cheap suspension upgrades
02-22-04, 09:56 PM
#26
Senior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany, OR
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i like where tom was going. i have thought a lot about wheel and tire size. the poll on best looking wheels and size but i haven't seen a whole lot about tire size. i like the 16's and i heard the biggest you can go in the front is 16x7's with 205 tires. does anyone know how big you can go in the rear. i saw somebody with 16x8's in the rear but i don't know about the tire size. does anyone know how big you can go in the rear? thanks.
02-26-04, 01:42 AM
#27
Full Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by peejay
A regulation hockey puck is *just* the right diameter to fit inside the FB front lower spring pocket. Just need to holesaw out the center, make a slice to allow it to fit the spring pocket, and maybe a hoseclamp around the mess to prevent it from spreading. Times two for a roughly 1.5-2" additional ride height, which ain't much considering with stock springs there's only about an INCH of compression travel with the stock sagged springs. But that's right in the middle of the strut's stroke, and rebound travel is as important as compression.
A regulation hockey puck is *just* the right diameter to fit inside the FB front lower spring pocket. Just need to holesaw out the center, make a slice to allow it to fit the spring pocket, and maybe a hoseclamp around the mess to prevent it from spreading. Times two for a roughly 1.5-2" additional ride height, which ain't much considering with stock springs there's only about an INCH of compression travel with the stock sagged springs. But that's right in the middle of the strut's stroke, and rebound travel is as important as compression.
George
03-07-04, 01:47 PM
#29
Old [Sch|F]ool
The suspension is in.
And it is Good.
Two hockey pucks per side in the front, one roughly inch tall coil-saver mounted *over* the rear springs. Goodly amount of ride height increase - now there is three inches of compression travel from static ride height in the front.
Working on a more complete write-up as I continue testing the car. Let's just say for now that I was right about everything.
And it is Good.
Two hockey pucks per side in the front, one roughly inch tall coil-saver mounted *over* the rear springs. Goodly amount of ride height increase - now there is three inches of compression travel from static ride height in the front.
Working on a more complete write-up as I continue testing the car. Let's just say for now that I was right about everything.
03-09-04, 12:41 PM
#31
Old [Sch|F]ool
Just in this thread, and a similar thread on Mazspeed.
There's nothing to the hockey pucks. Buy hockey pucks, run through 'em with a 1 7/8" hole saw (I used a 1 3/4 since that's the OD of the strut, but that turned out to be JUST a little too small), slice through it so it can twist under the bottom coil. If you go with two under each front spring then you'll want to wrap a hose clamp around the upper puck to make sure it doesn't squeeze out.
Note that in either event, you will want some way of raising the rear as well, to get the full effect.
Car looks *gooood* now, BTW. I hate the lowrider look - it has no function for a street car, and I can't see any form in something that has no function.
There's nothing to the hockey pucks. Buy hockey pucks, run through 'em with a 1 7/8" hole saw (I used a 1 3/4 since that's the OD of the strut, but that turned out to be JUST a little too small), slice through it so it can twist under the bottom coil. If you go with two under each front spring then you'll want to wrap a hose clamp around the upper puck to make sure it doesn't squeeze out.
Note that in either event, you will want some way of raising the rear as well, to get the full effect.
Car looks *gooood* now, BTW. I hate the lowrider look - it has no function for a street car, and I can't see any form in something that has no function.
03-11-04, 03:02 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: GA
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can speak very clearly about the most improved handling mod I found w/ my Miata. Jackson Racing sways. Flattened turns like you can’t believe! Did shocks. Springs & sways to the 7 at the same time so can’t differentiate what was the most valuable component.
03-11-04, 04:47 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Fort McMurray, Alberta
Posts: 723
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, very interesting.
I think I might start off with one puck and go from there. As it stands the rear has double the gap from the front (I'll actually measure it properly one day), so I'd like to balance it out. I remember reading on ausrotary that the 1st gen is one of those weird cars that likes the rear slighty lower than the front for best handling, like 10mm.
Well the price is right, I think I'm going to fiddle with this once I find my spring compressors.
I think I might start off with one puck and go from there. As it stands the rear has double the gap from the front (I'll actually measure it properly one day), so I'd like to balance it out. I remember reading on ausrotary that the 1st gen is one of those weird cars that likes the rear slighty lower than the front for best handling, like 10mm.
Well the price is right, I think I'm going to fiddle with this once I find my spring compressors.
03-13-04, 08:50 AM
#34
Whack 'em and stack 'em
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Clarksburg/Bridgeport WV- North Central Appalachia
Posts: 1,373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That sounds really interesting. I'm seriously considering getting rid of the tociko springs in my car. I don't like the 'slammed' look and the kidney pounding ride. So this set up would work with say- RB springs (which are a little softer than Tociko's) and basically orient the height back to stock? Wondering aloud here- but what about running new stock springs, tociko illimuna's and stiffer front sway bar, stock or adjustable rear swaybar..in lieu of hockey pucks??..) I like a car that handles but not punishes
03-16-04, 06:03 PM
#35
Full Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Bozeman, MT
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the subject of hockey pucks...why not just make yourself some turn-in-spacers??? I could see it if you off road ralley race or something but I think you guys are all blacktop racers and I don't understand the benifit of raising your cars COG and making it less aerodinamic.
Also, be very carefull and check them constantly. Hockey pucks are well known for being used as hillbilly body lifts in 4x4s. In this aplication it is bolted tight, doesn't get the extreme cyclic loads that it would in your suspension, only supports the cab not the hole rig, using 10 - 16 mounting points vs. just 4 with your aplication.
Check them constantly, eventualy they always crack and begin to crumble. If one comes out on you while you are driving down the road heaven help you...and the other people on the road. A large band clamp snuged around the outside of the puck will buy you some time...keeping the large chunks together untill you notice the broken puck.
Also, be very carefull and check them constantly. Hockey pucks are well known for being used as hillbilly body lifts in 4x4s. In this aplication it is bolted tight, doesn't get the extreme cyclic loads that it would in your suspension, only supports the cab not the hole rig, using 10 - 16 mounting points vs. just 4 with your aplication.
Check them constantly, eventualy they always crack and begin to crumble. If one comes out on you while you are driving down the road heaven help you...and the other people on the road. A large band clamp snuged around the outside of the puck will buy you some time...keeping the large chunks together untill you notice the broken puck.
03-16-04, 07:47 PM
#37
Old [Sch|F]ool
Look at it this way - It's cheaper than buying new coilover springs, but it's a great way to see how altering the roll couple affects handling.
Plus it is SO nice to have suspension travel. Truly it is.
I'll probably end up buying some 14" long 110 pound 2.5" springs and using them. It appears that with two pucks, the coils in the front can bind at full compression. Need to fix that. While I have it apart again, I can install some camber plates, because while the handling is greatly improved, the understeer is a bit much at times. (Probably due to all the positive camber)
I *could* reinstall the rear swaybar... but that is merely reducing the rear grip to benefit the front. I like being able to accelerate out of corners.
I'm not worried about longevity, in other words. They *do* seem to be holding up just fine. However, I think I broke another rear suspension link, and the ball joints are now loose too... the hockey pucks might outlast the rest of the suspension! *grin*
Plus it is SO nice to have suspension travel. Truly it is.
I'll probably end up buying some 14" long 110 pound 2.5" springs and using them. It appears that with two pucks, the coils in the front can bind at full compression. Need to fix that. While I have it apart again, I can install some camber plates, because while the handling is greatly improved, the understeer is a bit much at times. (Probably due to all the positive camber)
I *could* reinstall the rear swaybar... but that is merely reducing the rear grip to benefit the front. I like being able to accelerate out of corners.
I'm not worried about longevity, in other words. They *do* seem to be holding up just fine. However, I think I broke another rear suspension link, and the ball joints are now loose too... the hockey pucks might outlast the rest of the suspension! *grin*
03-21-04, 09:08 PM
#38
Old [Sch|F]ool
The coils *are* binding.
Note the rub marks on the coil the yardstick is pointing at. The coils are binding when the suspension bottoms (yes it's still bottoming even with 2" of lift) and when that happens the smaller diameter coil is going up *inside* the other coils. Mega badness.
First clue was that the ride height has dropped 3/4" in the front over the past roughly 1500-2000mi. That should not happen with used (pre-set) springs. Then I looked and saw the problem.
So BE CAREFUL. Make sure the springs can't coil bind! One way is to use a bigger bumpstop... but while that gives you the geometry benefits, it doesn't do anything about suspension travel. (Again, note that it's STILL bottoming out!) Could use less spacer... but then you lose both travel *and* geometry. The real solution is stiffer and/or longer springs. I'd like to try both a 12" long 150lb spring, and a 14" long 110lb spring. But that costs money, and a stiffer spring would require different shock valving.
Note the rub marks on the coil the yardstick is pointing at. The coils are binding when the suspension bottoms (yes it's still bottoming even with 2" of lift) and when that happens the smaller diameter coil is going up *inside* the other coils. Mega badness.
First clue was that the ride height has dropped 3/4" in the front over the past roughly 1500-2000mi. That should not happen with used (pre-set) springs. Then I looked and saw the problem.
So BE CAREFUL. Make sure the springs can't coil bind! One way is to use a bigger bumpstop... but while that gives you the geometry benefits, it doesn't do anything about suspension travel. (Again, note that it's STILL bottoming out!) Could use less spacer... but then you lose both travel *and* geometry. The real solution is stiffer and/or longer springs. I'd like to try both a 12" long 150lb spring, and a 14" long 110lb spring. But that costs money, and a stiffer spring would require different shock valving.
05-10-08, 01:37 PM
#39
Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Findlay, Ohio
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting
Carful with the big wheels. This car was designed for 13 inch wheels as far as geometry, ride height, clearance and brakes.
Think of the wheels as flywheels, because they are. Four flywheels to be exact. When you go up in diameter you place most of the mass at a larger diameter and the rotational momentum of the wheel goes up by the square of the difference. It takes more to accelerate and more to brake. If the tire OD is bigger than stock it also reduces the leverage on the brakes. Do that and forget about much lowering, because it won't fit under the wheel wells, and will look like a 4 foot man with size 10 shoes. So be smart and stick with stock tire OD or less and the lightest wheels you can, whatever the OD.
When the front roll center goes close to ground, meaning the lower control arm becomes level, it also becomes unstable and moves as much as five feet laterally per degree of roll. Think of the roll center as a teeter totter, and the roll center is the pivot between the springs and the wheel. Not only does a lower car lose roll stiffness, but the car can become quirky if you go too far.
Going stiffer also needs more damping. A lot more. 500 lb springs can feel really glued to the road when the proper damping is used. It is the lack of suitable damping from a warmed-over street shock originally designed to produce 15% of critical that is usually the problem with going very stiff. All the shocks but the double adjustable race Konis are no good over 300 lb. or so.
Look at my products at gforceengineering.net. Every one of these was designed to solve a problem with the lowered suspension. The bullets tell the story of why.
Expensive, yes. But you get what you pay for. Suspensions are very complex.
If you are not bridge designer and don't know what happens when you change the bridge supports, I woudn't be driving over that bridge. Your car may feel OK for street driving, but just wait until you have to make an emergency maneuver!! This car is known for getting ugly real fast even when stock. Without a good understanding of what needs to be done to correct the already screwey geomentry, it gets worse the lower you get.
Jim
Think of the wheels as flywheels, because they are. Four flywheels to be exact. When you go up in diameter you place most of the mass at a larger diameter and the rotational momentum of the wheel goes up by the square of the difference. It takes more to accelerate and more to brake. If the tire OD is bigger than stock it also reduces the leverage on the brakes. Do that and forget about much lowering, because it won't fit under the wheel wells, and will look like a 4 foot man with size 10 shoes. So be smart and stick with stock tire OD or less and the lightest wheels you can, whatever the OD.
When the front roll center goes close to ground, meaning the lower control arm becomes level, it also becomes unstable and moves as much as five feet laterally per degree of roll. Think of the roll center as a teeter totter, and the roll center is the pivot between the springs and the wheel. Not only does a lower car lose roll stiffness, but the car can become quirky if you go too far.
Going stiffer also needs more damping. A lot more. 500 lb springs can feel really glued to the road when the proper damping is used. It is the lack of suitable damping from a warmed-over street shock originally designed to produce 15% of critical that is usually the problem with going very stiff. All the shocks but the double adjustable race Konis are no good over 300 lb. or so.
Look at my products at gforceengineering.net. Every one of these was designed to solve a problem with the lowered suspension. The bullets tell the story of why.
Expensive, yes. But you get what you pay for. Suspensions are very complex.
If you are not bridge designer and don't know what happens when you change the bridge supports, I woudn't be driving over that bridge. Your car may feel OK for street driving, but just wait until you have to make an emergency maneuver!! This car is known for getting ugly real fast even when stock. Without a good understanding of what needs to be done to correct the already screwey geomentry, it gets worse the lower you get.
Jim
Thanks
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
HalifaxFD
Canadian Forum
126
05-09-16 07:06 PM
