Quote:
Originally Posted by Racecomp Engineering
Lower frequencies in the rear can actually be done for more comfort or other reasons...its not necessarily the end of the world. The springs are not the only things that control the balance if the car. However, spring rates that are much much lower in the rear are not imo a good idea at all on this car. Sometimes companies do things without a good explanation.
The rates you posted might be very aggressive imo and probably a bit of a handful on a track without a big wing.
The RSR rates posted are pretty good, kudos to them. I agree that rates along those lines would be a good starting point for autox depending on other factors. An upgraded rear bar should be matched with a front if you want/need additional roll stiffness or want a quick easy way to adjust balance with those rates imo.
Cool to see what looks like a quality product coming for this car!
- Andrew
|
Thanks Andrew.
I was working on the suggested f/r frequency ratio first and next would be sorting out lateral weight transfer with probably extra bar stiffness in the front next. (Are we fortunate enough that they share fronts with the WRX too?)
With the availabilty of rear bars from the WRX and STI would it be easier for HKS to go with the bigger rear development wise and that played a role in their spring rate choice?