[Trifecta]

Myles? anyone?

[evilSTi7]

is your car going to be a dedicated track car?

[stretch]

The point of buying Motons (or any super expensive, super adjustable coilover product) is that you can make them however you want them to be.

[BoostJunkie]

Give Myles a call, he's used them before. We also have a couple cars that we sponsor that are using Moton Clubsports but I believe they are all Evos.

[RainMaker]

I spent awhile staring at the Motons. In the end, I liked the Ohlins Flag static high speed compression, and wanted to keep my adjustments to lower-speed compression and all of rebound.

That being said, I now would potentially put a bit of "weight" onto non-inverted rear dampeners. I don't recall if the Motons are inverted or not in the rear, but Im coming to the conclusion that its very hard to get inverted struts to behave happily long-term with the angles of a GD rear Subaru. I've been working with Ohlins on my minor binding issue in the rear of my Flags, and it has no current effect on performance. Just a minor clunk in the back in certain conditions on the street.

There are a number of folks doing great valving for Evos for the Flags... I don't know that expertise is available with the Motons... and we have Subies anyways.

[stretch]

I don't understand- inverted struts should be stronger. If something inherent in the suspension is causing inverted struts to bind, it should be happening twice as badly on a non-inverted strut.

Monotubes (inverted or not, but moreso on inverted) have higher static friction than hydrolic dampers, but that is independent of suspension geometry.

[Turninconcepts.com]

Originally Posted by stretch

I don't understand- inverted struts should be stronger. If something inherent in the suspension is causing inverted struts to bind, it should be happening twice as badly on a non-inverted strut.

Monotubes (inverted or not, but moreso on inverted) have higher static friction than hydrolic dampers, but that is independent of suspension geometry.

It's actually a lube issue between the damper housing, and the packaging housing. It's pretty common on inverted setups.

[stretch]

Right, I only meant to say that I don't think the problem can be attributed to Subaru-specific suspension geometry.

[BoostJunkie]

It can though in a way because the rear struts are mounted at a slight angle. Although most of the force is being applied vertically when the shock is compressed, due to the angle there is a small amount of lateral force as well. This can break down lubrication between the shaft and the housing over time. Some companies have managed to achieve proper lubrication, like Ohlins (which is why fixed perch don't clunk), but even they have the occasional issue like in RainMaker's case.

[BoostJunkie]

And IIRC the Motons are non-inverted both front and rear.

[RaceComp Engineering]

Originally Posted by Trifecta

Myles? anyone?

Call Myles....410-579-1501

We helped Moton develop thier STi and EVO applications.


- Andrew

[stretch]

Originally Posted by BoostJunkie

It can though in a way because the rear struts are mounted at a slight angle. Although most of the force is being applied vertically when the shock is compressed, due to the angle there is a small amount of lateral force as well. This can break down lubrication between the shaft and the housing over time. Some companies have managed to achieve proper lubrication, like Ohlins (which is why fixed perch don't clunk), but even they have the occasional issue like in RainMaker's case.

Again, that's not a Subaru-specific problem. I challenge you to find a strut that isn't mounted at an angle. Doing so would raise the roll center of the car much too high. It never happens.

[BoostJunkie]

Originally Posted by stretch

Again, that's not a Subaru-specific problem. I challenge you to find a strut that isn't mounted at an angle. Doing so would raise the roll center of the car much too high. It never happens.

Well there are a lot of cars that can use inverted shocks in the rear without clunking. But then again, there are less and less cars that still use a rear strut, as most seem to be going to multilink, double wishbone, etc. So it may have something to do with the MacPherson setup.

[stretch]

Very true- heck, I can only think of Porsches that still use struts in the back.

But still, the front of the car has more weight on it, mounts the strut at a more extreme angle, and has to cope with higher spring and damper rates. If anything stresses a strut, it'd be the front.

[BoostJunkie]

Yeah, I didn't say it necessarily makes sense to me but that's just the way it is. I've never seen a front strut develop clunking but rears do it all the time.