S2000 STR prep resource
Originally Posted by Random1,Jan 11 2011, 05:47 AM
Unfortunately that web page only lets you enter the tire size as you have indicated. It assumes all tires are made the same. If you look at the specs from the TireRack page and Toyo web page they show the following for the overall diameters.
Toyo 245/35/17 -> 25.3"
Toyo 255/40/17 -> 25.2"
Star Spec 225/50/16 -> 24.9"
Star Spec 255/40/17 -> 25"
Hankook 225/50/16 -> 24.9"
Hankook 255/40/17 -> 25"
This just questions the calculations. To me they look too high on achieved speed. The Toyos would be off based on the Toyo web page data.
Toyo 245/35/17 -> 25.3"
Toyo 255/40/17 -> 25.2"
Star Spec 225/50/16 -> 24.9"
Star Spec 255/40/17 -> 25"
Hankook 225/50/16 -> 24.9"
Hankook 255/40/17 -> 25"
This just questions the calculations. To me they look too high on achieved speed. The Toyos would be off based on the Toyo web page data.
245/35/17: 23.8"
245/40/17: 24.7"
255/40/17: 25.2"
That looks much more reasonable.
So to change the subject, does anyone know about how much spring travel you're getting with the typical setup of 700-900 lb springs and a big stiff sway up front and small/no rear sway? If so what springs and sways are you using and how much travel do you have?
Or anyone have a reasonable estimate of CG height so I can calculate it?
Or anyone have a reasonable estimate of CG height so I can calculate it?
Originally Posted by IntegraR0064,Jan 11 2011, 09:24 AM
I just looked on Toyo's web page - it looks like Tire Rack has some typos. According to Toyo:
245/35/17: 23.8"
245/40/17: 24.7"
255/40/17: 25.2"
That looks much more reasonable.
245/35/17: 23.8"
245/40/17: 24.7"
255/40/17: 25.2"
That looks much more reasonable.
Originally Posted by macr88,Jan 12 2011, 02:30 PM
But of course he is doing it for the street - so performance be damned I guess.
Other than that - all that information is all over the internet, nice summary if it isn't in a ludicrously hard format to read.
Originally Posted by TheNick,Jan 12 2011, 12:38 PM
Except that his Motion Ratio's are wrong. And that he's ignored dynamic alignment changes, which will have more of an effect on the balance of the car than anything else. You can't look entirely at spring rates and roll bars and think that will determine the overall balance of the car. You also have to consider camber gain, toe change, caster change, ride height, and scrub radius. Spring rates and shock settings will just change the amount, and speed of alignment change.
But of course he is doing it for the street - so performance be damned I guess.
Other than that - all that information is all over the internet, nice summary if it isn't in a ludicrously hard format to read.
But of course he is doing it for the street - so performance be damned I guess.
Other than that - all that information is all over the internet, nice summary if it isn't in a ludicrously hard format to read.
I think his motion ratios are right. I was going to measure them myself to double check, but right now I'm working under the assumption that this thread is right - https://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.ph...c=380006&st=0& . That lists the same motion ratios as he had and is where he got them I'm assuming.
So... I got some RS3's, After about 1500 miles the tires were barely worn (could still see the flames)... then me and my wife went to a local Autox on a concrete lot... small even we got 15 runs in cumulatively (7 each, she got a rerun) afterwards however the fronts still have a TON of tread left but the rears are nearly to the wear bars... I cant figure out how I lost so much tire so quick. The only thing I can think of is my wife spun a lot (like only had 2 runs where she didnt) due to a combination of cold, and her not having even touched the car in about 4 months. she also got very sideways at times. But I cant imagine it wear through this much of the tires... the tire wear is perfectly even.
anyone else have this issue?
anyone else have this issue?




