S2000 Racing and Competition The S2000 on the track and Solo circuit. Some of the fastest S2000 drivers in the world call this forum home.

S2000 STR prep resource

Thread Tools
 
Old Dec 4, 2009 | 01:27 PM
  #781  
Random1's Avatar
Member (Premium)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,531
Likes: 3
From: Tucson
Default

Originally Posted by Random1,Dec 3 2009, 05:29 PM
The other bushings they do not have are for the lower shock attachment points. I sent an email to powerflex questioning that.
Below is the response from Powerflex including photos. Does anyone think this would be illegal for STR? The design is inherently different then a flex bushing.

EDIT: Now that I look at these the proportions look more like the compliance bushings not the lower shock bushings. I will get clarification.

"We are currently working on a urethane spherical bushing for that location
that will be a must have part in the S2000 community. It will be compromised
of 5 total pieces and have the NVH levels of a standard urethane street
bushings with the articulation abilities of a spherical joint.

This was our New Release product at this year's SEMA event. We're really
excited about this new line of product we are putting on the market.

I'm going to attach some images of the prototype bushings to this email. We
planned to have them available by Christmas but a fire at the factory has
delayed them for 2-3 months."


Old Dec 4, 2009 | 03:28 PM
  #782  
Orthonormal's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 1
From: Azusa
Default

That would be allowed either in place of the bushings in the upper mount, or in place of the eye bushing that mounts the shock to the the lower control arm. From the Stock rules:

13.5.B The mounting hardware shall be of the original type. The use of any shock absorber bushing material, including metal, is permitted. Pressed or bonded bushings may be removed from standard parts to facilitate the use of alternate bushings which fit in the original location without alterations to the part. This does not permit the use of an offset shock bushing. A shock absorber bushing may be implemented as a spherical bearing. The bushing attaching the end of a strut to the body or frame on a strut type suspension is a suspension bushing, not a shock bushing. For cars with a bayonet/shaft-type upper shock mount, this allowance permits the removal of the shock bushing from the upper mounting plate (e.g. via drilling, cutting, burning out the bushing) and replacing it with another bushing. This also includes shock bushings located in control arms, etc. This does not allow other modifications to the plate itself or use of an alternate plate.
A few years ago, I came up with the concept of a mount like that, but in delrin or metal instead of urethane.
Old Dec 4, 2009 | 03:41 PM
  #783  
glagola1's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 1
From: Atlanta
Default

Whoa... Interesting. I would not want to be the guinea pig that put my money and time up for those. Looks like contamination, deformation and installation could all be a little iffy in that design... especially if it's urethane!
Old Dec 4, 2009 | 05:50 PM
  #784  
bky's Avatar
bky
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 807
Likes: 0
From: Ocean Springs
Default

I've seen a unit exactly like that in a trailing arm bushing for SN95 Mustangs. Very clever, but a bit tricky to install.
Old Dec 7, 2009 | 08:46 AM
  #785  
glagola1's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,246
Likes: 1
From: Atlanta
Default

Here's a vid of an event yesterday. The can and driver need some work but the car is about as fast as the STS CRX (maybe a hair slower).
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zmv9ecJGH7M [/media]
Old Dec 7, 2009 | 08:54 AM
  #786  
neurotic's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 253
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by glagola1,Dec 7 2009, 09:46 AM
Here's a vid of an event yesterday. The can and driver need some work but the car is about as fast as the STS CRX (maybe a hair slower).
I like the announcer's accent.

Please remind me, what tires are you using? The thread is large enough that is quite cumbersome searching back.

Thanks.
Old Dec 7, 2009 | 08:58 AM
  #787  
TheNick's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,024
Likes: 1
Default

Dunlops in that video.
Old Dec 7, 2009 | 08:45 PM
  #788  
Random1's Avatar
Member (Premium)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,531
Likes: 3
From: Tucson
Default

[QUOTE=glagola1,Dec 7 2009, 10:46 AM]Here's a vid of an event yesterday.
Old Dec 8, 2009 | 07:11 AM
  #789  
TheNick's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,024
Likes: 1
Default

It would have been 225 Hankooks - they don't make a 245.
Old Dec 8, 2009 | 08:40 AM
  #790  
User 121020's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,376
Likes: 2
Default

Originally Posted by TheNick,Dec 8 2009, 10:11 AM
It would have been 225 Hankooks - they don't make a 245.
The Miata was on 225/45/15 R-S3s with 100+ runs on them.



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:13 AM.