Center of Gravity - Full pics of alignment
09-27-2007, 12:37 AM
#21
Originally Posted by eSeM,Sep 27 2007, 07:48 AM
The Cusco ARBs give a much harsher ride than the satandard ARBs
09-27-2007, 12:48 AM
#22
DemonTweeks sell them, and also the Whilteline ones which are cheaper. It'd be interesting to know how they compare; I suspect the Cuscos are stiffer, but that may not be a good thing.
The ride on mine is noticeably worse with the rear ARB, and is a lot more unsettled by hitting a bump with one side as you've lost a lot of the independence of the suspension.
The ride on mine is noticeably worse with the rear ARB, and is a lot more unsettled by hitting a bump with one side as you've lost a lot of the independence of the suspension.
09-27-2007, 12:51 AM
#24
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: There's no i in toast!
Posts: 9,022
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
As for using Honda to do your alignment. If your happy that you have a half decent dealer local to you that you trust then go for it.
However I don't, so I trust Chris to give me an honest opinion and his enthusiasm gives me more confidence that the job will be done right.
However I don't, so I trust Chris to give me an honest opinion and his enthusiasm gives me more confidence that the job will be done right.
09-27-2007, 12:57 AM
#25
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: There's no i in toast!
Posts: 9,022
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Since fitting my Cusco ARB's I've not noticed a massive change in ride quality. But then that might be due to the fact mine was always a bit harder as I have the 04 wheels but the 02 harder rear suspension.
When ever you fit aftermarket parts it's a trade off, and had it been too hard a ride I'd have taken them off by now.
When ever you fit aftermarket parts it's a trade off, and had it been too hard a ride I'd have taken them off by now.
09-27-2007, 01:15 AM
#26
I am very interested in beefing up the anti roll bars, I have done so on previous cars and have really enjoyed the result.
I had a look on Cusco's site and think I have found some info about thickness's etc, but bear in mind it was in Japanese!
Top bit is the info I already had about ARB thickness's. Cusco make a comparison to OE bars of MY2002 which give the percentage increases shown. With MY2004> these changed of course but the front bar stayed the same according to my info. The rear bar went down to 25.4mm to decrease oversteer so the potential percentage increase of the rear bar for 2004> is greater as it jumps by 4.6mm compared to 2.8mm for MY2002. I have guessed at 150%, perhaps someone con work it out more scientifically. Even so, in both cases the percentage increase is more at the front than at the rear so the combination should decrease oversteer/increase understeer. The difference in balance will be more pronounced with MY2002 than MY2004> IMHP
Year front-------rear
2000 28.2MMXT5.0 27.2MMXT5.3
2002 26.5MMXT4.5 27.2MMX4.5T
2004 26.5MMXT4.5 25.4MMX4.5*
2006 26.5MMXT4.5 25.4MMX4.5*
Cusco 32mm front 30mm back
Increase in thickness
MY2002 Front 5.5mm +172% Rear 2.8mm +136%
My2004> front 5.5mm +172% Rear 4.6mm +150%???
(edit) The percentages show the amount by which the bar is uprated -not thickness.
I had a look on Cusco's site and think I have found some info about thickness's etc, but bear in mind it was in Japanese!
Top bit is the info I already had about ARB thickness's. Cusco make a comparison to OE bars of MY2002 which give the percentage increases shown. With MY2004> these changed of course but the front bar stayed the same according to my info. The rear bar went down to 25.4mm to decrease oversteer so the potential percentage increase of the rear bar for 2004> is greater as it jumps by 4.6mm compared to 2.8mm for MY2002. I have guessed at 150%, perhaps someone con work it out more scientifically. Even so, in both cases the percentage increase is more at the front than at the rear so the combination should decrease oversteer/increase understeer. The difference in balance will be more pronounced with MY2002 than MY2004> IMHP
Year front-------rear
2000 28.2MMXT5.0 27.2MMXT5.3
2002 26.5MMXT4.5 27.2MMX4.5T
2004 26.5MMXT4.5 25.4MMX4.5*
2006 26.5MMXT4.5 25.4MMX4.5*
Cusco 32mm front 30mm back
Increase in thickness
MY2002 Front 5.5mm +172% Rear 2.8mm +136%
My2004> front 5.5mm +172% Rear 4.6mm +150%???
(edit) The percentages show the amount by which the bar is uprated -not thickness.
09-27-2007, 01:20 AM
#27
It's not as simple as that 
, because the OEMs are hollow and the replacement bars are solid.
I understood my Whitelines are 50% stiffer than MY99 stock, which in turn was about 50% stiffer than MY02 stock.
, because the OEMs are hollow and the replacement bars are solid.I understood my Whitelines are 50% stiffer than MY99 stock, which in turn was about 50% stiffer than MY02 stock.
09-27-2007, 01:25 AM
#28
Originally Posted by Dembo,Sep 27 2007, 09:20 AM
It's not as simple as that , because the OEMs are hollow and the replacement bars are solid.
I understood my Whitelines are 50% stiffer than MY99 stock, which in turn was about 50% stiffer than MY02 stock.
, because the OEMs are hollow and the replacement bars are solid.I understood my Whitelines are 50% stiffer than MY99 stock, which in turn was about 50% stiffer than MY02 stock.
09-27-2007, 01:37 AM
#29
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: City Of London / Knebworth
Posts: 39,551
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
10 Posts
Originally Posted by j8mie,Sep 27 2007, 08:51 AM
As for using Honda to do your alignment. If your happy that you have a half decent dealer local to you that you trust then go for it.
However I don't, so I trust Chris to give me an honest opinion and his enthusiasm gives me more confidence that the job will be done right.
However I don't, so I trust Chris to give me an honest opinion and his enthusiasm gives me more confidence that the job will be done right.
09-27-2007, 01:45 AM
#30
A big thumbs up for the 'fast road' settings done by CG, from me 
I calibrate various instruments for a living, the better half is also a professional engineer, so we had an interesting day with Chris. The initial reference cal is very important and much time is taken here to achieve a solid and believable benchmark. As this equipment is in daily use, the operators knowledge far exceeeds that of any dealership.
Even if calibration equipment is all equal, its the knowledge of the operator / calibrator that is important. Knowing how to interpret and manipulate results, and tailor the chassis tune to the customers driving style is far more important than absolute technical accuracy (Chris Franklin always accomplishes both anyhow).
I wouldn't rely on the occasional operator of Beissbarth or similar equipment at a dealership to have as much personal enthusiasm for, or technical knowledge of, this chassis.
They will likely (as time is of the essence) approach the cal with a "Its okay its within tolerance" attitude, and not with the "This is the best I can possibly achieve" attitude, as per CG.
Incidently the machine is accurate to +/- 2' (two minutes, or one thirtieth of a degree) which is impressive. Chris always tried to achieve absolute 'best accuracy' during adjustment and wasn't prepared to accept less than 2' deviation anywhere on his part. Impressive indeed.
It's surprising how many people are prepared to spend three-figure sums on aftermarket 'go-faster' parts when the best investment is often in the driver, and then in a simple optimisation such as that done by Centre Gravity Ltd.
I calibrate various instruments for a living, the better half is also a professional engineer, so we had an interesting day with Chris. The initial reference cal is very important and much time is taken here to achieve a solid and believable benchmark. As this equipment is in daily use, the operators knowledge far exceeeds that of any dealership.
Even if calibration equipment is all equal, its the knowledge of the operator / calibrator that is important. Knowing how to interpret and manipulate results, and tailor the chassis tune to the customers driving style is far more important than absolute technical accuracy (Chris Franklin always accomplishes both anyhow).
I wouldn't rely on the occasional operator of Beissbarth or similar equipment at a dealership to have as much personal enthusiasm for, or technical knowledge of, this chassis.
They will likely (as time is of the essence) approach the cal with a "Its okay its within tolerance" attitude, and not with the "This is the best I can possibly achieve" attitude, as per CG.
Incidently the machine is accurate to +/- 2' (two minutes, or one thirtieth of a degree) which is impressive. Chris always tried to achieve absolute 'best accuracy' during adjustment and wasn't prepared to accept less than 2' deviation anywhere on his part. Impressive indeed.
It's surprising how many people are prepared to spend three-figure sums on aftermarket 'go-faster' parts when the best investment is often in the driver, and then in a simple optimisation such as that done by Centre Gravity Ltd.