Pettit Racing Trak Pro Coilover Kit
08-05-11, 04:42 PM
#626
I think that is a bit tongue in cheek. However, I agree that more info is always better and at the very least let's people make their decision with a full deck.
That said, I have put a few thousand more miles on these and they are still making me smile.
-M
08-05-11, 04:55 PM
#627
lol, I guess 
whatever the case the car handles great, feels great, and the height was adjustable enough to get my v8 swapped car 1/2-1/2 weight distro with a nice ride height and cross weight. it's all good but still haven't heard back from these guys regarding the rear fittings that bolt to the upper arms. I shouldn't have to break out my grinder every couple hundred miles to cut more material off to keep it from banging. that's a design flaw, no bones about it. makes me wonder if they ever did testing on a street driven FD with these coilovers. 
I've called them several times and spoke with a human twice. sent a couple of emails, no dice. not happy with that.
whatever the case the car handles great, feels great, and the height was adjustable enough to get my v8 swapped car 1/2-1/2 weight distro with a nice ride height and cross weight. it's all good but still haven't heard back from these guys regarding the rear fittings that bolt to the upper arms. I shouldn't have to break out my grinder every couple hundred miles to cut more material off to keep it from banging. that's a design flaw, no bones about it. makes me wonder if they ever did testing on a street driven FD with these coilovers. I've called them several times and spoke with a human twice. sent a couple of emails, no dice. not happy with that.
07-05-12, 10:34 PM
#629
I've just finished reading the whole 26 pages. At first I was really excited by these coilovers. I thought that I found a good replacement for my Apexi N1 which are too hard (12kg/mm all around) for the street. When I arrived at the reselling a generic product part and the rear coilover hitting the arm part, it turned me off a bit.
Anyone has more feedback about these after more than one year since the last post?
Anyone has more feedback about these after more than one year since the last post?
07-07-12, 04:00 AM
#631
After two season of tracking and 15,000 kilometer (DGGR twice) no problems, and about the rear coilover hitting the arm ..... Just shave the casting *** off the arm ...... Fixed. Customer service could be better, never received the new rear celvis's but really don't feel like ripping the rear suspension apart again anyway.
clevis |ˈklevəs|
noun
a U-shaped or forked metal connector within which another part can be fastened by means of a bolt or pin passing through the ends of the connector.
07-07-12, 11:59 AM
#633
I have Stage III's and DD my car. I have driven it at Tail of the Dragon and Sebring. To say the car is neutral handling is an understatement. These coil overs just flat out rock. If grinding a piece of casting nub that shouldn't be there in the first place is a deal breaker for some of you guys then so be it. Buy something that fits a tad better but maybe sucks in its main roll (as a damper). There lots of options, how many have a good shock dyno and feel as good as these for the price is open to debate. Even with 12/10 spring rates my car doesn't feel as harsh as I though it would and probably not as harsh as other coilovers that have worse valving. I'll take good valving every time.
As much as we mod these cars to get the best performance, I really can't see why so many people are at arms about grinding a little piece of tab that had the factory been willing to spend the extra money in manufacturing, would have probably ground it of to begin with. How many here would want to purchase an expensive cast aluminum piece only to see the manufacture didn't final finish the product and remove the casting nubs. Here is a chance to perform final finishing as I see it and make a set of really good coilovers work flawlessly.
Maybe I just see it different and don't expect others to aggree. After all, I have a V8 in the car with 50/50 weight distribution and predictable handling.
Mike
As much as we mod these cars to get the best performance, I really can't see why so many people are at arms about grinding a little piece of tab that had the factory been willing to spend the extra money in manufacturing, would have probably ground it of to begin with. How many here would want to purchase an expensive cast aluminum piece only to see the manufacture didn't final finish the product and remove the casting nubs. Here is a chance to perform final finishing as I see it and make a set of really good coilovers work flawlessly.
Maybe I just see it different and don't expect others to aggree. After all, I have a V8 in the car with 50/50 weight distribution and predictable handling.
Mike
07-07-12, 11:46 PM
#636
I concur. i have mine set about like that. You want the rear softer so the car digs hard coming out of the corners. This will let you rotate and get on the gas sooner. I use a late apex line and this allows me to really dig coming out of a corner since the exit line is straighter as well.
07-08-12, 08:09 AM
#638
Racing Rotary Since 1983
iTrader: (6)
good initial setup advice from track7...
since you run less roll stiffness/spring rate in the rear and shocks primary use is to dampen the spring oscillations you want less valving in the rear shocks. i have both the Comp and stage 3s and run them w the stage 3 springs. i think they are a quality offering.
as to performance... Cam called a couple of weeks ago to say that he had won the Global Time Attack. he continues to get things done on track. here's is a pic he sent... i found it interesting.
note the RF is off the track a bit. generally this happens because the LR spring is too soft. diagonal transfer. on a level surface you get an exact dynamic relationship... that is, RF up 1.5 inches minus droop, LR into bump 1.5 inches plus the front droop.
not happening in the picture... because the L side of the car is on the banking.
front camber looks perfect, the rear needs some additional camber. pls ignore (if you wish) the commercial side to the pic, i would have edited it out but it is needed to convey the track surface.
it is great to see the FD doing what it was designed to do... finish first on a road course. WTG, Cam
since you run less roll stiffness/spring rate in the rear and shocks primary use is to dampen the spring oscillations you want less valving in the rear shocks. i have both the Comp and stage 3s and run them w the stage 3 springs. i think they are a quality offering.
as to performance... Cam called a couple of weeks ago to say that he had won the Global Time Attack. he continues to get things done on track. here's is a pic he sent... i found it interesting.
note the RF is off the track a bit. generally this happens because the LR spring is too soft. diagonal transfer. on a level surface you get an exact dynamic relationship... that is, RF up 1.5 inches minus droop, LR into bump 1.5 inches plus the front droop.
not happening in the picture... because the L side of the car is on the banking.
front camber looks perfect, the rear needs some additional camber. pls ignore (if you wish) the commercial side to the pic, i would have edited it out but it is needed to convey the track surface.
it is great to see the FD doing what it was designed to do... finish first on a road course. WTG, Cam
07-08-12, 10:38 PM
#642
Eye In The Sky
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In A Disfunctional World
Posts: 7,894
Likes: 0
Received 114 Likes
on
66 Posts
For those who went from GCs with their poor top mount to Stage 2 or 3,
was there an improvement with less NVH?
My GCs with Tokiko Illumina on even setting 1 are harsh.
was there an improvement with less NVH?
My GCs with Tokiko Illumina on even setting 1 are harsh.
07-10-12, 03:57 PM
#643
Racing Rotary Since 1983
iTrader: (6)
Hey Charles,
all of the GC coil over setups i have seen have a solid upper mount. if this is what you have you will notice a sig drop in NVH going back to more of an OE upper. all of the sprung weight of the car sits on the upper mount. since the upper mount has zero influence in any suspension dynamic there really is no benefit gained...
what spring rate are you running? and tire size? tire pressure cold?
hc
all of the GC coil over setups i have seen have a solid upper mount. if this is what you have you will notice a sig drop in NVH going back to more of an OE upper. all of the sprung weight of the car sits on the upper mount. since the upper mount has zero influence in any suspension dynamic there really is no benefit gained...
what spring rate are you running? and tire size? tire pressure cold?
hc
07-10-12, 08:23 PM
#645
07-10-12, 08:49 PM
#646
Also called ANSE suspension. Custom penski setup but is like 4times the price of pettit of any tawian built kit. What would you think the justification on such expense would be?
Thanks,
07-11-12, 07:16 AM
#647
Racing Rotary Since 1983
iTrader: (6)
"Would you have a recommendation on spring rates for an FC. I was thinking 500lbs front 400lbs rear."
while the FC shares similarities w the FD it is entirely different from a chassis aspect.
the FC has a strut front suspension so the WHEEL rate is the same as the spring rate.
the FD w it's double A arm suspension (all four wheels) delivers a wheel rate .6 of the spring rate. (that's because the lower spring mount is not out by the wheel, rather it is a bit inboard.)
if you put the same 400 pound spring on both cars you will find the FC has a wheel rate of 400 and the FD has a wheel rate of 240.
OTOH, the FC NEEDS stiffer springs because any movement from static creates camber loss. the beauty of the double A arm is that the smaller upper arm scribes a tighter arc and pulls the top of the tire in on bump. when the car rolls the FD negative camber gain retains proper camber in relation to the track. generally strut cars run lots of static negative camber and stiff springs to make things work.
the SCCA rulebook disallowed switching to double A arms so i had to run a (modified) version of front struts. we ran around 450 pound springs upfront at 2180 w me in the car and a very very low CG. your car probably weighs around 2750 w you in it? so if you track it alot i would recommend something around 550 front and 400 rear.
just understand that this measured as wheel rate will be very different than a FD.
spring rate is best evaluated w the tie wrap method and you are looking for no more than 2 inches on a FC.
as far as Penske shocks.... sure they are better than whatever however for most of us it is a question of prioritizing resources (money) and when weighing benefits gained versus money spent they are at the bottom of my list. i do believe the Pettit package, and similarly priced products, offers good value.
another consideration w re to the FC is that the chassis has alot of flex. if you add really stiff springs you may find no advantage because the chassis gives up the suspension settings. this can be fixed on a track FC w a well designed cage. the FD is very stiff in comparison.
good luck,
howard
while the FC shares similarities w the FD it is entirely different from a chassis aspect.
the FC has a strut front suspension so the WHEEL rate is the same as the spring rate.
the FD w it's double A arm suspension (all four wheels) delivers a wheel rate .6 of the spring rate. (that's because the lower spring mount is not out by the wheel, rather it is a bit inboard.)
if you put the same 400 pound spring on both cars you will find the FC has a wheel rate of 400 and the FD has a wheel rate of 240.
OTOH, the FC NEEDS stiffer springs because any movement from static creates camber loss. the beauty of the double A arm is that the smaller upper arm scribes a tighter arc and pulls the top of the tire in on bump. when the car rolls the FD negative camber gain retains proper camber in relation to the track. generally strut cars run lots of static negative camber and stiff springs to make things work.
the SCCA rulebook disallowed switching to double A arms so i had to run a (modified) version of front struts. we ran around 450 pound springs upfront at 2180 w me in the car and a very very low CG. your car probably weighs around 2750 w you in it? so if you track it alot i would recommend something around 550 front and 400 rear.
just understand that this measured as wheel rate will be very different than a FD.
spring rate is best evaluated w the tie wrap method and you are looking for no more than 2 inches on a FC.
as far as Penske shocks.... sure they are better than whatever however for most of us it is a question of prioritizing resources (money) and when weighing benefits gained versus money spent they are at the bottom of my list. i do believe the Pettit package, and similarly priced products, offers good value.
another consideration w re to the FC is that the chassis has alot of flex. if you add really stiff springs you may find no advantage because the chassis gives up the suspension settings. this can be fixed on a track FC w a well designed cage. the FD is very stiff in comparison.
good luck,
howard
09-20-12, 06:44 PM
#648
Eye In The Sky
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In A Disfunctional World
Posts: 7,894
Likes: 0
Received 114 Likes
on
66 Posts
Just went through the thread again, and saw things that I missed before.
From some people complaining I see:
(1) stock rubber brake lines being used, doh #1, and you complain about no line support.
(2) stock rear non adjustable plastic swaybar end links, and you complain about tight clearance, doh #2.
You are upgrading your suspension but still using other stock less desirable parts and complaining.
I purchased my March 1992 made R1 in July 1992. All the mods and rebuilt engine except for the paint job have been done or made by me. I have owned and worked on my FD longer than anyone else.
Most of my mods have required modding them to work or fit 100% correctly.
The Greddy stock mount IC from the early/mid 90s did not align up properly with the mount locations. Then you had to modify the stock IC air inlet shroud. Apexi’s idea for doing it was lacking, but I improved it for a better fit, performance, and looks. Poor design by Apexi.
From my first DP, MP, and CatBack, none have ever fit perfectly. Poor design by many.
Had the original Racing Beat lowering springs, and their hollow front swaybar like TriPoints, and solid rear sway bar. This caused a nut on the front sway bar to drag on the road going over some bumps. The rear sway bar drifted sideways and bounded up. Yes, poor design from RB.
How about the Apexi PFC not controlling the AC 100% like the stock ecu? Yes, Apexi poor desin again.
How many examples do I need to show that rarely do you get a mod that is 100% perfect? Even God has not made a perfect human yet!
Many of you live in a fantasy world and complain like children!
From some people complaining I see:
(1) stock rubber brake lines being used, doh #1, and you complain about no line support.
(2) stock rear non adjustable plastic swaybar end links, and you complain about tight clearance, doh #2.
You are upgrading your suspension but still using other stock less desirable parts and complaining.
I purchased my March 1992 made R1 in July 1992. All the mods and rebuilt engine except for the paint job have been done or made by me. I have owned and worked on my FD longer than anyone else.
Most of my mods have required modding them to work or fit 100% correctly.
The Greddy stock mount IC from the early/mid 90s did not align up properly with the mount locations. Then you had to modify the stock IC air inlet shroud. Apexi’s idea for doing it was lacking, but I improved it for a better fit, performance, and looks. Poor design by Apexi.
From my first DP, MP, and CatBack, none have ever fit perfectly. Poor design by many.
Had the original Racing Beat lowering springs, and their hollow front swaybar like TriPoints, and solid rear sway bar. This caused a nut on the front sway bar to drag on the road going over some bumps. The rear sway bar drifted sideways and bounded up. Yes, poor design from RB.
How about the Apexi PFC not controlling the AC 100% like the stock ecu? Yes, Apexi poor desin again.
How many examples do I need to show that rarely do you get a mod that is 100% perfect? Even God has not made a perfect human yet!
Many of you live in a fantasy world and complain like children!
09-22-12, 12:01 AM
#649
from someone who actually drives their car
You completely missed the point of my posts.
When it comes to things like exhaust flanges not lining up or bolt holes mismatched, or buggy software, or an oversight in the PCM logic, whatever, that's one thing. Tolerance stack ups and not thinking ahead in design phase will do that.
But there are plenty of other coil-over/shock setups that work well and are plug and play. Maybe I'm lazy in this respect, but I don't want to have to mod everything on the car all the time. For me, time is money. I'm not some old retired guy with time on my hands. I would gladly trade the time on install/testing for plug/play. If you can't see that it's not my problem.
My issue was an expectation not met, that's it. I don't want to have to be a test mule for a new product when I buy from someone as highly regarded as Pettit. If they really gave a **** they would have issued a bullitein or note to their customers but they didn't. Just kind of put it under the rug and I think that is bad business practice.
And about the complaining: for christ's sake I did an engine swap, do you realize how much "custom work" goes into something like that captain grumpy? I beat the **** out of my car and when something breaks I know how to fix it. I realize the world is not perfect, nothing is.
At the end of the day, I have put about 10,000 miles on my stage 2's with lots of street time and TRACK time, both autocross, driver's ed/testing, and road course work. They perform very well and I am happy with them in that respect.
I've noticed you have a habit of bringing your personal views into your comments and I think that is retarded. If you fundamentally hate people and think they are hopeless and misguided, take it elsewhere. I'm not offended in any way, but your opinions on humanity have no place in this thread.
When it comes to things like exhaust flanges not lining up or bolt holes mismatched, or buggy software, or an oversight in the PCM logic, whatever, that's one thing. Tolerance stack ups and not thinking ahead in design phase will do that.
But there are plenty of other coil-over/shock setups that work well and are plug and play. Maybe I'm lazy in this respect, but I don't want to have to mod everything on the car all the time. For me, time is money. I'm not some old retired guy with time on my hands. I would gladly trade the time on install/testing for plug/play. If you can't see that it's not my problem.
My issue was an expectation not met, that's it. I don't want to have to be a test mule for a new product when I buy from someone as highly regarded as Pettit. If they really gave a **** they would have issued a bullitein or note to their customers but they didn't. Just kind of put it under the rug and I think that is bad business practice.
And about the complaining: for christ's sake I did an engine swap, do you realize how much "custom work" goes into something like that captain grumpy? I beat the **** out of my car and when something breaks I know how to fix it. I realize the world is not perfect, nothing is.
At the end of the day, I have put about 10,000 miles on my stage 2's with lots of street time and TRACK time, both autocross, driver's ed/testing, and road course work. They perform very well and I am happy with them in that respect.
I've noticed you have a habit of bringing your personal views into your comments and I think that is retarded. If you fundamentally hate people and think they are hopeless and misguided, take it elsewhere. I'm not offended in any way, but your opinions on humanity have no place in this thread.
Just went through the thread again, and saw things that I missed before.
From some people complaining I see:
(1) stock rubber brake lines being used, doh #1, and you complain about no line support.
(2) stock rear non adjustable plastic swaybar end links, and you complain about tight clearance, doh #2.
You are upgrading your suspension but still using other stock less desirable parts and complaining.
I purchased my March 1992 made R1 in July 1992. All the mods and rebuilt engine except for the paint job have been done or made by me. I have owned and worked on my FD longer than anyone else.
Most of my mods have required modding them to work or fit 100% correctly.
The Greddy stock mount IC from the early/mid 90s did not align up properly with the mount locations. Then you had to modify the stock IC air inlet shroud. Apexi’s idea for doing it was lacking, but I improved it for a better fit, performance, and looks. Poor design by Apexi.
From my first DP, MP, and CatBack, none have ever fit perfectly. Poor design by many.
Had the original Racing Beat lowering springs, and their hollow front swaybar like TriPoints, and solid rear sway bar. This caused a nut on the front sway bar to drag on the road going over some bumps. The rear sway bar drifted sideways and bounded up. Yes, poor design from RB.
How about the Apexi PFC not controlling the AC 100% like the stock ecu? Yes, Apexi poor desin again.
How many examples do I need to show that rarely do you get a mod that is 100% perfect? Even God has not made a perfect human yet!
Many of you live in a fantasy world and complain like children!
From some people complaining I see:
(1) stock rubber brake lines being used, doh #1, and you complain about no line support.
(2) stock rear non adjustable plastic swaybar end links, and you complain about tight clearance, doh #2.
You are upgrading your suspension but still using other stock less desirable parts and complaining.
I purchased my March 1992 made R1 in July 1992. All the mods and rebuilt engine except for the paint job have been done or made by me. I have owned and worked on my FD longer than anyone else.
Most of my mods have required modding them to work or fit 100% correctly.
The Greddy stock mount IC from the early/mid 90s did not align up properly with the mount locations. Then you had to modify the stock IC air inlet shroud. Apexi’s idea for doing it was lacking, but I improved it for a better fit, performance, and looks. Poor design by Apexi.
From my first DP, MP, and CatBack, none have ever fit perfectly. Poor design by many.
Had the original Racing Beat lowering springs, and their hollow front swaybar like TriPoints, and solid rear sway bar. This caused a nut on the front sway bar to drag on the road going over some bumps. The rear sway bar drifted sideways and bounded up. Yes, poor design from RB.
How about the Apexi PFC not controlling the AC 100% like the stock ecu? Yes, Apexi poor desin again.
How many examples do I need to show that rarely do you get a mod that is 100% perfect? Even God has not made a perfect human yet!
Many of you live in a fantasy world and complain like children!