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.

Shocks for STR

Thread Tools
 
Old Jul 11, 2010 | 03:21 PM
  #71  
alvanderp's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Default

Originally Posted by INTJ,Jul 11 2010, 01:54 PM
That's exactly my thought, low speed is the handling, high speed it the road defect. If anything I want the blowoff not ramp up to be able to use the berms, not send me into low-earth orbit.
Try to remember that my shocks were built for a stock-class autocross car, where overdamped low-speed rebound is often used as a replacement for springs. At full stiff(I honestly never ran them more than once that high), the car had tons of initial transient response, before it immediately overloaded the tire.
Reply
Old Jul 11, 2010 | 10:46 PM
  #72  
Random1's Avatar
Member (Premium)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,531
Likes: 3
From: Tucson
Default

[QUOTE=alvanderp,Jul 11 2010, 04:18 PM]I'll try and dig up the invoice, but I'm 99% sure its an L/VDP piston.

Are you trying to say that in your experience Penske linear rebound pistons flatten out like that at x force(defined by the shim stack) regardless of the position of the adjuster?
Reply
Old Jul 12, 2010 | 05:55 AM
  #73  
alvanderp's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Default

Originally Posted by Random1,Jul 11 2010, 10:46 PM
Yes, if the linear curve did not flatten out then that would imply an infinite force is achievable.
Perhaps I should clarify, I can sort of see your point on my front shock because the flattening effect is somewhat progressive, but on the rears, the knee is pretty pronounced. I'd be surprised if the force termination was that pronounced on a Linear piston, but it's hard to see on your dynos because the plots stop at 5 in/sec. When it all comes down to it we are arguing semantics, I just want the shocks to do what I want
Reply
Old Jul 12, 2010 | 11:25 AM
  #74  
Orthonormal's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 1
From: Azusa
Default

I did not choose the valving on my shocks -- the previous owner was adapting a very high rate linear valving for use on pavement with humps and bumps. I am not sure why he chose such a high maximum force, but it did work a lot better on irregular surfaces than the pure linear valving. And like Drew's shocks, mine were built for Stock.

My main point was that Drew probably knows what pistons are in his shocks, and it's not impossible that his F-v curve was produced by the pistons he says he has.
Reply
Old Jul 12, 2010 | 11:50 AM
  #75  
Random1's Avatar
Member (Premium)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,531
Likes: 3
From: Tucson
Default

Originally Posted by alvanderp,Jul 12 2010, 06:55 AM
Perhaps I should clarify, I can sort of see your point on my front shock because the flattening effect is somewhat progressive, but on the rears, the knee is pretty pronounced. I'd be surprised if the force termination was that pronounced on a Linear piston, but it's hard to see on your dynos because the plots stop at 5 in/sec. When it all comes down to it we are arguing semantics, I just want the shocks to do what I want
Yeah there is definitely some semantics in the discussion. That can easily happen in an online text discussion.

I think your fronts will likely work for STR and worth a try before doing a re-valve.

Any plots for the rears?
Reply
Old Jul 12, 2010 | 12:49 PM
  #76  
alvanderp's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
From: Austin, TX
Default

Originally Posted by Random1,Jul 12 2010, 11:50 AM
I think your fronts will likely work for STR and worth a try before doing a re-valve.

Any plots for the rears?
Yeah I ran them this weekend and they worked fine, I'd just like them to be a bit more palatable on the street.

The rear plots are in the same link, just scroll down
Reply
Old Jul 12, 2010 | 07:13 PM
  #77  
Random1's Avatar
Member (Premium)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,531
Likes: 3
From: Tucson
Default

Originally Posted by alvanderp,Jul 12 2010, 01:49 PM
Yeah I ran them this weekend and they worked fine, I'd just like them to be a bit more palatable on the street.

The rear plots are in the same link, just scroll down
Wow I feel like a real knuckle head not noticing the second page!

The rears look they would work as well. You may need more compression over what the plot shows. The rebound does have a digressive curve for the rears.

I am surprised at how little the compression adjustment changes from full soft to full firm. It almost looks like an 8100 compression adjuster.
Reply
Old Aug 5, 2010 | 08:27 AM
  #78  
josh7owens's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,340
Likes: 0
From: Frankfort, KY
Default

has anyone found a double adj. mono tube coilover set-up thats under $2500? Besides tcklines which you cant get any more.

speaking of tcklines, what model koni's are they? Could I just a set and re-valve them through koni?
Reply
Old Aug 5, 2010 | 09:45 AM
  #79  
ghostshadow's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by josh7owens,Aug 5 2010, 08:27 AM
has anyone found a double adj. mono tube coilover set-up thats under $2500? Besides tcklines which you cant get any more.
how about used? you can get in that ballpark.. i recently picked up a set of moton clubsports for not much more than that.. complete and ready to bolt in. they may need a rebuild sooner than later but at least i have my foot in the door to knob turning, suspension setup fun
Reply
Old Aug 5, 2010 | 09:47 AM
  #80  
PossumK's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
From: Redondo Beach, CA
Default

TC Klines are the 8242 twin tube, I believe, and the S2000 fitment was a special run made for TC Kline.

For somewhere around $3000, you can get a complete bolt-on solution with the 30-series monotube Konis through ProParts.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:14 AM.