[RaceComp Engineering]

Originally Posted by Rootus

For this very reason, I am torn between getting a GC setup, or waiting for Prodrive to release the RB320 pieces. Prodrive is slooooooow, but it seems to me like they do spend some time engineering things to work together.

I wont say bad things about another vendor, but most went thru more than one revision when the 04 sTI came out for lowering springs. The exception NOT being the JDM Pinks. STI did 9 protos before settling on what is/was considered to be the benchmark. Even the manufacture you mentioned had an early 04 fitment that was later changed. The list goes on, but no one mentions that( primarily because its not known). Long before most of you had STI's, I was driving, tracking and abusing( sometimes) mine. Putting alot of street miles and alot of track miles on most of the springs out there.


Mw

[RaceComp Engineering]

Originally Posted by SWortham

I don't think RCE can be put in the same boat as the Tornado Fuel Savers, lol. I think we've heard plenty of cases now where RCE has based their engineering on trial and error and in-house testing. If a problem does make it to production they've been very receptive to problems and take it upon themselves to correct it.

As for not publishing numbers, it's really a marketing decision. It's too bad for people like you and me who like to see numbers to back up the merit of a product. I'll always ask for the numbers when it comes to stuff like this because I like to be informed.

But at the same time the risk to RCE is that their product might not be perceived by the public to be as good as someone elses "on paper." The other concern is of course when you publish all the technical data you have you can make it very easy for a competitor to literally copy your numbers, send it off to a third-party spring manufacturer, and then brand it as their own. That's the sad truth, so I can see both sides of this.

This is VERY true and dont think it doesnt happen, because it does. I could quote one recently who claimed to have copied JDM Pinks and sell them for alot less.

Not to mention that there is a LARGE group of people who just look at numbers and dont look at let alone what "feel" is.

THe only "trial and error" engineering we have done is once we had the final 5 good proto's that were approved by our engineers from the manufacture, myself and Jeff had the task of driving on all of them, one 06 and one 04. Same mods, even the same seats in the car, part for part.

MAny of the reviews that came back represented what we too felt, and as I know from setting up street and race cars, what seemed to be one way doesnt always "feel" that way. In the end we chose what we chose. People like it. So as we make it better, perhaps,more people will like it.

Certainly we all have those who like us and those who dont. I can accept that some of you dont like us and I appreciate those who support us. We will continue to produce good products and make sure they serve the needs of the end users. In that process, we will continue to make sure that we listen to the needs of the customers.

Myles

[RaceComp Engineering]

Originally Posted by MGizzle

This is exactly why I hate buying aftermarket stuff for my cars. Too many times you find out the hard way and I hate paying for something that nobody bothered really "engineering".

I almost bought the RCE springs but after finding out that it is trial and error engineering I didn't. Not saying that they are bad, but that matters to me. SPC, environmental testing, and durability testing is VERY important to me and in my opinion should be to everyone. Issues like this would be found and that is why we are paying more money for the OEM stuff like the Pink springs (in this case not that much more).

I can not believe that somebody would not put the effort in to compress a spring or at least do the calculations to see when solid height is reached, because it can actually do really bad stuff to your car. There is no excuse for it and it could've been dealt with properly. RCE could've disclosed that these springs can reach solid height but it sounds like they didn't bother with it because they had track and autocross in mind.

Wow...stuff like this just leaves me with my head shaking. Good job Stretch.

After we road and track tested our finals, we did send them back to the manufacture, ( hence the delay of our release) to be tested again to ensure quality. Again, my driving experience is extensive. I put these thru their paces on a very unsettling track and roads of Washington DC and Baltimore. Regular trips to NY via the turn pike. Again, we did as much if not more than most do to ensure as good a ride quality as one who participates in alot of track days and autocrossing would want without sacrificing performance.

So yes we have ( long before now) taken the steps to make it much better.

Myles

[michaelc]

Why was the original design of the copper colored RCE spring changed?

I was under the impression that only the color changed ... I did not know that one more coil was added.

[RaceComp Engineering]

Originally Posted by michaelc

Why was the original design of the copper colored RCE spring changed?

I was under the impression that only the color changed ... I did not know that one more coil was added.

In an effort to add some compliance,....some had complained the rates were too firm. We wanted some compliance without sacrificing performance on the track. One of the proto's had 5 on had 6. The one with 6 wasnt as harsh.

With the new springs, the decision was to go back to that, but redesigned and better with the second generation.(meaning what is almost here now having 5 coils)

Myles

[NewShockerGuy]

Originally Posted by BoostJunkie

You make it sound as if we just came up with some random numbers in our head and sent them off to some factory in Taiwan for production These springs went through extensive testing and many prototypes before we were satisfied with the results. They are made by a very reputable manufacturer, whose engineers have probably forgotten more about suspensions than most of us will ever know. Trust me when I say that the engineering of these springs was NOT taken lightly.

That being said, further testing has revealed that there is some room for improvement, which is why we are going to the 5 coil design. Just as some of the biggest manufacturers in the industry are constantly evolving and improving upon their products, that is what we try to do. I don't mean to sound argumentative but I do take it personally on some level when we are accused of not doing our homework when it comes to designing products. I can't speak for Myles but I will say that he takes great pride in what he does and works extremely hard to try to make the best products possible.

-Dan

Dan,

Just a quick question. My stuff that I ordered about 4-5 weeks ago from yall should be in in about a week. Does this mean that I will get the newer 5 coil spring?

On a side note since there is one less coil doesn't the entire spring have to be strong/stiffer to support the weight? It would be foolish for me to think that you could just cut a coil off without modifying it somehow... or is it that simple?

I can't wait to get everything!

Thanks,
-Nigel

[BoostJunkie]

Originally Posted by NewShockerGuy

Dan,

Just a quick question. My stuff that I ordered about 4-5 weeks ago from yall should be in in about a week. Does this mean that I will get the newer 5 coil spring?

On a side note since there is one less coil doesn't the entire spring have to be strong/stiffer to support the weight? It would be foolish for me to think that you could just cut a coil off without modifying it somehow... or is it that simple?

I can't wait to get everything!

Thanks,
-Nigel

Yes all of the springs beginning with the latest batch (the one arriving this week) will be the revised 5-coil design. You are correct that you can't just cut a coil off since that will change the overall rate. Steps were taken to reduce the coil count while maintaining the same rates and ride height. Again, this DOES NOT mean that the old design is flawed per se, but we felt that going from 6 to 5 coils was a beneficial revision in terms of the springs being suitable for a wide variety of users.

-Dan

[Rootus]

Originally Posted by RaceComp Engineering

Not to mention that there is a LARGE group of people who just look at numbers and dont look at let alone what "feel" is.

How can feel change without numbers changing? I understand that for a lot of folks, numbers perhaps mean little, because they do not know the ramifications of all the measurements. But for people who know what they're looking at, the numbers ought to tell the whole story, should they not?

Originally Posted by RaceComp Engineering

In an effort to add some compliance,....some had complained the rates were too firm. We wanted some compliance without sacrificing performance on the track. One of the proto's had 5 on had 6. The one with 6 wasnt as harsh.

All else being equal, adding another coil should lower the spring rate, which would definitely make it less harsh. Is that what you're saying you did? Is it incorrect to say that it's the rate that matters, not how you get there?

[BoostJunkie]

Originally Posted by Rootus

How can feel change without numbers changing? I understand that for a lot of folks, numbers perhaps mean little, because they do not know the ramifications of all the measurements. But for people who know what they're looking at, the numbers ought to tell the whole story, should they not?

You can't, but I think what Myles is trying to say is that something that looks good on paper doesn't necessarily work well in the real world.

All else being equal, adding another coil should lower the spring rate, which would definitely make it less harsh. Is that what you're saying you did? Is it incorrect to say that it's the rate that matters, not how you get there?

No, the overall rate stayed the same. However, the gauge of the wire was changed as well so it wasn't just the coil count that changed.

[Turninconcepts.com]

Originally Posted by BoostJunkie

No, the overall rate stayed the same. However, the gauge of the wire was changed as well so it wasn't just the coil count that changed.

I think I can help cover this.

With materials being equal (we'll use that as a baseline so we don't get off track here).

If you take a given free length between two springs and the wire diameter is the same then the one with fewer coils will be stiffer.

Now, if you take that spring with fewer coils, and use a smaller diameter wire you can bring the rate back down.

With that being said the net result is more compression before bind due to a) less coils and b) less material.

Less coils is obvious, but lets say you go from an 18mm wire to a 14mm wire. While that doesn't seem like much just add them up 4mm difference over 5 coils is 20mm MORE of compression before bind. 4/5th's of an inch. coupled with one less coil of the original 18mm you're looking at about a net total of roughly 38mm MORE room in there. This is a good thing.

Granted I didn't take into consideration the progressive winds there should still be a lot more room.

Given the numbers Stretch posted you would totally bottom out the bumpstop and strut given the 38mm of additional room.

I think the most valuable thing right now would be a repository of information.

First being on springs showing the following:

free length
crushed length
rate
drop
results of coilbind on stock struts (I say stock struts here due to needing a common baseline)

Yes, I already know that rates and drops are out there as common information, but as has been pointed out there is more to it.

Next we need it on struts (yes, I know there aren't a lot of options right now but that is improving):

Total length
full droop length
full compression length
body length
total stroke
graph if possible (maybe I should lease that shock dyno I've been looking at...)

(the reason I say total length is because it would make more sense to do that and would be easy to include instead of people guessing in the future as to that number based upon stroke)

[Rootus]

Originally Posted by BoostJunkie

No, the overall rate stayed the same. However, the gauge of the wire was changed as well so it wasn't just the coil count that changed.

If the rate stayed the same, how was the spring with the higher coil count less harsh?

[BoostJunkie]

Originally Posted by Rootus

If the rate stayed the same, how was the spring with the higher coil count less harsh?

I believe it was a slight change in the level of progression but I'd have to ask Myles to verify that.

[MGizzle]

Originally Posted by BoostJunkie

You make it sound as if we just came up with some random numbers in our head and sent them off to some factory in Taiwan for production These springs went through extensive testing and many prototypes before we were satisfied with the results. They are made by a very reputable manufacturer, whose engineers have probably forgotten more about suspensions than most of us will ever know. Trust me when I say that the engineering of these springs was NOT taken lightly.

That being said, further testing has revealed that there is some room for improvement, which is why we are going to the 5 coil design. Just as some of the biggest manufacturers in the industry are constantly evolving and improving upon their products, that is what we try to do. I don't mean to sound argumentative but I do take it personally on some level when we are accused of not doing our homework when it comes to designing products. I can't speak for Myles but I will say that he takes great pride in what he does and works extremely hard to try to make the best products possible.

-Dan

I don't doubt that you guys take pride in what you do. I am very sure you do, but come on guys, not doing a simple stack up on a solid height of a spring?? That is the first things the engineers at the place that make your springs NEED to know. Come on man...

Also, when you say you did extensive testing you need to clarify if "extensive testing" means you guys driving the car or you guys actually runing lab tests on your springs. Very big difference there.

You can't take stuff like this personal. You make money on the stuff you make so when somebody pays you $400 for the springs they would like to have ones that are properly designed. Don't take this the wrong way but you just have no excuse to take this personal. Nobody here or somewhere else made you come up with those springs and make them hit solid height. Imagine how you would feel flying in an airplane knowing that the components on it were "extensively tested" in your sense?

Bottom line is that if you buy aftermarket components that are not from the OEM or Tier suppliers to the OEM you need to keep in mind that the product could have some major flaws. If not great, if so maybe the customers that purchase the product can live with them. In my opinion hitting solid height on your strut springs is very bad, especially living in pothole heaven, Detroit.

[RaceComp Engineering]

Originally Posted by MGizzle

Also, when you say you did extensive testing you need to clarify if "extensive testing" means you guys driving the car or you guys actually runing lab tests on your springs. Very big difference there.

There are pictures of a few lab tests posted somewhere on here way back when. I have a LOT of data, numbers, graphs (i know you guys love graphs....) but I'm not going to post them.

- Andrew

[BoostJunkie]

Originally Posted by MGizzle

I don't doubt that you guys take pride in what you do. I am very sure you do, but come on guys, not doing a simple stack up on a solid height of a spring?? That is the first things the engineers at the place that make your springs NEED to know. Come on man...

Also, when you say you did extensive testing you need to clarify if "extensive testing" means you guys driving the car or you guys actually runing lab tests on your springs. Very big difference there.

You can't take stuff like this personal. You make money on the stuff you make so when somebody pays you $400 for the springs they would like to have ones that are properly designed. Don't take this the wrong way but you just have no excuse to take this personal. Nobody here or somewhere else made you come up with those springs and make them hit solid height. Imagine how you would feel flying in an airplane knowing that the components on it were "extensively tested" in your sense?

Bottom line is that if you buy aftermarket components that are not from the OEM or Tier suppliers to the OEM you need to keep in mind that the product could have some major flaws. If not great, if so maybe the customers that purchase the product can live with them. In my opinion hitting solid height on your strut springs is very bad, especially living in pothole heaven, Detroit.

Obviously lab testing was done on the springs...I think it would be tough to produce a spring without extensive testing, both in the lab and on the car.

I would say that the bottom line is that NO product is perfect the first time it comes out. If there were no room for improvement in this industry, every company would be at a complete standstill. We have acknowledged that tweaking the design of the springs would be beneficial (long before this thread was created mind you) and we are moving forward now. I obviously don't take criticism personally but when somebody essentially tells me that my associates and I are not doing our jobs I do take that personally.