The Autocross thread. Got questions? Get them answered here!

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by renfield90

By "one hand tied behind your back" I was strictly talking in terms of SA vs. DA. The KWv3s are DA so if anything, you just proved my point.

They're also 230/280# springs off the shelf and personally I'm not a fan of KW. I don't think it's unreasonable to presume that a more dialed in ($$$) setup would make the car easier to drive and easier to extract more performance out of. Otherwise all the fast guys would save money for tires and run Megans and BC Racing.

But swinging back to a previous topic, have you taken your Fontana setup and run it at a local or did you immediately switch back to your baseline setup? I feel that a damper is going to have a narrow window of providing maximum grip for the car and I wonder if you found that the two settings are mutually exclusive or if one just works better across the board.

Anyone else who feels like sharing is welcome to. I know surfaces are different, different amounts of grip will react to different tire pressures and alignments, but intuitively I wouldn't think damper settings should be wildly different, especially on an STX car where appropriate springs and sways are available.

[M0nk3y]

Originally Posted by renfield90

By "one hand tied behind your back" I was strictly talking in terms of SA vs. DA. The KWv3s are DA so if anything, you just proved my point.

Sam Strano in SSR on SA Konis, Julian Garfield in CS on SA Konis.

You don't get my point. Shocks don't make the time.

The fact you think you need 2 knobs to compete is a wild assumption.

Wong could easily win on Megan's. However he likes to do testing.

PS - Both Pallotta and Marcus ran on non-KW springs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by M0nk3y

PS - Both Pallotta and Marcus ran on non-KW springs

Do you know if they were revalved or if they got enough damping out of the adjusters? Either way, that kind of proves the point that the quick guys see value in spending more than the bare minimum on dampers and running them as they are off the shelf.

Edit: I only ask because I thought revalving KW's was kind of an underground market at this point as they no longer offer or authorize that service from the factory. I could be wrong though.

[M0nk3y]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

Do you know if they were revalved or if they got enough damping out of the adjusters? Either way, that kind of proves the point that the quick guys see value in spending more than the bare minimum on dampers and running them as they are off the shelf.

Edit: I only ask because I thought revalving KW's was kind of an underground market at this point as they no longer offer or authorize that service from the factory. I could be wrong though.

OTS Valving

Just IMO, I had DA Konis on my 128 and switching to MCS or JRZs would have made no difference.

I think there is a Huge placebo effect with "expensive shocks" and doing well


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[e1_griego]

Can't hear you over my rationalizing expensive shocks to make up for lack of talent.

[renfield90]

Originally Posted by M0nk3y

OTS Valving

Just IMO, I had DA Konis on my 128 and switching to MCS or JRZs would have made no difference.

I think there is a Huge placebo effect with "expensive shocks" and doing well


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree and disagree.

Yes, a lot of people think if they spend $4k on shocks they will have a guaranteed good setup. LOL. In fact I know someone who spent more - with a highly regarded shock builder, no less - and ended up with a worse handling car than stock because the shock builder set him up with some insane damping forces.

As I'm fond of saying, suspension is a matter of basic physics - by basic, I mean any first year physics student could at least wrap their head around the problems/equations involved (source: I stumbled through one year of physics). So yes, if you switch from Shock A to Shock B but match the settings so the damping forces are the same, there will be ZERO difference between the two. There's really not much reason to go from Konis to MCS, JRZ, Penske, et al if you're going to end up with the same damping range.

Where there are differences, it is in the following:
- durability/reliability
- heat tolerance
- adjuster accuracy/linearity/repeatability
- how easy is it to get a revalve/rebuild

I wouldn't say there will be huge differences between Koni/MCS/JRZ/Penske/etc for the things on that list. But if we start bringing up brands like Tokico, that conversation changes. Now if you had some hypothetical "magic" Tokico that matched the damping forces of the Koni, sure, there will be largely no performance difference (assuming those damping forces hold as the shock heats up).

But more than likely you won't like the damping forces of the Tokico, you won't be able to have someone change them, and the adjuster is potentially a random force generator. Same goes for Tein or anyone else who will refuse to give you detailed shock dynos.

Regarding DA vs. SA: my philosophy is that once the shock damping is correct, you shouldn't touch the shock (barring rain or similar calamity). With that in mind, you can get DA performance from an SA if you're willing to revalve...repeatedly. I'm not convinced you can maximize your performance potential with an OTS SA unless that OTS compression valving just happens to be the magically right value. And even then, that valving will be maximized for one specific tire on one specific surface in dry conditions. DA lets you move to different surfaces or deal with rain.

Yes, if you're talented, you can win on SAs especially in Street classes. The really exceptional Street drivers are those who don't just understand how to drive fast, but can understand a stock car's bad habits and drive around them. I still think DA is generally an edge. Note that Ogburn had DAs when he won CS. Knowing Peters, he probably had DAs when he beat Strano last year in SSR (don't know what shocks Strano had).

Fact is, most of us are not that talented and we need all the help we can get. And even those of us who are talented (Jeff) are ditching their SAs for DAs.

The real bottom line is if you buy an adjustable setup, you need to put in the work needed to find the fast setting. DAs are just a tool; ultimately the driver is the weapon.

[86Craze]

Is there any advantage of running a track brake pad over an autocross brake pad for autocross?
Are there say advatages of having an AX6 pad over an xp8/10 pad for autocross purposes ? Thanks.

[14stu]

Originally Posted by 86Craze

Is there any advantage of running a track brake pad over an autocross brake pad for autocross?
Are there say advatages of having an AX6 pad over an xp8/10 pad for autocross purposes ? Thanks.

No, and in many circumstances the track pad will be worse for autox than a less aggressive pad.

Many dedicated track pads need to come up to temp to work well and there just isn't time for that to happen at autox. Also, the biggest differences for track pads is that they hold up to higher temperatures, but again, at autox you won't heat up the brakes enough to worry about.

An XP8/10 will work fine for autox (they're pretty popular choices), but if you went to like 14-20 those probably wouldn't work too well (they'd never get up to operating temp).

For autox, you want something that'll work cold, has high initial bite (how much is mostly down to personal preference), and is consistent. In fact, you could run stock pads without problem at autox (they work well enough).

I'm actually worried that my Ferodo DS 1.11 won't work well at autox because they are too track focused (my street pads are Hawk HPS and I hate them at autox).

[Imp]

^^^ This.


Autox pads are down to personal preference. Are you a right foot stabber? Or are you calculated and easy with braking? Do you find yourself doing more braking before the turns, or more of a trail braker? I'd suggest you do a few events with the car and then decide if you want to improve some feature of your braking.


Remember this, the greater the initial bite, the faster ABS could engage.... not good if you're not smooth with your brakes.


--kC

[tony_r]

In Street class or SSC, I don't see any reason to move away from the factory pads. STX I would start to consider a slight upgrade in compound, but you're still on 200tw tires so even the "autocross" compounds are overkill.

[86Craze]

I am in SM.
I currently brake before the turn with some trail braking if I feel it wont upset the chassis. I am looking to be able to start braking a few feet deeper. Right now on stock pads if I can get a few sequential runs with little break in between the runs, I get some fade towards the last couple of turns.

[tony_r]

The Carbotech AX6 is a strong pad with great initial bite when cold and decent fade resistance, at the cost of heavy dust and low rotor life. I would definitely give that a shot if I was on Hoosiers.

[CoolHandMoss]

Has anyone experimented with softer springs in STX? I'm on 400/400 and I feel like that's really stiff. I feel like the car could grip more and be more forgiving with something like 400/350 or 375/325. I'll probably end up trying this out myself but I was just wondering if anyone here did much experimenting with softer springs before settling on the widely accepted 400/400 and also seeing if anyone has any feedback on how the car does with rates like that.

[G_Ride]

Originally Posted by CoolHandMoss

Has anyone experimented with softer springs in STX? I'm on 400/400 and I feel like that's really stiff. I feel like the car could grip more and be more forgiving with something like 400/350 or 375/325. I'll probably end up trying this out myself but I was just wondering if anyone here did much experimenting with softer springs before settling on the widely accepted 400/400 and also seeing if anyone has any feedback on how the car does with rates like that.

I would consider softer front springs