Midwest 7's

iTrader: (4)

i have heard of people taking them off, i just noticed the rear end i built up does not have one on it and my end links are shot. toying with the idea that i do not need it. what kind of differences would i expect by not having one?

coldy13

I put a 1.25" front sway bar and took off the rear on my car, doesn't oversteer quite as much anymore.

z-beater

I read an awesome thread in the race tech section. Might want to try searching there.

85rotarypower

I've read about this, and its not entirely recommended. I don't know exactly why, but I have experienced the snap oversteer these cars are known for, and it isn't fun. I would say give it a try, and if you don't like the way the car feels without the sway bar, just put it back on. Its really not all that hard.

Anthrax Mike

I think it better to just beef up the front bar to overcome the rear stiffness, no?

diabolical1

iTrader: (3)

the cars are naturally tail-happy. removing the bar is not going to change that. that said, removing the bar will increase it's tolerance for harder cornering.

however, that's not to say that you won't experience unexpected end-swapping. just about every Rx-7 i've driven with the 20+ year old suspension bushings actually plows a little just before the rear end lets go, so you may want to freshen up the front bushings before (or after) you remove the rear bar. and that's not even bringing tires into the equation ...

Midwest 7's

iTrader: (4)

really i am just to lazy to pull it off another rear end and paint it to go with my nicely painted rear end.

gsterror

I tried for a while with the bar, and without. I don't really notice any bad difference WITHOUT the rear bar (although the 'limit' of turning seems to have increased), but there is ONE bad thing.

Last time I went to a solo event, I was disqualified for not having the rear bar on. Tech got on me hard that day (god forbid the day they find out that I'm actually street ported ), even bitched about me not having the stock carburetor (fought over that. Technically, a Yaw is stock!)

I just got unlucky, I think, because there was another kid with a completely stock 84 there that got teched right before me. Boo to him!

bad 83

iTrader: (3)

Ok. I am a bit confused on this myself. I just spent a complete day this week changing the entire rear end in my 83 because it got a "little" tail happy and done a 180 on me. Put me in a ditch backwards doing about 80. Scary, real scary. Thing hit so hard it blew out the right rear tire and warped the axle. I would also like to know about the pros and cons of removing the sway bar. I tend to push the old girl a little harder than she was intendid for sometimes.

aussiesmg

iTrader: (1)

IMHO I am for removing the rear bar, I do it on all my cars first, because the rear has a solid axle this works to some extent as a anti sway bar, removing the rear bar makes the car more predictable when it reaches the limit of grip. Just learn to use opposite lock and then drive to the limits of your suspension

peejay

At stock ride height for a base model no options car with new springs, the rear bar makes sense.

On my stock ride height 2200lb '80 model, I kept the mongo 18mm (twice as stiff as what FBs had) rear bar and the handling was just about perfect.

FBs weighed a little more than SAs and sat a little lower, so the suspension geometry changes and the resistance to roll changes, but it changes for the softer in the front and for the stiffer in the rear, so Mazda gave the FBs the smaller 15mm rear bars to compensate.

After 20 years the springs are well and truly sagged so often it's best to just yank the rear bar altogether to compensate.

Ever notice that lowering springs are like almost twice as stiff in the front but the same or softer in the back? Same reason - lower makes the geometry change so you have to retune the rates to compensate. Only, factory springs in 2006 are lower than lowering springs... ut-oh!

nickj

When we raced these cas in Showroom Stock, we disabled the rear bar. Maybe a little more understeer, and more traction out of the turns (open diffs). In any case, it was faster with the bar disabled.

I have the rear bar on my '85 and I like the neutral handling, but if the car didn't have one when I bought it, I wouldn't add one.

Hyper4mance2k

iTrader: (40)

Do not remove the bar. I have tesed the car both ways. The bar slows suspension movement and in turn makes it take a longer harder turn to get to the infinate roll point that our car is known for. With out the rear bar you WILL reach that point sooner and have snap over stear. Seriously! Mazda put it there for a reason. I did tests with eibach pro kit and tokico shocks. trust me it's worse with out it. You can remove it if you're running rear springs heavier than 150lbs/inch and a 3rd link and panhard. then it's bennificial to remove the bar, but not with the watts and 4 link.

RacerX7fb

Some conflicting information here.

aussiesmg

iTrader: (1)

Bottom line, take it to the track with a stopwatch, run it on then disconnect one end and run again, see what works for your style and what the stopwatch says.

Weed Wacker

On my street car i have the stock suspension (all original except for replacing blown rear shocks with some monroes i had lying around) and the car handling is vey neutral. But on my IT car i have the panhard setup with no rear bar, but i have tokico illuma's with eibach springs (F:300 lbs R:200lbs)

peejay

My front roll center is raised up quite a bit and I have "too stiff" dampers and 200lb-in springs up there. I run no front sway bar.

In the rear, I have 100lb-in springs. I used to have 200lb-in back there in an effort to gain turn-in, but it completely destroyed the ability to power out of corners so overall times dropped substantially.

I'm currently on the hunt for some tall, 80-ish pound springs for the back, and I plan on addressing the turn-in issue with some negative camber and some softer dampers up front. I already lowered the RC some, which seems to have helped.

Generally speaking, softer is better in the rear in a RWD, you want the rear tires to easily follow the road for maximum rear grip for powering out of corners. This is *way* important, if you can accelerate 10 feet sooner, then you have made the straight 10 feet longer. You get understeer, yeah, but understeer is better than not being able to hook up

Of course this is for *race* cars. Race cars don't have to have pleasant handling, they just have to be fast.

For street cars... you *probably* want the rear bar off. It depends on your driving style.

nickj

No conflict. With stock springs, the car is faster without the rear bar. It won't snap on you. We didn't disconnect the rear bar in SS to go slower. With that setup, the car was a dream to drive.

Yes, Mazda put the rear bar there for a reason. They wanted a good compromise between ride and handling. They got it. For that reason alone, I don't see any reason to remove it. But there's nothing wrong with leaving it off, either. End of story with the stock springs.

When you play with the springs, however, all bets are off. You can really mess up the handling. I mean seriously screw it up. Best bet is to go with the complete package from a single supplier, one that's been tested and proven.