SCCA Solo C Street Discussion

[ksconekiller]

Originally Posted by solort

So is the crash bolt approved for the top or bottom hole of the 2 strut alignment holes?

The crash bolt goes in the top hole. The bolt is really just a 14mm bolt that goes in the top 16mm hole, giving some adjustment. Since the bottom hole is already 14mm, a crash bolt wouldn't do anything for you.

markw, that is odd that you were able to get more camber. I wonder if the dimensions of the holes changed at some point? I'd be interested if you ever had the opportunity to measure yours.

[markw]

I didn't measure them other than to see the holes were round. This could be a result of stacking tolerances. Ie. the manufacture says hole is 16mm +/- .5mm and the oem supplier puts the holes at 15.5mm while the aftermarket puts it at 16.5mm, both within specification for the OEM part. However one part at the one extreme would be prefered over a part at the other end of the extreme. This happens all the time with "blueprinting" cars for competition. They'll take a bunch of parts, measure them and use the ones that are within spec and work the best for the application. "Butter" is local to SD also, and he was also over 2 degrees on the Konis. I did get the shocks around the same time the springs came out, so they've been on the car since April.

[ksconekiller]

That could be, and it would be great for our community if that was the case. I wonder if we could confirm the factory's tolerances for this part. That could explain the stories I've seen about people getting more camber than factory struts. It would also help explain why there is variation even between cars on OEM struts with the camber bolts (e.g., some people only see 1.0 degree, while others see up to 1.5 degrees).

Edit: I know the parts manager of a Toyota dealership, so I will see if he has access to any information that can help with this.

[markw]

No one is taking into account that the TRD springs lower the car 3/4-1". The claims are all by people running stock height, claiming it's illegal. You measuring the Koni's and coming up with darn near identical dimensions to stock within a margin of error. .05 of a millimeter is pretty damn small. The koni parts are OEM replacements, and appear to measure out to oem specs. If someone is going to protest, I suspect they'll lose, as 1 they're off the shelf un-modified koni's, and 2 will they have a stock strut to compare it to. Heck, one guy on stock struts said he saw 1.9 with the TRD springs. At this point it's splitting hairs. I'm not going to worry about it, as when and if I win my class locally tires will be blamed. I just picked up RE71R's. Last event I took 2nd, only 1 way to go. Of course, this is 2 weeks away, and the tread is evaporating on the 71R's while they're sitting in my garage.

Mark

[ksconekiller]

I see your point, but with the front being struts, you will see minimal (if any) camber gain with the TRD springs. Certainly not being able to go from 1.5 to 2.5 degrees. Don't get the wrong idea; I really hope more camber is possible due to manufacturing tolerances.

[markw]

Pull your spring, and then put it all back together without the spring and with as much "camber" as you can get before somewhat tightening the bolts down. Then throw an angle finder on the rotor and cycle the suspension by hand. See what you get.

Mark

[ksconekiller]

I'm not planning to take the time to do this process on this car, but I did it on my Mazda3 when I was preparing it for the STF class. The Mazda3 has a strikingly similar front suspension design, so the results are likely similar. On that car, it gained 0.2 degrees of negative camber in the first 1.5" of lowering from stock height, but from there to bottoming out, the camber went back positive.

I did a quick online search for information about this on the WRX (since info on our cars is nonexistent), and most threads talk about gaining nothing (or almost nothing) in front camber when lowering the car.

The only other strut-equipped car I'm decently familiar with is the E36 BMW, and it doesn't gain any negative camber when lowered either.

Lastly, there was someone on this board several pages ago who posted his alignment sheet after getting the TRD springs, and he said he gained nothing in the front but the rear gained more negative camber. That makes sense since the rear is a multi-link design. Unfortunately, these cars in stock form need more camber in the front, not the rear.

I'd really like to see more people post their alignment numbers before and after installing the TRD springs.

[simpleisbest]

Originally Posted by markw

No one is taking into account that the TRD springs lower the car 3/4-1". The claims are all by people running stock height, claiming it's illegal. You measuring the Koni's and coming up with darn near identical dimensions to stock within a margin of error. .05 of a millimeter is pretty damn small. The koni parts are OEM replacements, and appear to measure out to oem specs. If someone is going to protest, I suspect they'll lose, as 1 they're off the shelf un-modified koni's, and 2 will they have a stock strut to compare it to. Heck, one guy on stock struts said he saw 1.9 with the TRD springs. At this point it's splitting hairs. I'm not going to worry about it, as when and if I win my class locally tires will be blamed. I just picked up RE71R's. Last event I took 2nd, only 1 way to go. Of course, this is 2 weeks away, and the tread is evaporating on the 71R's while they're sitting in my garage.

Mark

Just curious, but what was your front camber prior to installing the TRD springs?

[markw]

Originally Posted by simpleisbest

Just curious, but what was your front camber prior to installing the TRD springs?

It was 1.5 with the camber bolts, but I never loosened the hats, just the two bolts, replaced the upper bolt, put a jack under the hub, compressed the spring a bit then tightened it all down. When I did the Koni's I left everything loose until I put pressure on it with the jack and then tightened everything. I've got the sheet here somewhere, it ended up at 1.9 or 2 when everything was aligned.

Mark

[simpleisbest]

Originally Posted by markw

It was 1.5 with the camber bolts, but I never loosened the hats, just the two bolts, replaced the upper bolt, put a jack under the hub, compressed the spring a bit then tightened it all down. When I did the Koni's I left everything loose until I put pressure on it with the jack and then tightened everything. I've got the sheet here somewhere, it ended up at 1.9 or 2 when everything was aligned.

Mark

I've taken a look at how much adjustment can be had from the top hats, and from what I see there is only about a millimeter of a adjustment. The top hat bolt's threaded diameter measures out to be about 7.8mm and the upper mount hole to be about 9.7mm. That would give you less than 1mm of possible adjustment on the upper mount. On the MCSs I could only get about -1.4 degrees per side with everything maxed out. When I was on the Koni inserts and stock springs, it was about -1.5 per side (I think due to the shocks sagged).

Is it possible that either:

A) The TRD lowering spring with Koni's cause a huge amount of sag and lower the front more than other shocks, thus causing some possible camber gain (something I did not notice in particular with other cars at Spring Nationals which supposedly were on Koni)

B) The portion of the Koni shaft that goes through the upper mount has a smaller diameter than stock. I know the stock inserts had this issue and Koni sent out collars to remedy the issue, as the play could lead to damage.

C) Extreme leverage applied to the upper mounts has deform the upper mount holes on the chassis and provided more than the 1mm of adjustment. (Not accusing anyone of any illegal mods, mind you)

D) Alignment measurements are not accurate

E) Koni full replacement unit's mounting holes are not in the same LOCATION as OEM

-2.5 degrees on a stock car is pretty amazing. Even cars with lowering coilovers do not achieve that amount of camber without using aftermarket alignment bolts or aftermarket tophats

[chucky12012]

Congrats to Dave on another Pro Solo win this weekend at Mineral Wells and holding off those RX-8's. Fantastic event with long and fast courses that were difficult to get just right. Below are my fastest left and right course runs from the weekend. Did I mention it was hot...

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2X2tJt5c0E"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2X2tJt5c0E[/ame]

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qnYnPnWi90"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qnYnPnWi90[/ame]

[ryan t]

ive been reading this thread and thinking of trying cs. the set up im thinking of is 225/45 re71r on stock wheels,camber bolts, and trd springs. should i go with trd sways or just the strano front bar? is this starting set up that far off?

[Briankbot]

Originally Posted by ryan t

ive been reading this thread and thinking of trying cs. the set up im thinking of is 225/45 re71r on stock wheels,camber bolts, and trd springs. should i go with trd sways or just the strano front bar? is this starting set up that far off?

I've really been enjoying my FRS in CS after years of playing around in modified and prepared cars. Your idea sounds like a pretty good starting point. If it were me though I would consider upgrading dampers with the TRD springs. I found my Konis used for a pretty good deal (thanks Garrett!). Otherwise, again just my opinion, I would consider getting the TRD bars for now and doing the springs and dampers at a later time.

[markw]

Originally Posted by simpleisbest

I've taken a look at how much adjustment can be had from the top hats, and from what I see there is only about a millimeter of a adjustment. The top hat bolt's threaded diameter measures out to be about 7.8mm and the upper mount hole to be about 9.7mm. That would give you less than 1mm of possible adjustment on the upper mount. On the MCSs I could only get about -1.4 degrees per side with everything maxed out. When I was on the Koni inserts and stock springs, it was about -1.5 per side (I think due to the shocks sagged).

Is it possible that either:

A) The TRD lowering spring with Koni's cause a huge amount of sag and lower the front more than other shocks, thus causing some possible camber gain (something I did not notice in particular with other cars at Spring Nationals which supposedly were on Koni)

B) The portion of the Koni shaft that goes through the upper mount has a smaller diameter than stock. I know the stock inserts had this issue and Koni sent out collars to remedy the issue, as the play could lead to damage.

C) Extreme leverage applied to the upper mounts has deform the upper mount holes on the chassis and provided more than the 1mm of adjustment. (Not accusing anyone of any illegal mods, mind you)

D) Alignment measurements are not accurate

E) Koni full replacement unit's mounting holes are not in the same LOCATION as OEM

-2.5 degrees on a stock car is pretty amazing. Even cars with lowering coilovers do not achieve that amount of camber without using aftermarket alignment bolts or aftermarket tophats

I'm thinking old equipment at the local shop I use. I've got an alignment setup here, but I need to get my garage cleared out for a level floor, and I'll double check it. The wheel doesn't look tipped in any more than it did with the crash bolts and stock struts.

The struts fit nice in the top hats, so that's not an issue, and while the car was sideswiped it was before I did the camber bolts and it was a dent in the fender which didn't change the alignment.

My first thought was the bolt hole sizes were different on the Koni's but ksconekiller pulled his apart and measured, and while they're bigger, it was like .05mm which isn't much and could be a measurement error.

The drop I'm seeing from the TRD springs is about 3/4".

I was looking at Micheal Heinitz's car next to mine Saturday when we were tweaking his setup, and his front camber is WAYYY more than mine, but he said he's only at 3 degrees. Damn, now I want to check my camber again with a digital gauge to see where it's at.

Mark