CSG and RCE tag-team suspension Q&A thread! Ask us anything!

[SStratos]

Originally Posted by Racecomp Engineering

This.

- andrew

Since January watching the IMSA Datona 24hrs, and the news at that event that Continental was working with many championship winning drivers to develop their new Continental Extreme Contact Sport tire, I have been looking for and reading every testing article I can find on them like these two below which put them up favorably against the existing MPSS. Tires make a huge difference in how close to your ideal car usage goals you can get, and I was considering stepping back from the category of RE 71R, Rival S 1.5, and above mentioned Hankook, and into something like the CECS. This would dial me back to better streetable performance and less trackable performance, but still having enough performance to be used on the track on occasion.

What do you think about these? Have you tested-heard of anyone's experience with these tires?


http://blog.caranddriver.com/its-ext...contact-sport/

http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...act-Sport.aspx

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by SStratos

Since January watching the IMSA Datona 24hrs, and the news at that event that Continental was working with many championship winning drivers to develop their new Continental Extreme Contact Sport tire, I have been looking for and reading every testing article I can find on them like these two below which put them up favorably against the existing MPSS. Tires make a huge difference in how close to your ideal car usage goals you can get, and I was considering stepping back from the category of RE 71R, Rival S 1.5, and above mentioned Hankook, and into something like the CECS. This would dial me back to better streetable performance and less trackable performance, but still having enough performance to be used on the track on occasion.

What do you think about these? Have you tested-heard of anyone's experience with these tires?


http://blog.caranddriver.com/its-ext...contact-sport/

http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...act-Sport.aspx

I haven't tried them yet, but I would like to give them a shot. I've heard really good things and I may go for it in a month or so when I buy new wheels for my next car.

- Andrew

[Lunatic]

Take a look at Falken's new 615K+. I have 2 track days on a set and love them. Much more grip than my old Hancook RS3. Even though they are a 200 tread wear they feel as good as my Nitto NT01's felt.

[solidONE]

Originally Posted by SStratos

Since January watching the IMSA Datona 24hrs, and the news at that event that Continental was working with many championship winning drivers to develop their new Continental Extreme Contact Sport tire, I have been looking for and reading every testing article I can find on them like these two below which put them up favorably against the existing MPSS. Tires make a huge difference in how close to your ideal car usage goals you can get, and I was considering stepping back from the category of RE 71R, Rival S 1.5, and above mentioned Hankook, and into something like the CECS. This would dial me back to better streetable performance and less trackable performance, but still having enough performance to be used on the track on occasion.

What do you think about these? Have you tested-heard of anyone's experience with these tires?


http://blog.caranddriver.com/its-ext...contact-sport/

http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...act-Sport.aspx

I tested a friends ND using these tires, who typically run the Michelins on his car. Performance is comparable but inferior to the PSS in the dry. Treadblocks seem to be taller on the conti's and it seems to translate to more road noise and feels squirmy. Supposedly very good in the wet, but I wouldnt know firsthand. Only driven in the dry.

[Purist]

Hi all,

Considering stiffening up my suspension for weekend hillclimbs/sprints with an entry level spring and swaybar package. Just wondering if anyone has experienced lifting a wheel as a result of stiffer suspension. I'm thinking with such a low CG its unlikely.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Purist

Hi all,

Considering stiffening up my suspension for weekend hillclimbs/sprints with an entry level spring and swaybar package. Just wondering if anyone has experienced lifting a wheel as a result of stiffer suspension. I'm thinking with such a low CG its unlikely.

The first factor will be how sticky of a tire you run, softer suspension is more likely to lift a wheel than stiffer suspension.

If the course has any curbs you clip you can lift a wheel on a totally stock car (how the pedal dance mode was discovered to be useful).

[Purist]

I run medium compound AO50s. They're pretty sticky. What I'd read was that a stiffer rollbar will be more inclined to lift the inside tyre, but I think this is assuming the spring rate stays the same. I get that stiffer springs will reduce roll, and a company that produces packages like this would know what they're doing.

Suspension setup seems like more art than science.

[Racecomp Engineering]

Originally Posted by Purist

I run medium compound AO50s. They're pretty sticky. What I'd read was that a stiffer rollbar will be more inclined to lift the inside tyre, but I think this is assuming the spring rate stays the same. I get that stiffer springs will reduce roll, and a company that produces packages like this would know what they're doing.

Suspension setup seems like more art than science.

Science!

I wouldn't let lifting a wheel stop you from increasing your roll stiffness...you do need it with those sticky tires. Stiffer swaybars are the cheap and easy "solution" but they do have their drawbacks. You would still be faster with stiffer bars, but coilovers would really be the way to go (possibly in addition to stiffer bars).

- Andrew

[Lunatic]

I have Tein Flex A coil overs with swift 10K springs, 200 tread wear Falken 615K+ tires. Would stiffer sway bars reduce my lap times?

[cjd]

Originally Posted by Lunatic

I have Tein Flex A coil overs with swift 10K springs, 200 tread wear Falken 615K+ tires. Would stiffer sway bars reduce my lap times?

Based on the information given? Who the heck knows.

[Gearhead1]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

You're way overthinking this.

RaceSeng top mounts have adjustable caster and camber. RCE top mounts have adjustable camber and a fixed amount of increased caster. I think Velox increases caster as well, but I'm not sure about that. Any one of these will be cheaper and easier than slapping together mismatched rod ends and hoping for the desired outcome. If you really want an adjustable front LCA, SPL makes one ($$$) and RacerX can custom make one to your specs.

I currently use camber bolts plus SPC cam bolts, and ovalled out holes in the struts to get -3 degrees camber. This requires spacers to keep the front tires from hitting the spring perches. Way too gimicky and those skinny cam bolts make me nervous.

With OE springs, top mounts have a limited range of adjustment-especially if you want a meaningful caster increase (2+ degrees). And you raise the front of the car.

RacerX adjustable LCA's with urethane bushings looked like the answer for me, but they no longer offer urethane. Spherical rod ends only, with recommended annual replacement.

A custom-built LCA is too pricey, but moving the trailing LCA pivot point looks relatively simple. It will get me the camber I want, but admittedly will only give me about a 1/3 of the caster increase I was looking for. It should still be feasible to add an offset to the front pivot point (WL or other) to gain another small bit of caster, however.

So, back to my original question--does anyone know a way to get increased tie rod length, without spherical rod ends?

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Gearhead1

With OE springs, top mounts have a limited range of adjustment-especially if you want a meaningful caster increase (2+ degrees). And you raise the front of the car.

The raceseng's don't raise the front by more than 1/10th of an inch or so, +1 degree of caster, way cheaper than an LCA, I loved them on my OE suspension+camber bolts, but hey, you do you.

When adding that much caster be careful, you may start overheating the power steering unit and loosing assist mid-corner.

Edit: for the steering rods, maybe WRX's are sized longer?

[Gforce]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

The first factor will be how sticky of a tire you run, softer suspension is more likely to lift a wheel than stiffer suspension.

If the course has any curbs you clip you can lift a wheel on a totally stock car (how the pedal dance mode was discovered to be useful).

On the contrary. Softer springs allow more body roll before lifting a wheel. The stiffer you go and the shorter you go the sooner the inside wheel will lift. The more power you're trying to put down the softer you need to go with the springs on the drive axle.

There's only so much grip available. Whether that grip causes a lot of body roll or a little doesn't matter much. Roll control is about keeping the wheels upright, I.e. At the camber angle you decide you need, for as much of the suspension travel as you have. Shorter and stiffer springs reduce the camber change by reducing body roll. They also reduce the CG but, seriously the BRZ starts at 18 in CG height so dropping even two inches in ride height isn't making much difference.

The main effect of shorter stiffer springs is reducing camber change.

[Gearhead1]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

The raceseng's don't raise the front by more than 1/10th of an inch or so, +1 degree of caster, way cheaper than an LCA, I loved them on my OE suspension+camber bolts, but hey, you do you.

When adding that much caster be careful, you may start overheating the power steering unit and loosing assist mid-corner.

Not sure about cheaper. RacerX adjustable LCA's list for $579. Raceseng's camber plates are $420 plus the cost of coilovers, correct?