![]() |
Part critique please
Hey guys,
As any reader of this forum I've heard many harp on the lack of quality of stance coilovers and while I don't have any first hand experience I can understand the points being made. I'm wondering what those with the knowledge to make such judgements think about these? Quote:
I stole the image and info from @ft86speedfactory.com's listing. If you want it taken down just pm me and it'll be gone ASAP. |
You REALLY don't want Hiem Joints in dirty environments. As soon as they ingest any dirt at all they will rapidly wear out, start to chatter, clunk, and eventually fail.
|
I am curious about these as well. Seems interesting how they are designed to lower the car a bit.
|
Quote:
Something like a loaded slot rod end would be better than a 3 piece design. (They are more resistant to dirt. ) Also with the plating colour they are probably carbon steel as opposed to alloy steel. The description not correct either, there will usually be sintered bronze (like Oilite) pressed in not steel, and the zinc plating I'm familiar with isn't gold coloured. It's probably cad (not that it's really a major deal). A side-by-side with a factory piece would be helpful, too. (I'm assuming the piece is machined 6061 aluminum...) |
Quote:
|
I saw these the day they sent out pics to all the dealers and at first I was a little put off by the name associated with them but they definitely look better than most offerings at the moment. The single greatest thing about these over every other option is the ability to drop your car about an inch without losing any suspension travel. I have seriously considered buying these as a replacement for my Agency Power ones. I dont think I will actually replace them but these and the Whitelines would be my only other picks.
|
Quote:
|
The design is inherently structurally inefficient. Right where vertical loads are introduced and bending moment is greatest, the part is reduced to two vertical walls. Making it more of an inverted hat section like the OEM (which has holes in the bottom of the "hat" in places, making it more like symmetric Z sections) would be more structurally efficient, putting more material further from the neutral axis.
For all I know, they're structurally fine/adequate, but the basic layout is far from optimal from a strength/ or stiffness/weight standpoint. As a structural engineer, it bugs me... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thanks for chiming in. |
I don't think I would buy any control arm before the Whitelines come out.
|
I know the engineer who designed this piece very well. The biggest concerns he had when designing the piece were making sure the geometry and camber curve remained unaltered with the ride height difference. Then making sure it was able to handle the loads was the next concern. It was originally designed to withstand 4G's of loading as the SF, but the piece was deemed too heavy. This design is meant to withstand in excess of 2.5G's of loading. Just like with any other design, this has its compromises, but it a good option for those who run out of bump travel at their current ride height.
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:56 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2026 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.