what you still drop your car?
06-13-2008, 02:09 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dry Branch
Posts: 7,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by yufool,Jun 13 2008, 11:51 AM
I think when you get new springs you need new shocks and a camber kit - so might as well get coilovers.
On my old civic I tried to do without a camber kit and the inner toes on tires kept getting eaten up. Also depends on the amount of lowering and size of your rims - go to a performance shop and find out
On my old civic I tried to do without a camber kit and the inner toes on tires kept getting eaten up. Also depends on the amount of lowering and size of your rims - go to a performance shop and find out
06-13-2008, 02:21 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dry Branch
Posts: 7,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jhp012,Jun 13 2008, 10:30 AM
so would coilovers be okay compared to springs?
would coilovers be definitely better then stock suspension in looks and handling and ride?
would coilovers be definitely better then stock suspension in looks and handling and ride?
When my OEM shocks wear out (and eventually they will
), I will probably replace them with the adjustable version of the same shock, because the adjustable Showa Coil Overs are such a perfect replacement for the OEM non adjustable Showa Coil Overs, and because nobody has more experience in tuning S2000 suspension setups than Showa (they do all of Honda's shock absorber designs, so they know all the cars well). Odds are, I'll end up determining an acceptable setup through testing, and then once everything is adjusted, I'll only change the settings during autocrosses or track days. For street use, additional adjustability is something I've never found very useful (even on bikes it's not terribly useful).If you are lowering for looks, well engineered springs (the choice is critical) will minimize cost and downsides. Good alignment afterward is essential. Drop over an inch, and anything I might say is speculation, because I haven't dropped that much, and am of the opinion that it is asking for trouble. If you are lowering to try to improve grip, plan on doing more than just springs. At the very least, you'll need to do some testing and tuning to see any measurable benefits.
06-14-2008, 01:24 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dry Branch
Posts: 7,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Frame_Runner__,Jun 13 2008, 05:27 AM
To the OP... you asked if we would still do it if it had nothing to do with appearance or performance? ... If its not show or go, then what do you consider it? ...not trying to be an ass, just trying to clarify.
I read your post yesterday, and meant to respond, but somehow it slipped through the cracks. What I had wanted to say was that 
.People lower to change the looks of the car or the handling.
ARE there any other reasons for lowering?
Seems to me that since the car already looks great and has wonderful handling, most people have no reason to even consider lowering their S2000.
06-15-2008, 08:57 AM
#28
Originally Posted by RED MX5,Jun 12 2008, 03:42 PM
If you lower the car, you lower the CG, but the change in the angles of the A-arms changes the roll center. The former is simply a function of the distribution of mass, which drops as the car is lowered. The latter is a function of the suspension geometry. 
When the RC drops more than the CG, body roll is increased because the mass is working through a longer effective lever. However, the lower RC has no effect on total weight transfer, but the lower CG does.
LOL, then you throw in roll steer at the back and bump steer at the front, and the complexity of the interactions gets more obvious. It seems that we NEVER have all the information we need to make totally informed decisions involving suspension mods, so I always look at any changes as being a bit of an experiment. FWIW, it is without a doubt a lot easier to screw up a car's handling than it is to improve it.
When the RC drops more than the CG, body roll is increased because the mass is working through a longer effective lever. However, the lower RC has no effect on total weight transfer, but the lower CG does.
LOL, then you throw in roll steer at the back and bump steer at the front, and the complexity of the interactions gets more obvious. It seems that we NEVER have all the information we need to make totally informed decisions involving suspension mods, so I always look at any changes as being a bit of an experiment. FWIW, it is without a doubt a lot easier to screw up a car's handling than it is to improve it.
I agree, it seems like it'd be easier to screw it up then to improve on it. I still stand by the belief that 95% of us out there can't exploit every drop of performance out of our stock cars to warrant upgrades to our suspensions, most of the time the best handling mod we can do is get new/better tires and more seat time.
