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.

Tein SRC's compared

Thread Tools
 
Old 10-29-2014, 12:51 AM
  #101  
TWF

 
TWF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Advantage of the ride height adjustable shocks independent from spring preload is that you can choose better spring rate and than set ride height.
Old 10-29-2014, 05:55 AM
  #102  
Registered User

 
Sebring AP1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: FV CA
Posts: 2,656
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by andrewhake
Originally Posted by afzan' timestamp='1414555909' post='23386362
[quote name='andrewhake' timestamp='1414551759' post='23386311']
[quote name='helothere' timestamp='1414549079' post='23386278']
to Andrew,

on his post Rob states:

"The rear was raised by 3 turns to compensate for the “non-staggered” setup and to give it a slight rake towards the front"
Yeah I took that is meaning, the rear was raised higher than the front by 3 turns to give the car a slight rake to the front, which would increase oversteer if I am not mistaken? In a setup that is more prone to oversteer with the additional front grip. That is why I asked, I don't understand how that would compensate for non-staggered setup.
It compensates for the difference in rake. with a set coilover height, when you go from staggered to non staggered the rake of the car will change (the front will be higher with non staggered vs staggered)
[/quote]

That would make sense if it actually was a matter of just evening out the ride height due to the differences in front tire heights, but that isn't the case. It sounds as if the car was specifically setup with higher rear ride height for the non-staggered setup, but maybe that's not the case. It's not like the car was setup for staggered tires and then 255s were thrown on all around, it was setup from the beginning for non-staggered.
[/quote]

I always have rake on my cars. 3 turns is probably not even a quarter of an inch so it is more minimal than you're assuming it is. It's better to have that extra bit of rotation than not. Even heights or lowered rear would yield some high speed understeer which is a bad idea in a wingless car. Correcting an error almost certainly guarantees snap oversteer unless you're a left foot braking pro.
Old 10-29-2014, 10:27 AM
  #103  

 
maxrev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by andrewhake
Originally Posted by helothere' timestamp='1414549079' post='23386278
to Andrew,

on his post Rob states:

"The rear was raised by 3 turns to compensate for the “non-staggered” setup and to give it a slight rake towards the front"
Yeah I took that is meaning, the rear was raised higher than the front by 3 turns to give the car a slight rake to the front, which would increase oversteer if I am not mistaken? In a setup that is more prone to oversteer with the additional front grip. That is why I asked, I don't understand how that would compensate for non-staggered setup.
The rear is about 4mm higher then the front at this point. I raised the rear by 3 turns and would raise it by 4 turns or more if I am running some type of wing. In regards to camber, this car was never built for lap times. I am running -4 degree to keep the tires from destroying the OEM fenders...
Old 10-29-2014, 10:43 AM
  #104  

 
gptoyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

sorry to go off topic, but how much weight do you guys bias towards the front?

I'm just starting to understand how scary high speed understeer is when the car won't respond to steering input and dollar signs and insurance numbers fly across the windshield
Old 10-29-2014, 10:46 AM
  #105  

 
gptoyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 0
Received 22 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TWF
Advantage of the ride height adjustable shocks independent from spring preload is that you can choose better spring rate and than set ride height.
I had the same argument as my friend and he was said that most of the high quality aftermarket suspension have such short springs that you rarely/if ever affect spring preload

Does this hold water?
Old 10-29-2014, 11:01 AM
  #106  

 
andrewhake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mt. ________
Posts: 5,649
Received 96 Likes on 71 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sebring AP1
Originally Posted by andrewhake' timestamp='1414571278' post='23386443
[quote name='afzan' timestamp='1414555909' post='23386362']
[quote name='andrewhake' timestamp='1414551759' post='23386311']
[quote name='helothere' timestamp='1414549079' post='23386278']
to Andrew,

on his post Rob states:

"The rear was raised by 3 turns to compensate for the “non-staggered” setup and to give it a slight rake towards the front"
Yeah I took that is meaning, the rear was raised higher than the front by 3 turns to give the car a slight rake to the front, which would increase oversteer if I am not mistaken? In a setup that is more prone to oversteer with the additional front grip. That is why I asked, I don't understand how that would compensate for non-staggered setup.
It compensates for the difference in rake. with a set coilover height, when you go from staggered to non staggered the rake of the car will change (the front will be higher with non staggered vs staggered)
[/quote]

That would make sense if it actually was a matter of just evening out the ride height due to the differences in front tire heights, but that isn't the case. It sounds as if the car was specifically setup with higher rear ride height for the non-staggered setup, but maybe that's not the case. It's not like the car was setup for staggered tires and then 255s were thrown on all around, it was setup from the beginning for non-staggered.
[/quote]

I always have rake on my cars. 3 turns is probably not even a quarter of an inch so it is more minimal than you're assuming it is. It's better to have that extra bit of rotation than not. Even heights or lowered rear would yield some high speed understeer which is a bad idea in a wingless car. Correcting an error almost certainly guarantees snap oversteer unless you're a left foot braking pro.
[/quote]


Originally Posted by maxrev
Originally Posted by andrewhake' timestamp='1414551759' post='23386311
[quote name='helothere' timestamp='1414549079' post='23386278']
to Andrew,

on his post Rob states:

"The rear was raised by 3 turns to compensate for the “non-staggered” setup and to give it a slight rake towards the front"
Yeah I took that is meaning, the rear was raised higher than the front by 3 turns to give the car a slight rake to the front, which would increase oversteer if I am not mistaken? In a setup that is more prone to oversteer with the additional front grip. That is why I asked, I don't understand how that would compensate for non-staggered setup.
The rear is about 4mm higher then the front at this point. I raised the rear by 3 turns and would raise it by 4 turns or more if I am running some type of wing. In regards to camber, this car was never built for lap times. I am running +4 degree to keep the tires from destroying the OEM fenders...
[/quote]

Ah this makes sense thanks for clarifying. High speed understeer to snap over steer is definitely not fun. I agree bias toward more rotation as it is much easier to control the rotation as it is more linear. Thanks.
Old 10-29-2014, 11:07 AM
  #107  
TWF

 
TWF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by gptoyz
I had the same argument as my friend and he was said that most of the high quality aftermarket suspension have such short springs that you rarely/if ever affect spring preload

Does this hold water?
Depends what rate springs are used. Stiff springs with shocks unloaded will have negative preload, reason helper springs are there. Once car weight is put on them there will be preload.
Lets say you use very stiff springs on the front and soft on the rear to deal with oversteer. If you want to raise rear you can do it without preloading soft springs, that way you not taking away from extension.
Old 10-29-2014, 11:29 AM
  #108  
Registered User

 
Sebring AP1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: FV CA
Posts: 2,656
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by gptoyz
sorry to go off topic, but how much weight do you guys bias towards the front?

I'm just starting to understand how scary high speed understeer is when the car won't respond to steering input and dollar signs and insurance numbers fly across the windshield
Good news is if you can see dollar signs flapping across the windshield you're not driving fast enough!
Old 03-30-2015, 03:46 PM
  #109  
Registered User

 
LickyMYwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Just wanted to post an update

I am currently on a set of EVS SRC now and have been for a little bit so this is long overdue. Did 2-3 track days since owning them and have been able to hit decent lap times. I didn't feel anything very dramatic except that the setup is more compliant over very bumpy surfaces. The car doesn't seem to catch me off guard so I think my set of EVS SRCs are as they intended them to be.

I was experimenting in the garage and I was able to create 2 scenarios.

1. the car at full raised ride height and have it sit on the bump stop.
2. used lower collar to lower the car to lowest setting but still maintain a 2 finger gap.

I was able to accomplish setup Scenario 1 by unloading the spring and by that it would lower the car and sit on the bumpstop no matter how "high" you try to make the car with the lower collar. This may have been the issue that Ivan was seeing in his car which ultimately lead to revalving. It may have been the bumpstops that Ivan was riding on but I'm out of town a lot and I'm no professional, just a friend who volunteered to help out. Ivan then decided to revalve to Guys spec which is same as OP. Tein has revalved Ivan's set of coilovers and he is happy with them. I am currently happy with my off the shelf EVS Spec SRCs as well.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the shock can be valved correctly per manufacturer spec (whether it be good or bad is your choice) but if the setup of the actual suspension is wrong then that's a different story.
Old 03-30-2015, 06:01 PM
  #110  

 
andrewhake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mt. ________
Posts: 5,649
Received 96 Likes on 71 Posts
Default

Could definitely have been the case. If the perches are setup with drastically different preload than recommended and the car was just always sitting on the bump stop that would make a lot more sense.


Quick Reply: Tein SRC's compared



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:58 AM.