Best Track Coilovers Sub $2000

[oinojo]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

I wouldn't run a conventional damper on a track without bumpstops either. I can't think of any reason why you would, can you?

I won't pretend to understand enough about Magnetorheological dampers or DSSV type dampers to say anything on those.

I think ya'll confuse what Jeff meant by use of bumpstops. Ideally yes, you should run bumpstops to prevent issues from bottoming out but you also don't want a damper that will constantly crash into it.

This is what he meant by a damper with inadequate compressed travel. You see this with setups where the shock body is simply too long for the targeted ride height (typically off the shelf stock replacements). This also has issues with the shock shaft/piston operating in a non-optimal position inside the shock itself. Very prone to bottoming out internally and possibly hitting the dividing piston (monotube) at extreme bumps.




Ideally you want enough stroke that you never hit the bumpstops under roll. That way the bumpstops are just there to save you for those "oh $h*T" moments with potholes and such. If the strut/shock length isn't ideal for the ride height, you could be compromised and forced to run with the bumpstops in play more often than not. This becomes a tuning nightmare when the car sees varying grip levels via surface or tire choice.

[jwisjw]

Originally Posted by OkieSnuffBox

A bumpstop is just one of many tools in suspension tuning, but he seems to be insinuating that only poor quality shocks or poorly designed setups use them, which is blatantly false. I guess Moton, Penske, etc are all poor quality shocks because they have a variety of different bumpstops for different applications. It's like he isn't sure what they are really for.

I have no idea why the import guys like to hate on KONI over the all the rebranded Taiwanese stuff that has to be rebuilt before it's even considered usable for anything but scene points.

Have you ever tried tuning with a bumpstop? Not a lot of bumpstops are forgiving when reaching max block height, assuming you have tested the bumpstop spring rate yourself or the data is offered. I will say that going with inline bumpstop configuration is probably one of the best ways of tuning but a shorter shock is required for this.

Lets take the Koni kit that offers race inserts, single or double adjustable from ground control. They have part # 70.34.95.000.0 bumpstop included in this kit which is for a 22-24mm shaft in a 55mm length. I don't have data on this, however I have something similar which is for a smaller rod, 16-20mm rod and 55mm long.

73.34.53.000.0 - Progressive soft
.1" Travel - 56lbs
.2" Travel - 88lbs
.3" Travel - 109lbs
.4" Travel - 125lbs
.5" Travel - 150lbs
.6" Travel - 200lbs
.7" Travel - 298lbs
.8" Travel - 525lbs
.9" Travel - 1000lbs
1.0" Travel - 2000lbs

Taking the 70.34.53.000.0 data, 1.0" of travel before reaching max block height of 2000#lbs.... heck the bumpstop doubles it spring rate going from .7" to .8" 298lbs to 525lbs. You really want to tune with a progressive long bumpstop like this? Does Moton and Penske give you this information? Please share by all means.

As stated, RE Suspension is one of the few manufacturers that offers the inline bumpstop choices as shown below with spring rates with different durometer but whats the point if you are able to change spring rates?

I don't run bumpstops on my FR-S and don't plan on running any and also I do drive this car on the street. I'm confident I have enough compressed travel to the point that the chassis would bottom out on the ground. So introducing a bumpstop and relying on the surface to be consistent isn't for me.

Revalving the Megan's is a way to get more range for desired spring rates. I've shown you dyno graphs of OTS units, I can share tons more.

[pgranberg11]

and here I thought a bumpstop was just a piece of rubber/foam to help aid the strut from not bottoming out. Had no idea clue there was so much data involved. (not sarcasm).

[tigermack]

Anyone thought the bumpstop reflection looks like the casting couch?

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by tigermack

Anyone thought the bumpstop reflection looks like the casting couch?

So that's how you get this kind of data!

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by jwisjw

Taking the 70.34.53.000.0 data, 1.0" of travel before reaching max block height of 2000#lbs.... heck the bumpstop doubles it spring rate going from .7" to .8" 298lbs to 525lbs. You really want to tune with a progressive long bumpstop like this?

I think everyone would agree with you that this would be a poor design and anybody using it for competition is likely going to struggle with sub-optimal grip, especially mid-corner.

But you make it sound like everyone but you fucks this up, and that's simply not true as most bumpstops are orders of magnitude softer than you postulate and competitive types trim them to take them out of the equation for expected travel ranges.

Originally Posted by jwisjw

I'm confident I have enough compressed travel to the point that the chassis would bottom out on the ground. So introducing a bumpstop and relying on the surface to be consistent isn't for me.

Fuck if you can prove this I bet you'd get a lot of converts because I know my Bilsteins couldn't do that unless I moved the damper mounting locations 2" up.

[justint5387]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

But you make it sound like everyone but you fucks this up, and that's simply not true as most bumpstops are orders of magnitude softer than you postulate and competitive types trim them to take them out of the equation for expected travel ranges.

Fuck if you can prove this I bet you'd get a lot of converts because I know my Bilsteins couldn't do that unless I moved the damper mounting locations 2" up.

I don't think he was saying other people fuck it up, he was saying with the megans you dont need to run a bump stop and have desired travel unlike the Koni kit.

If I don't already have shocks, I would buy these Megans from Proparts.

[pgranberg11]

I will have to say for those who didn't read this yet as it was posted earlier... This is pretty good:

http://farnorthracing.com/autocross_secrets18.html


Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[jwisjw]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

But you make it sound like everyone but you fucks this up, and that's simply not true as most bumpstops are orders of magnitude softer than you postulate and competitive types trim them to take them out of the equation for expected travel ranges.

While I agree you could trim them but I would suspect that would affect the overall spring rate and engage the max block height even sooner. Seems to me like a slippery slope for tuning effectively. You should browse some of the dyno graphs that are offered on RE suspensions site.. A lot of standard looking bumpstops go non linear after 1-1.5" of travel, which typically will require a shorter shock than average to keep it away from that as much as possible, IMO.

Penske Bumpstops - http://store.resuspension.com/home.php?cat=330
Ohlins Bumpstops - http://store.resuspension.com/home.php?cat=331

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by jwisjw

While I agree you could trim them but I would suspect that would affect the overall spring rate and engage the max block height even sooner. Seems to me like a slippery slope for tuning effectively.

No different than the logic you use to justify having no bumpstop.

"I never expect to use this last X" of travel of my dampers, therefore no bumpstop is required"
"I never expect to use this last X" of travel of my dampers, therefore if my bumpstop is <X" it will not be in play during my suspension tuning"



Ultimately what matters is having a damper with adequate travel, I think we can all agree that heavily relying on a bumpstop to prevent the everything from bottoming out is not ideal, but it happens and it can be done effectively (like the OE setup).

And yes, you're spot on with regards to trimming a bumpstop means it ramps up to block much quicker as what's happening is like a progressive rate spring, the soft coils bind first, then the mediums then the hards, shortening it is like cutting out the travel across all stiffnesses of a progressive spring, it doesn't get any softer or harder, it just ramps up to bind much sooner.

Sorry if I seemed aggressive earlier and like Justin said, pretty sure I misinterpreted, I think this thread has taken a turn for the positive with sharing of information. And if one person learned more about bumpstops than it was worth it.

[jwisjw]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Fuck if you can prove this I bet you'd get a lot of converts because I know my Bilsteins couldn't do that unless I moved the damper mounting locations 2" up.

This is a picture of the car at static ride height along with what I feel is adequate travel available. Keep in mind that all I would have to do is thread the body into the lower mount and that retains my stroke travel while lowering the car at the same time. However, I don't know if this would eventually cause interference with the endlink because the cartridge would be exposed more. Currently I don't have any endlink binding issues.

[M0nk3y]

Originally Posted by justint5387

I don't think he was saying other people fuck it up, he was saying with the megans you dont need to run a bump stop and have desired travel unlike the Koni kit.

If I don't already have shocks, I would buy these Megans from Proparts.

Pretty much this.

I took my MCS shocks and compressed them totally to a bottom out position.

What did I find? Well I'd get coil bind before that. So yea, bumpstops are just an expensive add-on for me.

[oinojo]

Originally Posted by M0nk3y

Pretty much this.

I took my MCS shocks and compressed them totally to a bottom out position.

What did I find? Well I'd get coil bind before that. So yea, bumpstops are just an expensive add-on for me.

So your springs are too short... LOL

[M0nk3y]

Originally Posted by oinojo

So your springs are too short... LOL

Shhhhhh. Some people run 280 lb springs. Other run 2.8" springs.