KW V3: To flip or not to flip

[Sam Strano]

From the get go I thought it was insane to run a higher rear rate on this car, unless you are hell bent on running a BIG front bar and either stock or no rear bar.

I see no reason for super high rates, and I'd never run stiffer rear rates on this car.

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by Scooby South

I have been flipped on mine since I got them.. back last June.... most of the folks I know are flipped.. Not sure why KW made the call to have the higher spring rate in the rear.. makes no sense..

Bill

It's interesting because KW used to be really conservative with their standard spring rates. We were surprised to see them go stiffer in the rear for this car too.

- Andy

[RiskyTrousers]

The KW spring rates are apprx 340lb/in F and 400lb/in R.

Wouldn't the effective spring rate be 340 F and 280 R due to the motion ratio? This would still have a higher spring rate in the front without flipping.

[grodenglaive]

For sure you can't disregard the motion ratio. Good explanation here:
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9936

[GTM_Challenge]

Real World Testing > Theory.

You for sure can't disregard motion ratios, but nobody said you want even effective spring rates all around either.

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by GTM_Challenge

You for sure can't disregard motion ratios, but nobody said you want even effective spring rates all around either.

Agreed. I made that post but didn't intend for it to say "you must do things this way." Just trying to explain something that's often overlooked.

- Andrew

[GTM_Challenge]

Originally Posted by Racecomp Engineering

Agreed. I made that post but didn't intend for it to say "you must do things this way." Just trying to explain something that's often overlooked.

- Andrew

It's a good read, and it even says specifically lower spring rates in the rear CAN work. People just need to read closer.

[RiskyTrousers]

My point was that the standard KW setup already HAS a softer rear spring, effectively.

By flipping springs, people are running apprx 400lbs F and 238lbs R. Like RCE said in his post, its not necessarily bad, just people need to be aware.

[neurokinetik]

Originally Posted by RiskyTrousers

The KW spring rates are apprx 340lb/in F and 400lb/in R.

Wouldn't the effective spring rate be 340 F and 280 R due to the motion ratio? This would still have a higher spring rate in the front without flipping.

Yes, and flipped you end up with 400F, 255R. Not really a huge difference, especially in the rear. Unless you only care about hooning and driving sideways (or plan on using a huge front bar, like Sam said), you aren't going to want the wheel rates to be the same or higher in the rear than they are in the front in a nose-heavy RWD car.

[wootwoot]

It seems the consensus is that I should flip the springs.

What happens to the compression and rebound settings at that point? Should they be left as they come from the factory? Or are there other baseline settings that I should start with?

[GTM_Challenge]

Originally Posted by wootwoot

It seems the consensus is that I should flip the springs.

What happens to the compression and rebound settings at that point? Should they be left as they come from the factory? Or are there other baseline settings that I should start with?

If you're still using the factory settings, then you are missing out on A LOT of the benefit of aftermarket adjustable coilovers. That being said, if you are unsure of what the adjustments do, just swap the springs and read up on what the adjustments do for handling and go from there.

*edit* sent you a PM, but I'll post this link here for others to read up on Double Adjustables too - http://robrobinette.com/S2000KWV3Tuning.htm

[Sam Strano]

Coilovers are not magic, they are springs and dampers, with ride height adjustment.

In fact coilovers can screw folks up who have little clue what they are doing more than a set of good springs and Koni's. Twisting knobs isnt setup. Cars can have the same basic setup, but the tuning or driving causes very different behavior, in fact we've seen it as recently as this weekend where on car is planted and the other is unsettled. the devil is in the details, and the details are where I can offer direct support to my customers. Publicly, I have to be vague in general because of the nature of the business and folks taking info for granted. privately I will take very good care of my customers with regard to setup help.

[SubieNate]

Originally Posted by GTM_Challenge

Where were you when I need backup? It was all "but the motion ratio this, the motion ratio that" talk. I gave up.

Hiiiiiiii!

I'll be the first to admit that it's easy to get your opinions and facts intermingled when discussing things online.

My gut still tells me that there is a reason that the OEM specs from both Subaru and Toyota are stiffer in the rear, and that even front:rear is the most rearward bias I've seen among the "high end" coilover systems that have been released. KW (stiffer rear), Ohlins (Even, IIRC) Tein SRC (stiffer rear) T2's (even starting point), Eibach R2's (even).

It may be that it depends on whether you're doing track or auto-x, but I'm excited to see real testing in both environments.

Nathan

[Mitch]

I'm on the autocross spring flip bandwagon. I ran the stock wheels and tires this past weekend, and instead of being a slidefest the car neutral steered like a champ. I got to iron out some things with my technique (lack thereof), and I'm ready to get back on my star specs. If the rear had been looser it would have been a disaster. Same principles apply with more grip, just easier to notice in the absence of grip.