs out, to replace them with the new H&Rs, the paint was all chipped, and there was bare metal rusting on the RB springs. This is completely unacceptable in a performance product IMO. I inspect my suspension system regularly, and there's no chipped paint or bare rusting metal to date.
You do know that H&R is a prominent German spring maker, and is better known than Eibach in Germany!
01-17-02, 01:14 AM
#13
Rotary Enthusiast
FD sway bars
eibach's are 32mm fr, 19 mm rr with 2 holes, both bars very hollow.
I think they are too stiff, and switch to oem for winters. Sus tech has same od bar set, but solid steel and very heavy and stiff .... truck bars.
RB rear is also 19mm hollow, 2 holes. Just was on phone with RB guy, and talked him thru the measurments. much like eibach rear.
RB front is monster ... 35 mm tube, no adjustments. Big understeer, bad for rough tracks. May need solid sus-tech rear, or mabe even 22mm solid addco rear for auto-x.
M2 and Tri-point also have nice modular, adjustable front bars. 32mm od, but thin 3mm wall is available. Likely need RB rear bar set soft, or mabe m-speed solid rear with 2 holes, same od as the big 93 hollow rear bar.
more info at
http://www.scuderiaciriani.com/rx7/suspension.html
I think they are too stiff, and switch to oem for winters. Sus tech has same od bar set, but solid steel and very heavy and stiff .... truck bars.
RB rear is also 19mm hollow, 2 holes. Just was on phone with RB guy, and talked him thru the measurments. much like eibach rear.
RB front is monster ... 35 mm tube, no adjustments. Big understeer, bad for rough tracks. May need solid sus-tech rear, or mabe even 22mm solid addco rear for auto-x.
M2 and Tri-point also have nice modular, adjustable front bars. 32mm od, but thin 3mm wall is available. Likely need RB rear bar set soft, or mabe m-speed solid rear with 2 holes, same od as the big 93 hollow rear bar.
more info at
http://www.scuderiaciriani.com/rx7/suspension.html
01-17-02, 04:31 AM
#14
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
Re: Re: www.tirerack.com
Originally posted by potatobbq
I've heard of a few people complaining that the H&Rs are a bit too low up front... Do you have any problems with your tires rubbing or scraping the front lip? I would like to go with H&R over Eibach but I'm not sure if it it will be too low (my driveway has a nasty dip). I will be getting 17x8.5 (+40 offset) rims up front w/ 235/45 tires soon.
I've heard of a few people complaining that the H&Rs are a bit too low up front... Do you have any problems with your tires rubbing or scraping the front lip? I would like to go with H&R over Eibach but I'm not sure if it it will be too low (my driveway has a nasty dip). I will be getting 17x8.5 (+40 offset) rims up front w/ 235/45 tires soon.
Road setup: 8 x 16 SSR IA2, 38 mm offset, 225/50-16 Pirelli P-Zero
Track setup: 8.5 fr, 9.5 rr x 17 SSR Comp, 42 mm offset 245/45 fr-, 275/40- 17 rr Hoosier R3S03.
I would go 245/40-17 with the 8.5 x 17, 40 mm offsets. Shorter tire, and more clearance from the fender lip. Go up your driveway slowly.
01-17-02, 04:39 AM
#15
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
Re: FD sway bars
My Eibachs seem too heavy to be hollow...they're at least as heavy as the Suspension Techniques bars.
RB must have changed their design. The guys I know who have RB rear bars have only one set of holes (non adjustable)? Perhaps I mistakenly thought the RB fronts were adjustable? The bolts at the ends are supposed to be used to adjust the torsional stiffness?
I didn't know there was a 22-mm OD solid rear bar available for the FD? I hope there are mount bushings that go with that monster!
Good information on Steve Cirian's site, but many of the posts date back to 1998!
RB must have changed their design. The guys I know who have RB rear bars have only one set of holes (non adjustable)? Perhaps I mistakenly thought the RB fronts were adjustable? The bolts at the ends are supposed to be used to adjust the torsional stiffness?
I didn't know there was a 22-mm OD solid rear bar available for the FD? I hope there are mount bushings that go with that monster!
Good information on Steve Cirian's site, but many of the posts date back to 1998!
Originally posted by KevinK2
eibach's are 32mm fr, 19 mm rr with 2 holes, both bars very hollow.
I think they are too stiff, and switch to oem for winters. Sus tech has same od bar set, but solid steel and very heavy and stiff .... truck bars.
RB rear is also 19mm hollow, 2 holes. Just was on phone with RB guy, and talked him thru the measurments. much like eibach rear.
RB front is monster ... 35 mm tube, no adjustments. Big understeer, bad for rough tracks. May need solid sus-tech rear, or mabe even 22mm solid addco rear for auto-x.
M2 and Tri-point also have nice modular, adjustable front bars. 32mm od, but thin 3mm wall is available. Likely need RB rear bar set soft, or mabe m-speed solid rear with 2 holes, same od as the big 93 hollow rear bar.
more info at
http://www.scuderiaciriani.com/rx7/suspension.html
eibach's are 32mm fr, 19 mm rr with 2 holes, both bars very hollow.
I think they are too stiff, and switch to oem for winters. Sus tech has same od bar set, but solid steel and very heavy and stiff .... truck bars.
RB rear is also 19mm hollow, 2 holes. Just was on phone with RB guy, and talked him thru the measurments. much like eibach rear.
RB front is monster ... 35 mm tube, no adjustments. Big understeer, bad for rough tracks. May need solid sus-tech rear, or mabe even 22mm solid addco rear for auto-x.
M2 and Tri-point also have nice modular, adjustable front bars. 32mm od, but thin 3mm wall is available. Likely need RB rear bar set soft, or mabe m-speed solid rear with 2 holes, same od as the big 93 hollow rear bar.
more info at
http://www.scuderiaciriani.com/rx7/suspension.html
Last edited by SleepR1; 01-17-02 at 05:06 AM.
01-17-02, 11:40 AM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: SF
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: Re: www.tirerack.com
Originally posted by SleepR1
I have no rubbing problems with H&R springs.
Road setup: 8 x 16 SSR IA2, 38 mm offset, 225/50-16 Pirelli P-Zero
Track setup: 8.5 fr, 9.5 rr x 17 SSR Comp, 42 mm offset 245/45 fr-, 275/40- 17 rr Hoosier R3S03.
I would go 245/40-17 with the 8.5 x 17, 40 mm offsets. Shorter tire, and more clearance from the fender lip. Go up your driveway slowly.
I have no rubbing problems with H&R springs.
Road setup: 8 x 16 SSR IA2, 38 mm offset, 225/50-16 Pirelli P-Zero
Track setup: 8.5 fr, 9.5 rr x 17 SSR Comp, 42 mm offset 245/45 fr-, 275/40- 17 rr Hoosier R3S03.
I would go 245/40-17 with the 8.5 x 17, 40 mm offsets. Shorter tire, and more clearance from the fender lip. Go up your driveway slowly.
How much of a gap would say there is between the tire and the fender w/ the H&R and the 245/40-17 combination?
01-17-02, 11:51 AM
#19
Rotary Enthusiast
manny - bars
The eibach front is about 4.5mm thick. I weighed it and weight is consistent with about 4-5 mm thick tubing.
RB did change the original rear bar design, to what I described. Was just 1 hole, don't know if it used to be solid/hollow.
RB front bar is not designed or advertised as adjustable. Some use washers on end stud to change arm length, but this puts the small stud in bending ... not good, but if it works ...
RB did change the original rear bar design, to what I described. Was just 1 hole, don't know if it used to be solid/hollow.
RB front bar is not designed or advertised as adjustable. Some use washers on end stud to change arm length, but this puts the small stud in bending ... not good, but if it works ...
01-17-02, 11:51 AM
#20
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
potatobbq
About 2 fingers LF, 3 fingers LR, 2.5 fingers RF, and 3.5 fingers RR.
Fingers used are the index, middle and ring fingers. My glove size is large.
Fingers used are the index, middle and ring fingers. My glove size is large.
01-17-02, 11:54 AM
#21
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
kevin bars
4.5 mm...is that thick for a tubular, or average? Eibach bars damned heavy compared to stock!
Yes, understand with the front RB bars. Very thick up front. Probably too much understeer for my taste. Great for ovals like Michigan International Speedway!
Yes, understand with the front RB bars. Very thick up front. Probably too much understeer for my taste. Great for ovals like Michigan International Speedway!
01-17-02, 12:39 PM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: SF
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: potatobbq
Originally posted by SleepR1
About 2 fingers LF, 3 fingers LR, 2.5 fingers RF, and 3.5 fingers RR.
Fingers used are the index, middle and ring fingers. My glove size is large.
About 2 fingers LF, 3 fingers LR, 2.5 fingers RF, and 3.5 fingers RR.
Fingers used are the index, middle and ring fingers. My glove size is large.
03-16-03, 08:29 AM
#24
Lives on the Forum
Thread Starter
Bumping to the top for FD owners interested in stock (4-inch) outer diameter springs (H&R or Racing Beat), and aftermarket sway bars.
This thread is over a YEAR OLD, but the info remains accurate.
This thread is over a YEAR OLD, but the info remains accurate.
Last edited by SleepR1; 03-16-03 at 08:42 AM.
03-19-03, 02:56 PM
#25
Ex fd *****
There are Two types of RB front bars - A one Piece Non adjustable one that is in their new suspension kits, and the older "Speedway" style modular bar that could be ordered with different size/thickness "tubes" to vary stiffness. The "Speedway" style bar is also available from TriPoint and other Race Car shops.
Last edited by maxpesce; 03-19-03 at 03:04 PM.