RS*R Sports-i Coilover system installed (pics)

[Moto-P]

Originally Posted by 86design

well put!!! and I'm sorry if the question was off topic...just curious cause of all the great parts you have for your FRS

but again congrats on that beautiful FRS

Thanks! Yes I have been fortunate enough to earn trust by a few firms here and there over the years doing lots of racing and analysis of cars, and many many dollars and time, spent doing that out of my pocket. I still prefer to pay for things I keep as much as possible so as to not become a leech to the industry. AS for the FRS, its been really busy with many places contacting me to measure, calibrate, review and check for compatibility between the Japan model items and USA model stuff, that's usually the same, but in some rare cases can be a issue.

My goal is to accommodate this as much as possible, and relay that to the end users, as well as feedback to the manufacturers so that in the end, everyone can enjoy the FRS and life that surrounds it as much as possible.

I appreciate all your feedback in what I write and please let me know if you have any other concerns. I'll try to address it when I have time!

[Moto-P]

Originally Posted by RYU

Thanks for the feedback Moto. Any idea if they offer a rebuild service and what would be the recommended time/miles when one should do so? Any details on this?

A car daily driven in LA with 5-8 track days a year will incur a ton of miles for me

(I'm having this issue with my current DG-5 set)

There isn't a timeline and expected date range of suspension component life as there are vastly many scenarios and habits of each driver and the car. for the usual LA roads that I drive, I usually rebuild or replace shocks about every 25,000 miles as soon as degradation is apparent, but not completely failed by any means. Sooner any mechanical issue is addressed the more time you can drive optimally and less costly most repairs get in any device, right?

RS*R can rebuild most modern shocks, but if the design is outdated, they will likely suggest you replace them for a little more money as they would want you on the latest specs. It's sort of like working with a PC in performance world of cars. Specifically for shocks and bushings, it is much more time and cost effective to replace it as it is a constantly moving metal parts and things can wear and deteriorate somewhat beyond the ability to return to original specs even with a fresh rebuild. Things wear, score, distort over time by microscopic levels that really do affect prolonged performance retention.

So yeah, I am not as expertly as I'd like to be on this so it's probably best to just contact RS*R USA and talk to Ben, to see what the best solution is. He is not a salesman as much as a guy at Best Buy, RS*R is a company that values personal buying and long relations, for smaller market that appreciates that, and will point you not for maximizing of profit but to cater to you so that you will stick around as a loyal customer. This is why I do lots of business with them, and trust and give feedback to their products.

[Moto-P]

Originally Posted by mattles

Im very eagerly looking forward to your thoughts on the apexi throttle control module.

Here is a separate post I made about the APEX-i Throttle control unit, just now. I hope it helps.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6482

[Moto-P]

Originally Posted by Nardi330

Moto san, what is the ground clearance now with this setup?

Thx

I haven't taken a GC slide ruler to it yet, but it should be stock minus about 32mm front and 35 mm rear, as it is still on OEM wheels and tires.

I'm still able to go up and down over parking lot entry and intersection drainage dips quite well, without scraping the front lip without having to weave diagonally. However, it will not clear most sidewalk-style curbs when parking against it head-first and will have to watch those tire stopper anchor bars on some parking spaces.

[Moto-P]

Originally Posted by Scooby South

I have a couple of questions also:
-What type of competition are you going to participate in?

I will be building my BRZ to SCCA Solo spec in whatever Street Tire Class it falls in.. as I have already started to accumulate the needed parts, rims/tires etc to facilitate this..

I haven't started or have concrete plans for structured competition entry with my own FRS just yet, as this is my daily driven car, in AT paddle and it wasn't my focus as much as, going to various Sunday events, over many varieties of track, autocross, ride&drive, and other dynamic excercise and to refine the FRS in ways we like them as personally tuned, functional sports car for Club4AG's readers. So I don't have too much knowlege of what can be done to specifically tailor it to a very finely focused venue like SOLO and SOLO2. I will partake in them as time permits and eventually associate with teams or make my own, that can generate suggestions and data for such usage. My car is still 12 days old so I can't really get a dynamic results with engine still in break-in schedule as well.

-Moto, is it wise to say going with a stiffer rear, even tho slightly, makes it more neutral??? Since it is a new platform, Spring Rates were a crapshoot. I was going to start with 8k/8k.. but that sounds to stiff?? now.

Again, same as above, too early to know for sure on my end...sorry

-With 35mm maximum drop, would Steering Compensators ie: Bump steer kits/Ball joints be a wise investment?

Probably not, since the FRS was designed with really long pinned arms, and with foresight into mild drops and ideal dynamic arm alignments at -20mm.
Yes, Mr.Tada and his team are genious!, as they did this knowing that his original design would get lifted by that much by legal and PD folks who are concerned about ground clearance and snow chain usage, before final product.
So I would say, drop it to your specific ideal configuration and measure the specs, I would really suspect that the steering compensator will not be needed at all, and that it may line up better than at stock height!! I can see this visually too on my car at -35mm.

-Will you still be using the stock swaybars? or are you planning a upgrade there?

This is another element of tuning, where unlike old days, bumping up the lateral spring rate (without altering longitudinal spring rate) of a car is a really tricky thing, and simply jacking it by certain percentage usually doesn't do any good, and sometimes worse. The FRS isn't exactly like a sold beam Mustang or a sport pick up truck, so I'd be really careful.
AS for my personal taste, I like to work with springs as much as possible, so that spring rate is connected to all three axis of car's motions, and when that is spot on to my liking, that is when I can start to see if modifications to laterally isolated spring rate (sway bars) should be needed to reach a certain goal.

-Care to share your Corner weight info???

FL 795 FR 771
RL 595 RR 609
Total 2771 without driver and 3/4 tank of gas.
I played with it till I got about 3 lbs more bias to the right to compensate with me in the car and still keeping ride height even to within 2mm. (I guess I am below the intentional average weight for drivers? I'm 140lbs with clothes on)

-If you were to run camber, How much would you run, Do you have any idea of the how much Static Camber you have during aggressive driving?? And do you know if Toyota or Subaru is going to offer 'crash Bolts' to be able to get more camber out of the stock mounting???

I'm sure standard Subaru crashbolts for older Impreza will work, the bridge and ears of the two bolt mating surface is a little wider with aluminum RS*R lower mount of the shocks but still well within use range for those in length, and configured in similar way. Just how much camber is really up to the crash bolts or with use of adjustable lower arms from Cusco.

- how much room do you have between the shock body/spring and the inside of the tire at this point??

Thanks sooo much for your time..The information you are providing will go a long way in my own build. Much appreciated

Bill

I'll try to get clearance measurements next time. It was well after 5pm last time I had them with Master Mechanic eager to celebrate the last night in Los Angeles before going back to Japan. So I'll have it next week when it goes back on the rack to check for settling and re-tightening anything that might have worked loose.

lastly though, I would add that none of these numbers mean much as it is ultimately up to the driver to setup the car to his liking, and to tailor it more to his habits and abilities, as smaller theoretical performance specs can be greatly erased if the car or driver isn't tuned for each other. I found this many times over in my days of SCCA National/Regional days, when the driver (me or my co-driver) was tense and ready, but without some setup to put some margin on areas where we have a habit of making mistakes or to compensate for any inherent peaky difficulties of the car's character, that counted much more in reduction for each error, than gains of a few theoretical hundredths here and there.

So just drive it and get to know the car first before any changes are made. FRS is an awesome car, but it's a near even balanced car and some characters can be fast and sudden, with lots of human muscle memory being required for upper limit motions. It's a lot quicker seemingly in transitional weight shifts than even the best of the Corolla AE86's that we've raced, and as such, it pumps my blood and fills me with excitement, but at the same time, treating with respect for its enhanced capabilities and potential into the development into a race car of any sort.

[Scooby South]

thank you sir... ...I can not tell you how excited I am for this platform....and...You speak the truth..


Bill

[LSxJunkie]

Originally Posted by Moto-P

Here is the photo of the FRS, with RS*R Sports-i installed, corner-weighted, and tuned and aligned at 35mm drop front, and 32mm drop rear.
The profile of the car starts to really look nice about this height, but wheels becoming more and more weak in visual impact~~! LOL!!
Waiting on some 18" but custom made is not exactly overnight.
I've always wondered if the red dots (low runout point) on the tires are matched to the wheels from factory...

Oh look, the part of installing coilovers that everyone forgets about.

[Moto-P]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

Oh look, the part of installing coilovers that everyone forgets about.

Yeah, normally if it was on my own timeline, wheels and suspension systems go in at the same time. But this time the car was so booked up on test fits and reviews, the timing is like 100 times faster than my usual by the wallet chronology. So excuse me that the weak look of the factory wheels making a slight Bullet Train look and effects. Hehe!

I didn't forget about the wheels, just that I don't do this just 6 days after buying a car normally...

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by LSxJunkie

I actually don't mind the stock wheels. ...

I'm with you on that. In fact, I've had a few comments from folks saying they can't believe they are stock wheels. But again, I'm not a "wheel guy" so maybe I'm not the best judge!

[Dimman]

Moto, I'm curious about what you said earlier about anti-roll (sway) bars. Why do you prefer to use the springs for roll control, rather than using the bars? I would think that being able to separate roll from pitch to be a much more powerful tuning tool. Or is that just in the context of Solo and/or limited mods?

Thanks,
D

[Moto-P]

I like to setup balance as much as possible using springs and shocks then only if I see it necessary, tune it further with larger sway bars. This is because one variable is easier to deal with on overall combined spring rate that works on all three axis, that can be precisely controlled by the dampers.

I'm not saying I don't use it, but merely stating that it is the last thing I touch, and sometimes the most difficult, and combined rate can seem awkward in handling to me when lateral and longitudinal tilt/dive amount seems grossly different.

But this is one of those things, where individual flavor has more to do than exact science...
I like cars that roll a bit, and at rate of descent precisely controlled by the shock absorbers.
It feels very tanacious when you get it right, and enough body roll can be synced to speed and motions that work well with the given chassis and tires, where each snap of hard left or right can load the appropriate tires aggressively and quickly, and that yaw be controllable also by brake or throttle, and be relieved of it just as easily and redirected to your next input.

Making a car corner too flat makes this transitional phase very short and snappy and driver error makes it hard to time well. Being theoretically quicker ideally, but often not and less fun to drive. Less docile when things are stiff and unintuitive.

Think of many tactics in martial arts or forms of dancing, kinetic ally similar activity but with your own body. To balance on your foot, skates, skis, you want your upper body to be strong, and able to sustain loads of your partner or your own violent weight loads, but your knees and ankles to be readily capable of rebalancing for any rapid changes to make inertial direction change to your next instinctive move. Introduction of a separate and uni-axis restriction and furthermore a spring re-lashing that isn't properly dampened by controlling damper can get pretty messy and tricky. I see it almost similar... for cars. Obviously if you got rubbery Nike Airs (race slick tires), you need harder muscles and bones but still in a good overall balanced rate to do your hip hop or break-dance. This, just in the same way if you're on loafers (street tires), one needs less strength and bones in the same balance, to allow for graceful transitions to swing your girl gracefully, and to have all axis predictable and ready, so you don't end up throwing your female partner across the room and falling on your ass.

On cars like the FRS sway bar tuning is even more complicated as its a very light car with low center mass, so there isn't much pitch, dive, and sway in the first place... So that slightest change can really start to prevent things from rolling at all, which can't be all good.
I would say as far as, I probably wouldn't go larger on them unless tires in question are the most aggressive of racing slicks that are enough to roll it that far that fast...

And even then, I'd still would probably work with that much harder spring/shock to hunker on those forces, and sway bars may still be optional to me... Only being a tool I use mostly if this is a dedicated car for very fast tracks with long high-G sweepers well into top of 3rd gear, and speeds I'm less comfortable with tenacious weight shifts... But that's one of those scenarios I rarely encounter, as most of my thrills come from smaller venues like autocross, small to medium road courses, and safe casual passes through twisty rural hill passes. These are places where I like high levels of chassis response, and less limitations for me to transitions easily. Overly pinned down suspensions prevent that, and not being able to cope with larger motions of the chassis is more the lack of finesse by the driver, I feel.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Moto-P

I like to setup balance as much as possible using springs and shocks then only if I see it necessary, tune it further with larger sway bars. This is because one variable is easier to deal with on overall combined spring rate that works on all three axis, that can be precisely controlled by the dampers.

I'm not saying I don't use it, but merely stating that it is the last thing I touch, and sometimes the most difficult, and combined rate can seem awkward in handling to me when lateral and longitudinal tilt/dive amount seems grossly different.

But this is one of those things, where individual flavor has more to do than exact science...
I like cars that roll a bit, and at rate of descent precisely controlled by the shock absorbers.
It feels very tanacious when you get it right, and enough body roll can be synced to speed and motions that work well with the given chassis and tires, where each snap of hard left or right can load the appropriate tires aggressively and quickly, and that yaw be controllable also by brake ot throttle, and be relieved of it just as easily and redirected to your next input.

Making a car corner too flat makes this transitional phase very short and snappy and driver error makes it hard to time well. Being theoretically quicker ideally, but often not and less fun to drive. Less docile when things are stiff and unintuitive.

On cars like the FRS sway bar tuning is even more complicated as its a very light car with low center mass, so there isn't much pitch, dive, and sway in the first place... So that slightest change can really start to prevent things from rolling at all, which can't be all good.
I would say as far as, I probably wouldn't go larger on them unless tires in question are the most aggressive of racing slicks that are enough to roll it that far that fast...

And even then, I'd still would probably work with that much harder spring/shock to hunker on those forces, and sway bars may still be optional to me... Only being a tool I use mostly if this is a dedicated car for very fast tracks with long high-G sweepers well into top of 3rd gear, and speeds I'm less comfortable with tenacious weight shifts... But that's one of those scenarios I rarely encounter, as most of my thrills come from smaller venues like autocross, small to medium road courses, and safe casual passes through twisty rural hill passes.

Thanks.

I'm starting to get more technically involved in suspension theory. What I'm looking at is setting up the springs for a .9f/1r frequency ratio (looking like 250/390 f/r but with some big assumptions on unsprung weights and rear motion ratio until I get get some real measurements...), sorting out the damping ratios and slopes for them and then using bars to balance the remainder of roll front to rear.

Am I on the right track?

Edit: with those rates and my weight and motion ratio estimates I was looking at ~1.77Hz front and ~1.94Hz rear.

[Moto-P]

Also, suspension tuning is a mastered art of levers, dampers, springs, and motions. Take it one element at a time and study each step carefully. It's only very obvious, if you can isolate elements, before you combine them, when things just exponentially become more complex.

[Moto-P]

And theoretical setup is a useful guideline, but with driver brain, habits, preference, and skills as the largest of variable of them all... It can really only be finalized on the field, with equipment, talents, and resources, and over many trials to get there... So I can't really say yay or nay on your inquiries at this time... It's other half of tuning is on the seat of your pants.

Even things like full, half, or empty tank of gas will require changes in suspension in an ideal world... So... Numbers start to get really confusing when there are 1000 other variables. Great guideline, yes, but from there, you need to play with actual feeling of real driving. After all, it takes the best engineers a full year to figure out the right setup for only 17 tracks on an F1 cars, and half of them still not close to perfect on the field each time... We've got way more than 17 places to go in our cars, and work without billion buck R&D.