CSG and RCE tag-team suspension Q&A thread! Ask us anything!

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

Whoa whoa whoa, hold up.



What? Pics? Story? Did you get any cool McLaren memorabilia? You're designing the suspension for their new F1 car?

Lots of pics from the GT CAR test on our FB page. Its for the MP4 12C GT3.

Nah I sooooo not worthy to be associated with ANYTHING F1 related.

Myles

[gramicci101]

Going to have to start following you on FB, then.

[gramicci101]

Originally Posted by Racecomp Engineering

I ran my T2's 30mm lower than stock with Group-n front mounts and stock rear mounts on 500 lb springs and with the SLOTTED front struts I got -2.65 front camber.

One more question, and then I'll stop asking frivolous questions for today.

I read somewhere that Group-N top mounts from an STI fit our cars. Is that correct? I had thought I saw them listed for sale somewhere, but now I can't find them. I seem to recall them being a few hundred dollars though. Would it be more cost effective and functionally effective to spend another hundred and get real camber plates like yours or HVT's?

Also, why not Group-N top mounts for the rear too?

Thanks Myles.

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by Turkish

@Racecomp Engineering: I am considering these bad boys for fixing my front camber issues:



http://www.racecompengineering.com/i...-lowering.html

How do they compare to the Raceseng top hats which are the other top hats I am considering for my needs. Keep in mind that my car pulls double duty for autocross and daily driving. I assume both will experience premature wear as a result of the daily driving...



http://ft86speedfactory.com/raceseng...ates-1293.html

Well to make things easier on you, we don't really have an ETA on our own RCE plates. Just having major supply issues, so go with the Raceseng tops. The HVTs are good as well.

- Andy

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

One more question, and then I'll stop asking frivolous questions for today.

I read somewhere that Group-N top mounts from an STI fit our cars. Is that correct? I had thought I saw them listed for sale somewhere, but now I can't find them. I seem to recall them being a few hundred dollars though. Would it be more cost effective and functionally effective to spend another hundred and get real camber plates like yours or HVT's?

Also, why not Group-N top mounts for the rear too?

Thanks Myles.

Yes, front Group Ns from GD chassis fit our cars. Note that STIs never came stock with Group N tops in this country...they just had regular old top mounts.

They're about 199 for the fronts.

The rear doesn't need firmer tops quite as much.

As for why Group N and not camber plates...well that comes down to what you need. If you need a lot of camber and a pillowball, the plates are a good way to go.

You can still get a decent amount of camber with RCE T2s and group Ns since they have a slotted lower mount. If you need -3 or so then yes you'll want real camber plates. The group Ns also have the advantage (or disadvantage) of being a little more forgiving. They're firmer than stock, but since they're still primarily rubber it means little to no impact on NVH. An all metal camber plate will be more "immediate" but can sacrifice a little here.

- Andy

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

One more question, and then I'll stop asking frivolous questions for today.

I read somewhere that Group-N top mounts from an STI fit our cars. Is that correct? I had thought I saw them listed for sale somewhere, but now I can't find them. I seem to recall them being a few hundred dollars though. Would it be more cost effective and functionally effective to spend another hundred and get real camber plates like yours or HVT's?

Also, why not Group-N top mounts for the rear too?

Thanks Myles.

I run front Group-N tophats. If you want a stiffer tophat, that's what you get. If you want adjustability and accept the NVH that comes with it then get camber plates.

Stock rear top hats are fine. There isn't a need for an adjustable rear top hat and it's basically just a place for the shock to mount to the chassis - don't need a fancy plate of aluminum there.

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by Racecomp Engineering

Well to make things easier on you, we don't really have an ETA on our own RCE plates. Just having major supply issues, so go with the Raceseng tops. The HVTs are good as well.

- Andy

Doesn't look like you guys added any additional caster angle with yours. Yes?

[gramicci101]

Thank you for the thorough answer, I appreciate it.

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by solidONE

Doesn't look like you guys added any additional caster angle with yours. Yes?

Negative. We've thought about building in a small amount just by an offset, but not at the moment.

- Andy

[solidONE]

I've found a complete coilover system Monotube, 46mm pistons, 22mm shafts, remote reservoirs and 3-way adjustable for just above $5K! Company is based in UK, but has an office/warehouse in the US. My prayers are answered. maybe.. Check it out, guys.

Nitron suspension:
http://www.nitron.co.uk/Automotive/T...gt86-12-ntr-r3

[chadori]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

I generally recommend zero toe for people with experience, and slight toe-in on the rear for people with less experience or confidence.

We have not played with staggered tires enough to give accurate feedback.

Larger tires will not require you to "amplify" the alignment specs.

Each setup is different, and you'll get best results by using the proper tools to determine what is right for you (pyrometer, air pressure gauge)

How would the slight toe-in on the rears affect daily driving? Is there such an alignment that is geared towards a street car, but also gives you pretty good results at a track? Or, how is driving a track aligned car on the street?

Originally Posted by Racecomp Engineering

Agree with what CSG Mike said, but I'll add...

I'd avoid staggered tires.

Generally, more roll means you need more camber. So that means you need more with sticky tires and/or if you don't have much roll resistance.

- Andy

If avoiding staggered tires, would it just make more sense to buy wheels that are, for example, 17x9 all around? From reading, I get the feeling that it isn't always about how wide the wheel is, but more so how much contact the tire has with the ground.

Does that mean, perhaps, a 17x8 on 225's all around with a great alignment would do better than a 17x9 on 245's all around with a so-so alignment?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by chadori

How would the slight toe-in on the rears affect daily driving? Is there such an alignment that is geared towards a street car, but also gives you pretty good results at a track? Or, how is driving a track aligned car on the street?

It stabilizes the car; zero toe will result in a car that wants to follow all the cracks and grooves in the road. It also stabilizes the car under hard cornering/power, but at the (minimal) cost of ultimate grip.

A track aligned car on the street my get some camber wear, and feel slightly skittish, but nothing unmanageable if you're doing one track day every 2 months, and are always holding on the steering wheel.

Seriously, some people drive without hands on the steering wheel...

Originally Posted by chadori

If avoiding staggered tires, would it just make more sense to buy wheels that are, for example, 17x9 all around? From reading, I get the feeling that it isn't always about how wide the wheel is, but more so how much contact the tire has with the ground.

Does that mean, perhaps, a 17x8 on 225's all around with a great alignment would do better than a 17x9 on 245's all around with a so-so alignment?

That's very possible, depending on the alignment, and how it affects contact patch.

Also, if you get square tires, you have the ability to rotate the tires for maximum life and even wear.

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by solidONE

I've found a complete coilover system Monotube, 46mm pistons, 22mm shafts, remote reservoirs and 3-way adjustable for just above $5K! Company is based in UK, but has an office/warehouse in the US. My prayers are answered. maybe.. Check it out, guys.

Nitron suspension:
http://www.nitron.co.uk/Automotive/T...gt86-12-ntr-r3

I had a long conversation with them at PRI a few years ago and was excited to help them bring some kits to market for Subaru and EVO. I'd heard good things and got a good impression talking to them in person, but unfortunately there were a lot of delays and we eventually gave up and moved on.

I think they could be good but I'd like to try them and see some plots as well.

- Andy

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by chadori

If avoiding staggered tires, would it just make more sense to buy wheels that are, for example, 17x9 all around? From reading, I get the feeling that it isn't always about how wide the wheel is, but more so how much contact the tire has with the ground.

Does that mean, perhaps, a 17x8 on 225's all around with a great alignment would do better than a 17x9 on 245's all around with a so-so alignment?

Assuming we're talking the same tire compound, I'd take the car with the narrower tire and great alignment.

Yes go square with wheel and tire width.

- Andy