Originally Posted by andrewhake

Not true. Talk to a few people at t hill aka ivan and he will tell you he is having trouble setting up his suspension

I had the r2 and after countless track days of fiddling. I don't have them anymore

Originally Posted by anorexicpoodle

So obviously the car is setup to cope with the atrocious pavement we have here at southern California tracks BUT I would not suspect the tuning methodology would really change much for another region since a bump is a bump and if the track is smooth but my car can handle bumps that just means I can use more curbing . From here on is really only my rudimentary understanding so take it with a grain of salt: Really what this setup provides is platform stability. The spring rates on the car are 900f/780lb rear and it now rides smoother than it ever did stock. The reason being is the heavy spring rates provide most of the compression resistance needed already and then you just need to control the rebound of those heavy springs. In the front you want more rebound to keep the nose from unloading too fast after braking so the car will take and hold a set. If you run too little front rebound on heavy springs like that the nose will unload too soon after turn-in. As for the rear The S2000 has so little rear travel that running too much rear rebound (like the evasives did) will cause the rear to down-jack to the bumpstops and stay there. This was born out on the evasives I ran. The idea for low rebound in the rear I THINK is to recover your travel as quickly as you can to keep the car "suspended" and preserve travel.

Honestly I doubt the dampening will change much when adding aero. The biggest change might be to my rear spring rate to help re-balance the car so a wing doesn't push it statically into the bumpstops but otherwise the idea is that if you introduce aero into a shock setup like this where the suspension is already interpreting the road without upsetting the car to a degree, now as long as you add balanced aero all it does is increase the effective traction limit. I already experience this on my lemons car when adding aero. In high speed corners with poor pavement like riverside at buttonwillow, on the evasive shocks my S2000 would buck and heave over the choppy pavement. My lemons car with more compliant shocks and aero, you could feel the suspension working furiously to keep the tires down but the chassis never moved while the car sailed over bumpy pavement. This means I never had to apply corrective inputs and could keep things smooth which meant more time on the gas and more effective use of the available traction and thus better times.

I think if you follow the shock tuning going on in the miata community (Supermiata, Miata challenge, etc) you'll find that they are several years ahead of what we are doing here just due to the pressures of more competition driven development going on, and the really fast setups (949 racing Xida suspension, FatCat motorsports etc) are all trending toward these sorts of low compression curves because they make the car easy to drive, and easy to drive fast because the car becomes more stable and thus encourages the driver to push the envelope. Obviously the exact numbers of the setup are tied to spring rates and chassis weights etc but the general idea is portable.

I look at it like this, anything that makes the car easier to drive, makes the car faster and more consistent. Period. I don't think anyone will argue with that statement.

Originally Posted by anorexicpoodle

Not a direct comparison but more of a wake-up call that if it can handle this good on pieced together junk yard suspension, then there is no excuse for my S2000 on good shocks to not handle at least that well.

Originally Posted by albertg

Ryan, did he provide you with more shock plots? ie. force vs displacement, cvp, etc?

Originally Posted by EvasiveMotorsports

We have contacted Ivan regarding his dampers, hopefully we can get his set back after his next track day so we can get it on the Tein shock dyno to verify.