[Splash]

Originally Posted by stretch

Case in point: I have loads of suspension travel in the back of my car. I run hydrolic Koni shocks- they have no gas pressure that would cause the shock to expand without a spring. My springs, 8" long 250lb/in, completely decompress about 1.5 inches prior to the strut fully extending. Thus, I have 1.5 inches of droop beyond where I could possibly have a use for. Splash advocates this, if I understand his argument- he likes droop well beyond where the spring unloads. I have that even though I don't want it. Nonetheless, I still lift a rear wheel very easily. Why? Because it's a weight transfer issue, and my car is capable of transferring 100% of its weight laterally. To solve this, I'd need to lower the car's center of gravity or lower my spring rate (or sway bar rate) in the rear, where the latter would cause steady state understeer.

Exactly, and I say that, even without gas pressure to extend it past the length of the mainspring, I still have the helper spring rate PLUS the weight of the suspension, brakes, and wheel/tire to extend the damper to keep the wheel down... In effect, your 100% transfer is all sprung. Unsprung stays put, and, in my experience, that and the helper rate is sufficient to keep the rear diff happy in tight corners.

If the damper itself is too short to allow this, it will be airborne (or just as useless) with very little movement of the opposite front.

[RyanLee]

So.... with more than 1.5 inch drop, it would work just fine... right?
Any noise issue?? ride quality?

[Splash]

I'd say more than 1.5 and the perches will be closer to the middle of their range, giving you a better balanced travel solution.

They weren't noisy, but the 450lb spring combined with spherical bearing plates makes sharp bumps harsh, but then any sharp bumps on bearing plates are harsh.

The ride was plenty good for a firm street car.

[sportek1]

Originally Posted by Splash

They liked to be 1.5" lower or more as that provided the best balance of travel options relative to their fully extended length. I did not want to run that low and had the perches rather high on the body. This results in having the helpers almost fully compressed, running out of shaft extension at any level of droop. For the limited lowering I wanted, they are just too short.

The droop issue meant that, even with 450lb fronts springs and a 27mm front bar, the rear wheel would lift and spin in tight corners. There just isn't enough extension available to allow the inside rear to stay on the ground. Keep in mind though, this is during autocross conditions. For the street, they're fine.

Splash ... so what you did not like what the limited rear shock travel, and the minimum drop of 1.5"?

Ride and corning performance was good?

[stretch]

Originally Posted by Splash

Exactly, and I say that, even without gas pressure to extend it past the length of the mainspring, I still have the helper spring rate PLUS the weight of the suspension, brakes, and wheel/tire to extend the damper to keep the wheel down... In effect, your 100% transfer is all sprung. Unsprung stays put, and, in my experience, that and the helper rate is sufficient to keep the rear diff happy in tight corners.

If the damper itself is too short to allow this, it will be airborne (or just as useless) with very little movement of the opposite front.

I remembered I forgot to tackle the subject of unsprung weight with my last post- nice catch on not letting it slip by!

You'd be right if you weren't running a sway bar, but even the very smallest sway bars are going to transfer the 100lbs or so of unsprung weight from one side of the car to the other. However, without a spring pushing to extend the shock, the tire would extend too slowly towards the ground (think of how quickly you can expand a shock by hand) beyond the spring's length and the added grip would still be almost nothing. Heck, you want that weight to transfer to reduce understeer mid-turn- if you didn't, then you're better off obtaining less weight transfer in the rear via a smaller sway or softer springs.

[twiSTies]

how about not running a rear swaybar with these coilovers?

[Splash]

Originally Posted by stretch

You'd be right if you weren't running a sway bar, but even the very smallest sway bars are going to transfer the 100lbs or so of unsprung weight from one side of the car to the other. However, without a spring pushing to extend the shock, the tire would extend too slowly towards the ground (think of how quickly you can expand a shock by hand) beyond the spring's length and the added grip would still be almost nothing. Heck, you want that weight to transfer to reduce understeer mid-turn- if you didn't, then you're better off obtaining less weight transfer in the rear via a smaller sway or softer springs.

Now, I thought the same thing when I first compared them..

However, ALL that changed were the coilovers vs STOCK struts and OEM springs.

The bars and their settings remained the same after I took the coilovers off, alignment specs set the same, same camber plates. The bars were WL bars, 27/24, both set to full stiff

Point blank, the H&R coilovers and their 450/400 springs could not keep the inside rear wheel down, while the stock struts and springs could, so at least we know that the progressive portion of the OEM rear springs are stronger than the H&R helper springs, and that the available extension length of the OEM struts was long enough to allow it.

But, in the H&R's case, no amount of stiffness (as in remove the helpers and use longer mains) would have helped because the total front roll was still more than the available extension of the rear struts.

Keep in mind this is not for turning, keeping the wheel down is simply a mechanism to keep the stock rear diff happy. If I could replace the diff, I would likely carry the inside rear wheel about 1/4 to 1/2" up almost everywhere. (once it's up, there is no more transfer to be had)

Without fail, no matter what combination of bars, struts, or springs I've had, any solution worked successfully for keeping the inside rear wheel down as long as the available extension length of the rear strut was more than the amount of total front roll on the opposite front corner.

Another good case in point, are the KW coilovers, where they have a LOT less extension than the stock struts, but have a lot more than the H&R's (or Tein Flexes), which seems to be sufficient to keep the wheel down until you use 275 R-comp tires, at which point you need to increase front bar or spring. However, in classes where you can use KW's and R-comps, you can change the diff, and that is preferred solution.

[jdmmuscle]

How does these compare to a similarly priced coilover? tein flex rtc...