[Parker]

so does this mean that we who have the older version of the yellows get a replacement set free of charge or at a great discount???


maybe???

[Lang]

yikes, I stop reading IWSTI for a few weeks and come back to this....if I recall correctly, the Yellows were the "cat's meow", there was a fairly large thread on them, and everyone was jumping on the bandwagon. Hell, I even swapped out my Prodrive springs to try the Yellows.

[scottjua]

I swear I theorized to this a long while back when doing my initial basic knowledge research on springs. In fact coild stacking/binding and them doing so on large bumps was THE reason I went with JDM Pinks vs. RCE springs when I finally bought some. Not a rib toward RCE springs at all, but after driving on some I felt exactly what my Prodrive WRX springs when they bottomed out on large bumps, and it was confirmed when I looked up into the wheel well and while it was on the lift and saw evidence.

For me, although they handled great, I didn't care for the way they handled large bumps... I guess the binding was the reason.

That said, I don't think anyone should see this thread as a doomsday topic for springs and don't let this scare you out of a spring decision... rather add to you knowledge about the parts you're putting on the car.

[gOt_rally?]

So stretch I think this leads to a much more serious problem...why on earth havn't you manufactuered your own god damn spring yet ! Seems like just about every informative suspension thread was been written by you so if anyone knows there **** it is you.

Also major props to RCE for standing behind their product and correcting the issue pronto. How many other spring manufacterers are in this forum looking at customer feedback taking it in and solving the problem first hand. Seems like RCE was singled out in this thread much more so then all the other manufacterers that had the exact same problem, yet they handled it very professionally.

[stretch]

Originally Posted by gOt_rally?

So stretch I think this leads to a much more serious problem...why on earth havn't you manufactuered your own god damn spring yet ! Seems like just about every informative suspension thread was been written by you so if anyone knows there **** it is you.

I did, sort of. I picked out my own spring rates and ride height using Ground Control products. Notice the threaded sleeve on my springs pictured earlier.

I've posted this several places, but here's the Stretch-spec spring setup:

• Front springs: ~275lb/in front, raise the car 1/4 inch, completely linear
• Rear springs: ~225lb/in, lower the car 1/2 inch, linear as possible (would need one or two "dead" coils)
• Lowering tophat: this is the key to the system; a camber plate that raises the top strut mount point as much as possible, roughly 3/4" I think. Hopefully this can be done without a redesigned upper spring cup.
• Bump stops: replace fronts with Prodrive or similar, trim one progression from rear

I figure that the package could sell for $600 or so. To save money, I'd be fine with a non-adjustable camber plate that is permanently maxed out at -1 degree, and users could get adjust camber from there using the OE camber bolt. Total drop would be roughly half inch front and rear, but bump travel would be 1/4 more than stock and with softer bump stops. This would ride better than a stock setup, no doubts about it. It'd handle far more predictably and rival softly sprung coilovers in performance.

Ground Control may sell exactly this setup. I've read their camber plates raise the upper strut mounting point nearly an inch, and obviously you can get whatever spring rates and ride height you want. You could make your own stretch-spec setup. Buy 8", 275# springs front and 8", 225# springs rear. I personally ran the springs without the camber plates, which means I didn't run the most important part. I now run their coilovers but I'm still on the Group-N tophats, shame on me.

I did hear a rumor about forthcoming non-lowering springs for the STI. I think those (if the rumors are true), combined with RCE's lowering camber plates would be another good setup. I think less is more when it comes to lowering unless the strut can support it. For that reason, I also think RCE's Black's will outperform the Yellow's in every way. On aftermarket struts that may change, but honestly, I think coilovers are just the easiest solution. You can get Koni/GC or Bilstein coilovers pretty cheaply and that gets you much firmer springs, more damping, more travel, and the ability to run more camber.

I think there's a stigma that coilovers are all stiff or uncomfortable. There's absolutely no difference between a "coilover" and a matched spring/strut set other than the threaded spring perch. That's it.

Anyway, I'm rambling. Bottom line: it's nice to finally have a few non-slammed spring choices! And I look forward to seeing a few new fixed-perch strut choices, too. Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing... Happy Independence Day!

[Splash]

That's funny...

Dude, whaddya mean it would rival softly sprung coilovers? It IS a softly sprung coilover.

And there's no way it would be $600.. Your camber plate would have to be cheaper than Cusco's plate and you'd have to give away the stops.

PLUS, you cannot have linear springs with dead coils. If the spring is really linear, every coil will have the same input.

The only thing I don't like about your plates is that they are street-only. A race alignment isn't possible doing it that way, the hole in the top of the tower isn't big enough.

I do agree, it is nice to see some little to none lowering springs coming out, they are long overdue.

[stretch]

Dude, whaddya mean it would rival softly sprung coilovers? It IS a softly sprung coilover.

That was my way of saying the spring and damper rates would closely mirror the Whiteline coilovers. You'd have less overall suspension travel but I think you'd still have enough. The damper and spring rates would be very similar.

PLUS, you cannot have linear springs with dead coils. If the spring is really linear, every coil will have the same input.

Bah, you know what I meant with the dead coils- as linear as possible, using dead coils only to get the spring long enough. Basically, a linear + helper spring equivalent. I know that's not really linear, but without a shortened shock it's the next best thing.

And there's no way it would be $600.. Your camber plate would have to be cheaper than Cusco's plate and you'd have to give away the stops.

$600 would be plenty! Both Prodrive springs (with bump stops) and Whiteline camber plates, both very good designs, are under $300. Combined, that's less than $600... and I'm suggesting using a cheaper, non-adjustable tophat. Heck, the Ground Control stuff runs $800, and that's way above-and-beyond hardware.

The only thing I don't like about your plates is that they are street-only. A race alignment isn't possible doing it that way, the hole in the top of the tower isn't big enough.

I think the hole in the top would only allow about a degree, as opposed to two degrees with a non-lowering camber plate. The rest would have to be gotten via camber bolts. With two camber bolts, though, one could get 3.5 degrees of camber. With the OE bolt you're looking at about 2 degrees, perfect for a street car (which is probably what this package would be used for).

[crand002]

Originally Posted by RaceComp Engineering

This morning Myles got on a conference call with our rep and an engineer at the manufacturer and was able to get all of the vital information on the revised springs. I have the spec sheet here in front of me and everything is looking very good. The following are the specs that are relevant to this conversation:

2nd Gen. Yellows:
Wire Diameter - 13.50mm
Total Coils - 4.80
Solid Length - 71.34mm

Blacks (Regular Guy):
Wire Diameter: 13.75mm
Total Coils: 5.00
Solid Length: 78.38mm

We have also decided to include shortened bumpstops with all of the new springs. I hope this helps to put some of you at ease. We are still in the process of getting more information from the manufacturer as far as the reasoning for the old design, but at this point I think it is important to move forward and focus on the new design.

-Dan

Can I get this info for the "1st generation yellows"?

[XDNBC]

I find this discussion very enlightening and I appreciate RCE actively participating in it.

I have a few questions:
1. Which part of the suspension is better suited to be the first to reach maximum compression. It seems to me that the bump stops should be first, coil bind second and shock piston third. Comments?

2. Spring rates seem to be a critical factor in that stiffer springs will take more force to fully compress and weaker springs may jam the bump stops at a high speed causing a very rapid transition to HIGH spring rates.
BTW: What are the limits to plastic spring rates before they break?

3. What are the objections to progressivly wound springs? It would seem that on relatively gentle roads a softer spring rate is better; and when fast rough bumps are hit, a progression to stiffer rates would prevent bottoming out [less drastic a transition from spring to bump stop rates]. I must admit that in the past, progressive springs even felt better to me when cornering hard as the rate of car angle change slows when Gs increase to max.

4. What about preloading springs on cars? This is done alot on motorcycles to get ride height maintained when the weight on the bike changes. Do coilovers enable this to be done with the STI?

5. Myles and Dan- what are coil bind and stroke specs for the Tarmac 2s. Ride height can be set without loosing stroke [good], and it also looks like preload can be adjusted too [is that correct]? What are the differences between the KW3 and TM2?

Thanks again for all this interesting info. My current problem is that I have camber plates on stock springs and my fronts are about 15.5" fender-hub and rear is 14.25". Car still handles well, and I don't know what lowering it wil do to straight line high speed stability or cornering. It sounds like best way to lower my car would be coilovers though.

[Splash]

Originally Posted by stretch

$600 would be plenty! Both Prodrive springs (with bump stops) and Whiteline camber plates, both very good designs, are under $300. Combined, that's less than $600... and I'm suggesting using a cheaper, non-adjustable tophat. Heck, the Ground Control stuff runs $800, and that's way above-and-beyond hardware.

I was just going by your specs.

Originally Posted by stretch

* Front springs: ~275lb/in front, raise the car 1/4 inch, completely linear
* Rear springs: ~225lb/in, lower the car 1/2 inch, linear as possible (would need one or two "dead" coils)
* Lowering tophat: this is the key to the system; a camber plate that raises the top strut mount point as much as possible, roughly 3/4" I think. Hopefully this can be done without a redesigned upper spring cup.
* Bump stops: replace fronts with Prodrive or similar, trim one progression from rear

Prodrive springs are not 275/225 and are not linear.
Whiteline plates do the opposite of lowering tophats. (the KEY to the system)

The only way to meet your specs is by using the only lowering plate on the market, and by using coilover sleeves, enabling you to use linear springs at your choice rates. $600 won't cover this.

Even then, you'd simply end up with an $830 (more if you need helpers) set of KYB non-adjustable coilovers. I do have to admit that this still might be better than most of the sub-$900 coilovers available, but I bet it would still clunk.

[stretch]

I know all that, which is why I suggested the development of a totally new product: one that would probably sell for $600 as a package, have linear-ish springs, and lowering tophats. How can you possibly know that a product which doesn't exist would cost exactly $830? That's what it'd cost to do with GC Products.

[Splash]

Because that's what it would cost with existing equipment. It's all I have to go by.

You're asking me how I can possibly know what a product that doesn't exist would cost, yet you seem to think it could be developed and sold for less than $600.

You might be able to do that with KYB GR2-style shocks and cheap chinese coilover springs/sleeves, but I still think the lowering tophat would still put it over. However, do that, and you have inferior quality to just about anything out there. Might as well just throw a set of K-Sports on there....

[snorky]

another confirmed case:


Initially I was looking for this when I installed them (because of the extra coil). I had worse coil bind with all the signs and symptoms on my Cobbs.

When i inspected the RCEs at 500miles there were no signs of coil bind. Lately i was getting thumping on harder bumps synonymous wiht bind and this thread inspired me to check.

I really like these springs for the track/autox but I'm going back to Pinks.

[williaty]

I just want to chime in and thank RCE for providing the actual data for the new verision of their Yellow spings. Companies that publish specs get my business. Companies who won't publish a spec a customer asks for don't get my businees.

RCE, ya did good!

Now when are you coming out with a setup to run at near-WRX height for us fools who see a lot of bad forestry roads so I can actually buy something grom you?!

[NewShockerGuy]

Originally Posted by snorky

another confirmed case:


Initially I was looking for this when I installed them (because of the extra coil). I had worse coil bind with all the signs and symptoms on my Cobbs.

When i inspected the RCEs at 500miles there were no signs of coil bind. Lately i was getting thumping on harder bumps synonymous wiht bind and this thread inspired me to check.

I really like these springs for the track/autox but I'm going back to Pinks.

Did you cut your bump stops?

-Nigel