View Poll Results: Which FC Antisway bar would you use?
Eibach bars (adj)
4
40.00%
Suspension Tech bars (adj)
2
20.00%
Racing Beat non-adjustable bars
4
40.00%
Voters: 10. You may not vote on this poll
FC Anti-Sway Bars?
#1
Rotary Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FC Anti-Sway Bars?
I'm looking for some options on the Suspension Tech, Eibach and RB. This would be used for mostly Solo II and some track days.
I like the sus tech because of the larger size
"Eibach Anti-Roll Bars help reduce body roll and allow the vehicle's handling to be fine tuned to the track and the driver. Kit includes urethane bushings, mounting hardware and instructions.
Eibach Front = 28.5mm, Rear = 17.0mm"
"Suspension Techniques Sway bar systems are designed to minimize body roll when cornering, resulting in improved vehicle balance and handling. Each system includes larger diameter front and rear anti-sway bars, low-deflection urethane bushings, complete mounting hardware and installation instructions. Bars also sold separately.
Suspension Tech Front = 28mm, Rear = 19mm
I think both bars are adjustable rear bars, while the RB bars are non-adjustable. I'm not really at the level to get anything custom made, unless it's cheap.
The RB sizes
Front -28.5mm Rear - 16mm
I've heard that the sus tech has crappy mounting stuff with it. While I've heard nothing but good things about the Eibach. Anyone?
I like the sus tech because of the larger size
"Eibach Anti-Roll Bars help reduce body roll and allow the vehicle's handling to be fine tuned to the track and the driver. Kit includes urethane bushings, mounting hardware and instructions.
Eibach Front = 28.5mm, Rear = 17.0mm"
"Suspension Techniques Sway bar systems are designed to minimize body roll when cornering, resulting in improved vehicle balance and handling. Each system includes larger diameter front and rear anti-sway bars, low-deflection urethane bushings, complete mounting hardware and installation instructions. Bars also sold separately.
Suspension Tech Front = 28mm, Rear = 19mm
I think both bars are adjustable rear bars, while the RB bars are non-adjustable. I'm not really at the level to get anything custom made, unless it's cheap.
The RB sizes
Front -28.5mm Rear - 16mm
I've heard that the sus tech has crappy mounting stuff with it. While I've heard nothing but good things about the Eibach. Anyone?
Last edited by SoloIIdrift; 09-03-02 at 03:23 PM.
#2
Has been.. hangin' around
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Milpitas, CA
Posts: 2,618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roughly:
F - 28.5
R - 16
And I can't vote yet. However, spring rates are going to very important as well as swaybar type. Additionally, are those bars solid or hollow? And how thick if they are hollow.
PaulC
F - 28.5
R - 16
And I can't vote yet. However, spring rates are going to very important as well as swaybar type. Additionally, are those bars solid or hollow? And how thick if they are hollow.
PaulC
#6
Persona non grata
I went with the RB front, and stock rear. FC's problem is understeer so you really don't want a bigger rear bar. In fact, a lot of guys disconnect the rear bar completely for road racing/autocross. I'm going to experiment both ways.
#7
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Illinois
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went with the RB front, and stock rear. FC's problem is understeer so you really don't want a bigger rear bar. In fact, a lot of guys disconnect the rear bar completely for road racing/autocross. I'm going to experiment both ways.
Cale Yarborough said "Understeer is when I hit the wall with the front of my car. Oversteer is when I hit the wall with the back of my car."
Trending Topics
#8
inteligent extratarestril
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Sunny B.O.P, New Zealand
Posts: 1,313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah i've always understood that the front sway bar keeps the car flat entering the corner, while the rear sway bar keeps the car flat while exiting the corner
#9
Full Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Philly, Pa.
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Front rear roll stiffness biases the lateral weight transfer (the stiffer end gets a higher percentage of the lateral weight transfer).. The end that has proportionately less lateral weight transfer loses less grip.
I can't remember the attribution of the quote, but "Oversteer is when the passenger is scared. Understeer is when the driver is scared."
Stiffer front means the front loses more grip than the rear due to lateral weight transfer than the rear does.
I can't remember the attribution of the quote, but "Oversteer is when the passenger is scared. Understeer is when the driver is scared."
Stiffer front means the front loses more grip than the rear due to lateral weight transfer than the rear does.
#10
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MechE00 said: "Stiffer front means the front loses more grip than the rear due to lateral weight transfer than the rear does"
Yes and No. No because I my experience tell me that FC need more roll stiffness in the front to keep the front tires from rolling over to the edge on high G's corners, I need a stiiffer front bar to limit the amount of roll at front to gain more traction since I can't dialed more negitive camber than I need in E-stock SoloII. this is my experience only.
89 GTUS
Yes and No. No because I my experience tell me that FC need more roll stiffness in the front to keep the front tires from rolling over to the edge on high G's corners, I need a stiiffer front bar to limit the amount of roll at front to gain more traction since I can't dialed more negitive camber than I need in E-stock SoloII. this is my experience only.
89 GTUS
#11
Full Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Philly, Pa.
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ben, true.. my quick analysis looks only at the weight transfer part of things, and assumes you have perfect tires, no camber issues, etc..
In stock class where only the front is free to swap, then if you need more roll stiffness to handle de-cambering issues then yeah, you gotta do what ya gotta do..
If not limited to stock, though, and if the chassis has enough torsional rigidity, you might be better served by stiffening both the front and back by the aforementioned guidelines, as opposed to just one side-- depending on what behaviors you're trying to tune into the chassis.
Hehehe.. I have a throrough understanding of superficial suspension tuning theory!
In stock class where only the front is free to swap, then if you need more roll stiffness to handle de-cambering issues then yeah, you gotta do what ya gotta do..
If not limited to stock, though, and if the chassis has enough torsional rigidity, you might be better served by stiffening both the front and back by the aforementioned guidelines, as opposed to just one side-- depending on what behaviors you're trying to tune into the chassis.
Hehehe.. I have a throrough understanding of superficial suspension tuning theory!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
eplusz
General Rotary Tech Support
15
10-07-15 04:04 PM