SCCA Solo C Street Discussion

[solort]

Originally Posted by ChrisV

I don't know that anyone has confirmed alignments with nothing changing except for the Konis.

I know that I could do it, but it would require me taking a couple of hours and spending money to do so. I would have if I found any discrepancies between the struts as they measured, but I didn't, so it wasn't worth my time or money.

I aligned my car for the first time with Yellows, camber bolts, and TRD springs - I don't have a baseline alignment to work off of to know how far the alignment is from stock capabilities.

FWIW, I speculate that there will be no significant difference (based on measurements and pics in this thread). But I also go with the "innocent until proven guilty" philosophy. When I get Konis at some point in the future, I will do my own testing and share whatever results I get...

[simpleisbest]

I think what most have a problem with is accepting the idea that getting more than -2.0 deg of front camber on a stock set-up being possible.

The way Koni advocates in this thread are trying to convince everyone otherwise is unreal, IMO.

There are many similar examples out there of what others forum members outside of SCCA and C-Street have done to prep their cars and provided their alignment results.

Here is just one:

Note this user has lowered coilover suspension, Whiteline camber bolts, requested alignment for MAX front neg. camber...NO adjustable front upper mounts(unlike many STX builds).

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...0&postcount=15

MAX front camber achieved was -2.10/-1.85

If you look at pics from the first post, the car is pretty low, lower than what most would get with the TRD package.

I know that this is just one example. Do you own searches and you will find many more.

#continueflame

[7thgear]

thinking outloud...


have any of you measured the distance between the centerline's of the struts from the top, when you open your hood?


maybe the strut towers were welded in at less than spec..

[ChrisV]

Originally Posted by simpleisbest

I think what most have a problem with is accepting the idea that getting more than -2.0 deg of front camber on a stock set-up being possible.

The way Koni advocates in this thread are trying to convince everyone otherwise is unreal, IMO.

There are many similar examples out there of what others forum members outside of SCCA and C-Street have done to prep their cars and provided their alignment results.

Here is just one:

Note this user has lowered coilover suspension, Whiteline camber bolts, requested alignment for MAX front neg. camber...NO adjustable front upper mounts(unlike many STX builds).

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...0&postcount=15

MAX front camber achieved was -2.10/-1.85

If you look at pics from the first post, the car is pretty low, lower than what most would get with the TRD package.

I know that this is just one example. Do you own searches and you will find many more.

#continueflame

Look, I get what you're saying. If I hadn't measured the struts myself, I'd probably be agreeing with you.

Since I have empirical evidence that says the parts are legal, and only conjecture and rhetorical devices that say they're not, I'm going to rely on the empirical evidence.

If the evidence changes somehow, I'll take the parts off the car. Until then, I won't.

[Locust]

Stopped reading two pages ago. You're all ridiculous and need to be put on timeout or something.

[DylanFRS]

I currently have the crash bolts and TRD springs on stock struts. If anyone wants to donate a set of the Konis to me I would gladly get before and after camber measurements.

Until then...

[TMF]

Ha, well I'm showing up at a heated time...

Anyway I'm picking up my FRS next Monday and am planning on running in CS. I've been running with the local club for a few years, both in a Saabaru and most recently my 08 STI that I just sold. Obligatory pic for reference:



I just sold the STI (which I ran in SM, but was no where near full prep) because I really would like a competitive autox car...enter, the FRS.

I'm also running at nats this year for the first time, perhaps I will meet a few of you there!

Here's what I have planned for the setup. I have a few questions on the items, so any insight is welcome.

Tires: Bridgestone RE 71-R's (225/45-17 or 235/45-17? 235 seems like it could be "floppy" on a 7" wheel, and make for some tall gearing. I like crisp turn-in.)
Wheels: any lightweight wheels I can find. I have a lead on RFP1's, but they are a few weeks out, and my first practice event is on 7/17.
Brake pads: probably HP+, but open to other suggestions
Koni's (despite all the debate)
TRD Springs (is there any good documentation that shows these are "legal"? I did trade emails with Doug Gill wherein he said the TRD springs, bars, and short shift are legal).
Crash bolts
PLM muffler delete
Sway bars: I may wait on these. Our local events tend to be much smaller and tighter than the Nats courses)

Most importantly: seat time! I've only done two events in a RWD car in the past, so there will be a bit of a learning curve. Fortunately there is a practice event before my first event in the car, so I will get plenty of seat time.

Overall, I'm just excited to finally move into a car that can be competitive in autox. And it looks like I will have plenty of competition to compare to

[renfield90]

Originally Posted by simpleisbest

The way Koni advocates in this thread are trying to convince everyone otherwise is unreal, IMO.

You mean...by using actual measurements of the parts in question?

[renfield90]

Originally Posted by TMF

Tires: Bridgestone RE 71-R's (225/45-17 or 235/45-17? 235 seems like it could be "floppy" on a 7" wheel, and make for some tall gearing. I like crisp turn-in.)

The 225 Bridgestone is easily the tire with the sharpest turn in I've ever felt. I haven't tried the 235, but I don't think it will be that floppy (the taller gearing is helpful/hurtful depending on the course). Definitely don't go 245 if you don't want floppy.

Originally Posted by TMF

TRD Springs (is there any good documentation that shows these are "legal"? I did trade emails with Doug Gill wherein he said the TRD springs, bars, and short shift are legal).
Sway bars: I may wait on these. Our local events tend to be much smaller and tighter than the Nats courses)

Yup, the SEB officially clarified in a fast track that the springs and bars are legal. You will want the bars even on tight courses, IMO they're a big help.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by renfield90

The 225 Bridgestone is easily the tire with the sharpest turn in I've ever felt. I haven't tried the 235, but I don't think it will be that floppy (the taller gearing is helpful/hurtful depending on the course). Definitely don't go 245 if you don't want floppy.


Yup, the SEB officially clarified in a fast track that the springs and bars are legal. You will want the bars even on tight courses, IMO they're a big help.

Awesome, thanks for the info! A quick search reveals that the top speed in 2nd gear is 58 mph? Looks like the 235/45-17 would bring the top speed up to almost 60, which would be nice.

[renfield90]

Originally Posted by TMF

Awesome, thanks for the info! A quick search reveals that the top speed in 2nd gear is 58 mph? Looks like the 235/45-17 would bring the top speed up to almost 60, which would be nice.

In practice I think the soft limiter holds you just under that. The downside of the taller gearing is that if you have a slow corner, you fall deeper into the torque dip and have a harder time climbing back out.

[simpleisbest]

Originally Posted by renfield90

You mean...by using actual measurements of the parts in question?

The measurements you keep referring were from a user that did NOT report achieving -2.0 degrees camber or more.

It is apparent that not ALL Koni full replacement users are able to achieve a significant increase in negative front camber.

It is still a plausible theory Koni's production tolerances may be poor enough to affect alignment as such. It may be a situtation that some Koni struts may be Street class legal and some not.

Camber does not simply "grow". As I am sure you know it is a product the mechanical relationship of the angle the hub mounts to the strut/chassis.

If you can not achieve -2.0 degrees camber with OEM struts, but can with Koni yellow full replacements, do you really believe they are the identical??!!

"Any modification that allows for more neg camber vs OEM would be an illegal modification" -Wouldn't you agree on this statement alone?

[simpleisbest]

Originally Posted by TMF

Awesome, thanks for the info! A quick search reveals that the top speed in 2nd gear is 58 mph? Looks like the 235/45-17 would bring the top speed up to almost 60, which would be nice.

I have run both 225 and 235. While 235 is not as sharp, the gearing has help me on certain courses. I have noticed that 225 heats up way faster than 235.

235 seems to be cheaper than the 225 and 245...why I cannot understand

[renfield90]

Originally Posted by simpleisbest

"Any modification that allows for more neg camber vs OEM would be an illegal modification" -Wouldn't you agree on this statement alone?

Degassing your shocks is legal and will result in more negative camber (due to lower ride height) then you could ever hope to achieve with OEM parts. Camber bolts are also a legal modification and get you more camber than OEM so on it's face, your statement is overly broad.

There is also the question of "how much camber can you achieve OEM." Someone upstream reported -1.9 on TRD springs and OEM struts. Figure some measuring differences between machines and they could measure over -2 at another shop.

Camber is just a number. It's how you arrive at that number that matters. Until you can show me the cold hard facts of an out-of-spec Koni, with measurements done by yourself, I'm inclined to believe the engineer who designed the shocks as well as the multiple people who have measured their shocks and found them in spec. Once again, Occam's Razor.