Lonnie P

Dean,
I see this as a very informative, but challenging topic to explain a paragraph at a time.

I never meant to accuse you of being wrong, I was only interpreting the picture of Stan's suspension geometry. Whatever the case, we were looking to you for some insight in how to make these cars work better. It's all a learning experience, I'm just trying to gain knowledge here...

This is a tough concept since caster, camber, toe & weight transfer are all changing at the same time. I'm a mechanical engineer & still recognize the value of chassis experience over beating a calculator & trying to figure out what "should" happen as a car corners.

SlickTrackGod

Thank you, and please accept mine in return. I do not like getting sh8tty, but sometimes I have to point out when I am being offended whether it is intentional or not. I think we can all agree the time bomb comment was not called for. Anyways, lets move along. Thank you.

James, If I may go off topic for a moment. Whether it be arrogant or not, I think many here on TGO realize I have vast knowledge with chassis dynamics. Becuase of that, I have, for god knows what reason in human nature, for the last decade been a target for people to try and discredit (not all people here, but some do try) in order to gain quick respect for the higharchy of knowledge resource here on TGO. I get this "knock off the top dog" crap all the time and I get sick and tired of those type of people- so yes I do chew alot of peoples *** that are sarcastic to me. For some reason the internet is full of this.

Now with that said, everyone (and I mean EVERYONE) that knows me here AND in real life laugh about this all the time about the crap I get thrown my way as well as the way I choose to deal with them as a result. Yes it hurts others here because alot of knowledge has been disrupted with childish BS over the years. You should see the bantersomeone informed me several months ago over on FRRAX about me when i fact I have help just about every one of them at one time or another (not locals). Jealous much? they are over there for some reason- what is that reason? It all started with a guy with a little V6 boasting he can beat anyone around (as a friendly challange)---and then organized an actual local public event and did just that. ...

But MOST IMPORTANT you know what came of that??? I am very good acquintance with every one of them today and have helped most every one of them at the local tracks, not marked them as enemies like alot of people around here think for some reason of me. People tell me it's funny the image people have of me over the internet that have never met me and say I am nothing what this site portrys me as other then ...well...yes I am famous for speaking my mind to people (in person or on the internet alike). Funny thing is evereyoien I have seen talk crap to me on the internet seem to be two faced humble around me in person. If I have not met any of you, good chance I will some day eith talk in person or on a private phhone call. I have conversed with hundreds all over the world in phone conversations including Lonnie here. Brian and I have yet to chat in real life, but I am sure we will.

I pesonally think what would have helped this site years ago is make it a prerequisite that every new member (including every existing member) put up a picture of themself so we can all attach a human being with these words we type to. I think that would make this a better place. It is a know fact people tend to be more polite to people if we are better acquinted to eachother.

There are only 2 people on here (Don and Kevin) I do not like for what childish crap I have seen them do in person to a friend of mine Mike P. other than that, I am friends with pretty much every local 3rd gen owner that has meet me and not the crap they see on this site. Other than that I stopped associating with the local club because of people trying to use our local facebook site as a furm to make a buck off other members listing everything they have for sell. I fell that site is to help eachother and if someone needs something they can ask, but I do not agree it be used for a ForSale ad forum. I helkp people for free, but when I saw others doing that practice I left becasue it was my choice not to be associated with that. I still feel they are wrong for that and should keep the for sale stuff of a club site and sell it on craigslist or such.
...But that is merely my opinion and I left so as to not enforce my beliefs of the club. I now only help those I see not doing that. I am an eye for and eye type person. You have to either respect it or not associate with me. I believe in fairness to all.

Thank you
Anyways, this is Mr and Mrs Doc Sake' (like the Japanesse rice wine) as alot of the locals know us.
I will say anything to you in person I would say here, but what people do not see is I say it all, good or bad, WITH A SMILE ON MY FACE. ..pretty much always in life. I in fact never raise my voice even if upset. Think Im bad? Just be glad you never deal with the Mrs. (lol)

Anyways, I think this site should make everyone put up an avatar just like you would a personal profile on these internet dating sites and such Ive seen. It would humanise everyone on one here rather than "call names". I know the facebook site works alot better because of that personalization.

Dean

Moral here is: I might be the arrogant guy that challanges people and say I will beat them, but I will also help them in the process so they make the best run they can possible.

SlickTrackGod

Now back to the subject. I would actually like to make a jig in my shop and show with pictures on how this all works. I could be very detailed in pics and a working model to show actual angle changes through all 3 demensions. I will not have the time in the next week, but please hang tight and someone remind me (those of you that know how to contact me personally) and I will promise to get to this and post up visual references in the near future. This wil be fun to show such an advanced model of geometry and explain just why a large positive scrub radius is terrible.

Ill need to get my trusty assistant Valentin over to my place so I can take exact measurements on his car- speaking of which- order those damn parts kid, Im waiting to finish that custom STB/strut mount setup

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

That would be a valuable contribution to the website! Thank you Dean.
The 80's hair and garb has changed, but I really have not changed much since I bought my new car and drove to CA, and drove it up and down Hwy 1 (border to border).
Santa Barbara 12/89

San Fran 12/89

More recent pic as Pastor Brian - TEDSgrad means Trinity Evangelical Divinity School graduate


Brian

Roostmeyer

iTrader: (3)

[QUOTE=TEDSgrad;5693300]Does anyone know the KPI/SAI for the stock spindle?


From a "reliable" source the spindle inclination angle is 16.52.

I think Dean has pretty well covered it, but I thought this was good reading too:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1305510 I

And this is a quick and dirty way to measure caster assuming there's no trail built into the spindle:
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show...&postcount=249

This is much faster and more accurate than my old way of turning the wheel 20 degrees and measuring camber change which induces a lot of measurement tolerance into the calculation.

SlickTrackGod

I have not measesure a spindle yet- I have two originals front brake setups in one of my shop bays I have to dig out of a storage container- they are the setups I took of my old car to put the new wilwood setups on. So I have complete setups to tinker with (I just remebered this and can use them as a jig example and make a quick simulated wood strut length and I can adjust and rotate them on to show how these angle all work. The setup still has the modified factory brake setup with rotors also.

Anyways, I would tend to believe your figure of 16.5 Roostmeyer if we are talking about the spindle shaft parallel to the ground and the tow bolt hole angle where the strut mount are measured in angle from vertical. Reason is tthat this angle will lessen in chassis SAI because of the difference in angle from them and the balljoint to strut mount pivot when just even eyeballing it would be obvious to me. Thank you - that info is helpfull to anyone fabricating a new set of spindles.

I'll do a few drawing later tonight to show this as as well as one of my old top secret designs I was working on (I've mentioned years back I had alot of secret stuff I would not share because I was looking to fabricate parts- but life took some pretty drastic changes in the last half decade so I do not see that happening anymore (personal reasons I do not care to share anymore why) It would be a shame for me not to share this with someone that could maybe utilize these idea for the 3rd gen community. Especially for those of you with wider front wheels.

Ideally I wanted to package a complete new bolt-on k-member with entire front suspension package with coreccted suspension ount points, different lenght A-arms, different spring pockets, and custom made struts. The thing we all still face is the terrible steering setups and the tierods/wheel interference of wider negative offset wheels. The whole package would be quite expensive but would have been geared towards those handful of decerning buyers wanting to stay with a "traditional looking" setup but manipulated. The car would not need to be hacked and altered and would questionably slip through alot of autox class rules and such that fabricated K's and A-arms are allowed. Sucks I never got that far to even begin to tinker with this- though I know the concepts in my head would work.

SlickTrackGod

Just a quick sketch you can see angle 1 is the spindle holes angle at the 16.52 (I am going off of Roostmeyers figure) and the actual SAI angle of most 3rd gens being about 11-14* range with the imaginary line interseting the sturt mount pivot and the ball joint.

SlickTrackGod

My front geometry fix ideas. This was my top secret package I was wanting to build- but it was going to require I buy another car for the lady that was driving it full time at that time so I could have it torn down for awhile- that is why it never happened- well that and a divorce and subsequently the car leaving my possession. I just moved on to better things in life.

I wanted to drop the K-member out of the car and manipulate the front mount slightly higher about 1/2", and then try and get the rear mount up about 1" to help with anti-roll and anti-dive as well as lastly give a better camber curve (gain in Negative Camber as the suspension compresses----> This is due to the A-arm inverting whent he car is lowered more than 25.5 " fender height without drop spindles. drop spindles however create a problem with positive scrub so I did not want to use those nor were any availiable at the time I came up with this package idea of the front suspension.

I would next alter the upper spring pocket with a swivel cup weight jacker and offset it inside the can favoring it mounted outboard a 1/2". Clearanse issues of the 5" spring diameter? Nope, I was going down to a 2.5" coiover type barrel spring so shifing the smaller spring inside the upper spring pocket would be no issue.

Next was to either order or build some tubular lower control arms with rod ends that I could extend to get a longer arm (At that time Spohn had the fabricated ones but I was considering buying them and cutting and altering them myself rather than starting from scratch. I would outfit the a-arm spring poicket to accept the 2.5" barrell spring and clock the set at the correct angle in relation to the upper swivel jacker position.

Thios now moves my entire assembly out 1/2" at the balljoint. So now we go to the SAI, the strut, and the sturt mount position- as well as the (above said) natural 16.52* angle of the 3rd gen OEM spindle.

I need to back up a minute and explain something else. As alot of you know, I built and installed a very radial lassive and lightweight 6piston Wilwood brake setup that my entire assebly was 4 lbs light each side then the OEM brake setup. that assembly also had a 2-off ever made aluminum Global West hubs designed for a 4000lb G-body road race car. My brake rotor face sat 1" inboard in track with on each side then the 1LE setups, and even more when compared to the C4 setups and etc. I was more inboard in geometry swing which ment lighter unsprung weight movement of the assembly....PLUS- MORE CLEARENCE FOR THE MOUNT FACE OF THE WHEEL moving it inboard 11/16" compared to OEM (remember my custom hubcentric spacers I machined? they were temporary to get the proper scrub radius until I did all of this build, then they were coming back off once the A-arm was extended another 1/2" longer.
Most people with 1LE brakes and 9.5 front wheels have a scrub radius 2" more positive then I had with my current 8" setup with my wilwood mount offset (that is the critical info alot of people might miss when considering my scrub radius and SAI angle. My SAI did not need hardly any "fudging" to barely get about 3/4" inboard from centerline scrub. Lastly, I had 3/4" clearence still between the tire and the strut body. If I pulled the wheel spacers I would still have 1.* clearance and be shifted to 0 scrub with the 8" wheel...and of course about back to where it was with a tad closer to postive 1" scrub (where I like it when considering the straight line dynamic braking footprint of the tire with -0.8* static camber. Dynamic is more like -1.5 when I improved the camber gain as described in an above paragraph.

The ONLY problem these cars have is rubbing of the inner fenderwheel at full lock just ont he front side near the swaybar- so just a little clearencing of the chassis would be needed here- that or a BFH (big f'ing hammer). THis would be needed once the 17x9.5's were going to be later fitted with about 7/8" positve scrub and not full lock turning issues- all set to tuck under the fenderwell and have the same OEM track width to match the rear track width. It would be the only car around like this- Ok, so you ask how about the contact with the tire and strut??? and how about contact with the tierod???? have that all worked out- including the SAI fix and the problem with the upper strut geometry now compared to the longer A-arm (thus more outboard bball joint position)
Post for now, more to come...

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

I considered asking you about off-setting the plate inside the can (for lack of a better word). There is some room, and the new spring perch on the swivel cup bolt does descend down some - you can't predict when putting it in, only when you do to decide ride height.


Yeah, I know the rotor is on backwards for this mock-up pic when rebuilding.

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

I've been wondering for a year or two, if there is a good scale model of a working suspension out there somewhere. A frame with full working suspension (dampers, springs, bars,etc.), and maybe a large, non-scale steering wheel to turn the wheels and camber visible.
Would be a good product for drivers ed instructors, track instructors, body shop/alignment shops as a visual aid for customers, and other gear-heads types. Instruct, teach, visual aid for brake dive, accel squat, cornering loads, etc.
Does anyone know of anything currently in production - a metal frame with full working suspension (doesn't have to be McStrut)??? A quality die-cast desk top model???? Spring rate would have to be exagerated for visual impact.
I asked Sutton, he did not know of any. It couldn't be produced in CA, we'd probably have to get a CA CARB number for it

SlickTrackGod

It always makes me nervous trusting any fabricator I see that puts tires on a rolling chassis in the wrong direction- but go figure. What a blatant oversight for a magazine article.

Then the caption on the photo saying that chassis will take a wide veriety of wheel and tire combos is the next clue the builder is selling a platform with no specific performance engineering. Wow- and that was in Chevy High Performance?

No I d not know of any such chassis model but yes it would be a sdecent thing for a school autoshop teacher or such to show basics. Most of this stuff is far too advanced that 99% of car guys never get into things this deep to even care- its the show car crowd. I was just talking to my buddy Louie yesterday (owns Vetrical Doors and Calif Corvettecoupes) about how the masses go for looks first far before function. Our conversation did go however how a stock 2010 mini cooper or such will out handle a 1978 Ferrari due to anvancements in OEM chassis engineering from all big automakers. Its once the average person just decides to lower anyuthing that they actually mess things up worse then they improve them.

Brian, Are you in Calif now? I was under the impression you are East coast.

I'll now continue my earlier post and should have the finshed part of the steering and tierod clearence up in a few minutes (I was tired last night and did not finish my above post.)

SlickTrackGod

.5So now we go to lining up the SAI and thus the upper pivot (strut mount) within decent tolerances of SAI, caster, and camber- But the wider tire is now in the way of the strut and thus a steep SAI angle needs to be used right? NOPE.

Here's the kicker...since these cars are usually maxed out in negative camber adjustment, the lengthening of the lower A-arm 1/2" puts the position of the strut mount in a much more favorable range. All we need to do is fabricate tthe first of two parts I was going to offer. This is a billet aluminum shim block that sill set the body of the strut inboard from the spindle mount by about 1.5" as well as just slightly lower the strut body for clearance of a OEM flush height strut mount (not needing the extra travel versions everyone needs for lowered cars.) It looks like this-

Note the red circle is where you have more clearence for wider tire against strut, The upper mount can now be moved back out and the SAI can be adjusted a little less steep as a result of oving the strutmount out positive camber wise- ALL WHILE keeping the spindle angle (the original 16.52* to strut remounts lower and adjusted more to a slightly less angle (15.5-16* range) while retaining good scrub radius on reference to the center tread and wheel offset. Its a win win all around, as well as having added travel without a heightend fabricated sturt mount. This shorter distance remeber I spoke of is critical in CASTER increase in comparison to SAI in suspension travel.- these cars need it due to lack of camber gain even though that also is slightly improved.

Now a strut like a Koni Yellow has great rebound range, but in my book I felt it was slightly too stiff compression dampered...so the new strut angle will slightly decrease its effectiveness and thus lower the compression damper effectiveness appropriately.

Its a fairly simple machined aluminum block alot in essence like a wheel adapter- but lets call it a strut adapter block. The angle of the bocl holeon the spindle mount side (being at the spindles 16.52" could be fudged now with the next two mount holes on the other side of the block that slip into the strut. They can be angled anywhere we need it in machining to get this decreased yet a better SAI over OEM engineering and a proper scrub radius with the wider wheels, as well as proper static camber range. In other words, we do not need a re-engineered spindle angle with this little block adapter add-on.

SlickTrackGod

Next Steering and Ackerman issues as well as tierod placement, wide wheel clearence. and geometry.

Go to a Rack setup with tabs weleded higher on the front of the Kmember and go over the top of the steering knuckle- also short throw and more inboard for improved ackerman. The red tierod relocation plate would be fabricated out of two steel plates welded together and then tap the spindle arm for the second attcment fitment. The original tierod bore would be drilled straight trough and also tapped (then safety wired also like I did my brake brakes) so as to be as fluch to the mount surface as possible so as to allow for the new top mount tierod clearence.

Lastly, the swaybar would have to be remounted with lowered blocks and attached into the A-arm rather than above this. this is another detail that I have worked out but that is enough I will share for now. aftermarket sweaybars like ones used in NASCAR latemodels can be utilize mounting straight into the A-arm with welded provisions.

And there boys and girls is entirely reengineered OEM fron 3rd gen suspension geometry that will correct all the factory flaws.
I have had these simple designs in my head for a decade and was going to do all of this to my car. But life took a little turn so now I will share those top secret ideas of mine.

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

Yes, CHP
No, love visiting, just find it oppressive to live (we won't talk politics). In Cali, everyone is "back east." I've lived in Mpls or WI all my life (couple yrs in Chicago for grad school).

Will a smaller diameter spring do the job? Will it need more coils per in. in order to do that job? Springs are a big factor in "Grip."


I'll re post that info on springs because it was so good:
#2 The amount of energy lost or “dissipated” … through the springs … is directed related to how long the spring wire is. The more wire required … the more energy lost. For years, if a spring had a rate of 500#, the amount of wire to make it was the same from brand to brand … because for years all automotive spring manufacturers, racing & oem, made springs from the same cheap spring steel. But automotive spring technology … which was stagnant for years … has come a long, long way in the last 15 years.

Today, the spring companies on the leading edge, have learned better processes and use higher grade (and more costly) materials to produce springs that last longer, don’t sag, settle or deform … and use less coils to achieve the same rate. These springs have less energy dissipation than older design, cheaper springs made with inferior metal & processes. That means they apply more net load on the front tires … for more grip … during braking & cornering.

How much more? To know that, we’d have to know how much energy was being lost/dissipated through your current suspension, which is beyond my scope. But the simple math is this:
• A 500# spring of old design & cheap spring steel … with dimensions of 5-1/2” od x 10” tall with ½” wire … requires 9 full coils (approximately 141” of spring wire). That is 141” that energy dissipates through.
• Comparing to a new design spring, with higher quality steel … in the same size … but requiring only 6 full coils … takes approximately 94” of spring wire. That is 1/3 less wire … 1/3 less energy dissipation … and 1/3 less grip lost.

How do you know the quality of springs?
Visually, you can see a higher quality spring takes less coils and has more gap between the coils … when comparing the same rate & size. (See photo below for example.) But that’s only part of the equation. Material is key, so ask what they‘re made with. A simple rule of thumb is the higher the number, the higher the quality. Where 4000 series steel was a step up 10 years ago, it is low end today. 5000 series works better, and 9000 series outshines them all.

A spring doesn’t have to coil bind to fail. Low quality automotive springs fail in some form or another … from too much dynamic loading or simply from over use (cycles). High travel suspension set-ups with softer front springs work & test those softer rate springs much harder than stiffer springs see in low travel set-ups. I know from my racing experience … running soft front springs, in heavy track cars … transferring a lot of load onto the springs with high g-forces from braking & cornering … lap-after-lap … works these soft springs much, much harder.

Most common quality & brands of racing springs being ran … failed. They failed in different ways. Some would lose height. Some would lose rate. Some would lose shape & distort. Some would do a combination of two or all three things. When springs lose rate, height or shape … they have failed … and no longer behave the same way. That’s worth repeating. If a spring changes it shape, height or rate, it has failed and will not perform the same.

It is hard for most of our brains to get wrapped around this concept … that springs can have a given rate … and yet not act the same. But this is fact. If a 350# spring loses height, but still tests at 350# in a spring rater … what’s wrong with that? It has failed. To lose height, the spring coils must “bend” or “distort” to some degree. They will never act the same. The responsiveness will decrease. We call this a “dead spring.”

In my NASCAR Modifieds, when we tried running 4000 series springs, they would fail before the weekend was over. Some would distort, which was easy to see. Some would lose height, which could be determined by measuring the car height. If a corner on the car “sagged” … we would remove the spring & measure its “free height.” Sure enough, it has lost free height. Toss it.

The 5000 series springs were good for 3 races. But the 9000 series springs held rate, shape & height all season and were still perfect after a season of racing. They cost 3 times as much, but well worth it in my opinion. Just for reference, typical 4000 series oval track racing springs cost $50-60, 5000 series springs were $100 & 9000 series springs were $150-175.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Suspension component flex under load can be another source of energy dissipation, but a minor one. If you have upper and/or lower control arms flexing, I’d be more concerned about the negative geometry changes that occur than energy dissipation. Ideally, you want to utilize upper and lower control arms that are just strong enough to minimize flex and yet still light enough for optimum suspension control & responsiveness.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary:
• Springs with modern technology & high quality steel … with less wire … have less energy dissipation … and load the tires more, providing more front end grip.
• Springs with modern technology & high quality steel … handle higher dynamic loads & cycling … without failing, losing rate, height or shape.
• Control arm bushings & suspension component flex figure into energy dissipation … and effect tire loading & grip too.
• Running bump stops achieves almost zero energy dissipation from the spring … and loads the tires even more, providing the highest front end grip this side of coil bind.
• Combining bump stops … with springs of modern technology & high quality steel … in a high travel/low roll set-up … produces the optimum cornering performance available with current technology.


Attached Images

Lonnie P

Good stuff here. Glad you shared the illustrations.

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

That strut adapter block is amazing. I did think about messing with the supplied spacers inside the strut mount, but never thought I could equalize both sides (and don't know what I'm doing, so don't mess).
The weight of the car on aluminum adapter blocks? I'm ignorant and unsure, here.

I thought of a little clearancing of the 5.5" spring --> can, and getting what I could out of the Spohn adj arms. Good to know my inclinations are in the right direction, just don't have the knowledge to pull it off.

SlickTrackGod

Sure you do. If there is a will there is a way. Look at that brake setup i built. It was just persistence. I kept buying and returning a few parts until I figured out a mockup that was working, and what little things didn;t work and/or were not availiable I had custom machined. Its all about learning to weld and fabricate...and find sources to machine stuff for reasonable prices.I used to have access to a Bridgeport CNC mill but no longer unfortunately. I would like to own one some day- then you figure Id be busy? Id be trying all kind of crazy stuff.

As for weight on billet aluminum blocks, just like having it rest on billet aluminum wheel adapters- only better becasue those two spindle/strut bolts torque to 200 lbs where as a wheel assembly is about 85 lbs. It would never move, nor fatigue. It does not hold the weight of the car like wheel adapters do. it only holds lateral force of the strut link. The springs hold the weight of the car through A-arm ariculation mostly- other than of course strut dampering forces in dynamic. i'd be a pretty good size chunck of aluminum block they'd would have been machined out of. Steel would be too much unsprung weight.

I do not buy into that 1/3 less energy disapated so 1/3 more grip theory. That is hogwash. You might be talking 2% at the very very most. Its more about shock damper quality then it is spring rate quality. Beside, I also ran springs in NASCAR for a few years. We changed them and swaybars at the start of each year, but left those parts ALONE all year to stay consistent. I have the figure of the Craftman truck in my head as for spring rats and chassis ride heights in all 4 corners. I ALWAYS baselined that truck back exactly the same before each friday night practice and then started the typical weekend tweaking to the normal tire carcass changes and track & ambient temp changes. That guy is full of crap those springs change that much. Who's gonna dispute him other than another guy like me doing the same (not many of us out there and I can tell you stright up most of them talk alot of b*llsh*t to the crewmember when they do not know stuff themselves. I look at an individual's winning record, not labels or team jerseys.

Shock dampering is the MAJOR KEy to consistency. Take my Vetruck for example. I run 8 dampers on it (two on evey wheel) and I waste them every two years and have to have them all rebuilt because of the weight. The springs have been in there for over 20 years and the truck feels perfect AND sits perfect every time I rebuild the shocks.

Now granted, Barrell spring like from Swift are the cats meow. Why" take an ordinary AFCo coilover spring (2.5 ID spring) that is 12" long and 350 lbs rate. It will wear the crap out of the aluminum threads on a coilover shock over time becasue they twist and kink on the shock assembly. There is generally one side of the shock that takes the spring rubbing wear, not the entire body of it. that contact is eveidence that the spring shpe is failing and rubbing against the wall of the shock body which in turn is creating a little unwanted bind or rate increase. Those Swift barrell springs will not onlu seat each time I drop the car off jacks (nice rolled end spring edges)but will also never make contact with the shock body because the center coil sections are more like 3" ID and the ends are 2.5". They are pretty much like the beehive valve spring concept. They maintain their stature over the top of the motion so as to keep much more even resistence. Smaller springs are just plain less unsprung weight.

Where spring design comes into play. I like a longer coil spring trather than a shorter one in height. Why? They will in fact stay more consistant in rate. This is a hard concept for so many to grasp, but it has to do with angle of the wire. The more vertical a bar of wire is the more it can support. Ill give an example. Take a 3 foot long solid spring wire bar that is straight. now atop that wire you rest 1000 lbs. It will prtty much hold it stright up and will not "spring" if it stays 100% compleely vertical. Now lay that bar at a 45* angle with the bottom of the bar clamped somehow (doesn't matter much, just say it can;t move and will support without breaking off its base. Now lay that same 1000lbs uptop the top end of the 45" angle and the bar will bend in its length and start to bow just like a fishing pole. the more sideways that bar is mounted towards horizontal the more it will bend and the less weight it will hold.

Now with that explained. take two springs of 350 lbs. One is 8" tall with 8 winds, the next is 12" tall with 8 winds. Wire size will be different becasue of independant shape and angle of each so that needs to be understod. The one that is taller will use less wire thiockness- the shorter one will have thicker wire to make up the same rate. Now once both of them have to support 700 lbs, they essentually will compress 2" each right? NOPE. On paper yes, but real world no. The shorter one will remain more contant of an angle becasue it started out with more horizontal coil ramps and thus doews not change effective angle as drastically as the longer spring ramps do. The longer spring ramp smay start more vertical and once they start to lay over the weight they can resist goes down progressively. The shorter spring stays more linear if already static at a layed over angle.

Now above I just contridicted myself if any of you caught that- that was on purpose. I said I like the tall spring......a taller spring not of the two I compared, but a taller spring with a thikcer wire and more coil loops. The rate stays more consistent in long travel. This is EXACTLY why offroad trucks use springs about 10 feet long (yes I am exagerating a bit, but close) I want the 350 lb spring 12" tall but with 12 winds and a thicker wire, rather than the 350 lb spring 12" tall with 8 winds and a thinner wire. To do this, you need barrel springs that will keep their shape better. it is like keeping your feet under you to keep your balance, the barrel spring design falls upon that principle keeping each coil wind atop the next and centered through convexed shaping.

SlickTrackGod

In the same height springs, you can use a little thicker wire and more length in a barrel spring design to get the same static rate as a conventional coilover spring. The barrel spring is more stable. Never advancement in spring wire tchnology now means the same can be done using thinner stronger wire that is lighter weight. Wire quality now is the new thing the past few years but I hav enot had any experience with the new lightweight spring slicone wire.


Here is a good comparison image:
http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b2...pring_swap.jpg

I stand corrected, The term Barrel springs is thrown out there alot around the track and we all refer them to tapered body springs. In what I just researched a true "barrel shape spring" is narrow on the 1st and last coil, but then all the internal active coils are a bit wider but yet even in diameter through the mid section. The real term I am looking for is one labeled in thsi Hypercoil video called OBD shape or OBD technology. They have a true barrel shape that is convexed and not stright in any vetrical fashion. When we say "barrel springs" I mean a spring that has the same shape as a whisky barrel.

You can watch this video for better explination of the shape and benefits if you'd like-
http://www.hypercoils.com/suspension...r-springs.html

From what I have seen though, this new spring wire technology is great for bumpier long travvel dirt track stuff because they loose the angle of the coil ramps as I stated above and are less harsh on a slippier surface. Which means more mechanical grip. Asphaft would just mean the car leans on them more and they colapse as the tire grip with far greater traction on asphalt than dirt. I am still not buying into the thinner shorter wire technology. I think right now its hype. better unsprung weight, but the same can be done with a shorter smaller diameter convexed or barrel shape spring as opposed to our large 5" or 5.5" diameter conventional springs.

My 1300 lb truck springs are great for durability over the years, they are just HEAVY. About twice as heavy as your average 3rd gen spring they are that massive in size and shape. The truck weights 5000lbs hthough, so that heavy unsprung spring weigth does little diffence in comparison to a lighter car.

SlickTrackGod

For the fun of it also- since I got this thread off on a little tangent earlier as well as alot of you hear from me about my dealings in the NASCAR ranks, The teams I crewcheif on are what we call driver development teams. it is local shortrack racing and is the equivlent in NASCAR to what minor league baseball teams are to MLB. You have to be a ******* cousin of Dale Earnhart to move up anywhere in the bigtime ranks- way too many politics and dynasty names. Several of the teams I personally run against in Supertrucks are teams owned by Kenny Schrader a well as many other famous names like Everham etc.

These photos will show alot of you the real me at and around people. I happen to be a real prankster.

SlickTrackGod

.

SlickTrackGod

3

SlickTrackGod

4

SlickTrackGod

5

SlickTrackGod

...and last but not least this years Halloween party and series banquet. Yes I am Jack.

SlickTrackGod

And here is some work I was doing last month on the new team truck Ill be crewing for next year Sadly Irwindale's (Toyota Speedway) last year. They are tearing down the nations premier half mile oval and replacing the area with comercial building which will gain the city more revenue. Land here in So Cal is at a premium everywhere.

This is ST58, my new toy. IYou can see me baseline scaling the chassis in the pics. I spent a whole day tearing it down and starting from scratch setting the entire chassis to the limits of our rulebook.

SlickTrackGod

and lastly I am a performance driving instructor for an exotic car company that specialist in Ferrari and Lamborghini experiences. I am partial to the Ferrari's. The Lambo Gallardo's are a piece of crap in my book. Talk about a car that has issues with wandering (SAI topic). I have driven 5 different Lambo's on several different courses and every one of them is crap compared to Ferrari handling. I drive the 430's, the 430Scud (race car version, and the beautiful 599 FioranoV12 and Carbon brakes which both unfortunately the company just sold a two months ago prior to the last event. We only have the regular 430's currently.

These pics will show alot of the sceptics around here just what vast experience I have around race car setups and that I am the real deal in helping people- not some almightly complex to be a know it all and front on the internet. Yes life is fun, and I try and share that with other. One picture above with the tan shirts is Jason a TGO member that helps me with that race team we quickly put together for a big prize money race two years ago. he wanted to experience it first hand so I made him a crew member for the day.

Edit: the guy on the far left in the 1st pic is CaseyQ from Unbalanced Engineering Racing.
http://www.unbalancedengineering.com/Camaro/Racecars/

SlickTrackGod

I have also been a crew chief for JesseJames once for a CyncoDeMayo celebrity race at Toyota Speedway, as well as was recently on the set of Overhaulin and actually got a little TV time once again in life. Iyou can briefly spot me on the 68 Camaro build show that the reveil was at Peterson Automotive Museum. 3rd pic is of famous American F1 driver Allen Berg who is one of my coworkers for the exotic car company. I have many many more but those cover a good range of my car world dealings.

SlickTrackGod

Most of all...I just wanna be a RockStar.
Yeah BS, I had to sweep the track and get the marbles off the course. No job benaeth me. makes for faster lap times.

Speaking of Rockstars, Drunk Michael Anthony leaning on me in our NASCAR suite at Irwindale. He would come up and hang out with a few of the team owners occationally.

You all now have a better idea that SlickTrackGod is not some 13 year old kid hiding behind a keyboard on the internet.

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

The strut mount block seems doable, and could easily go back to stock.
There is a reputable company a couple miles away that could do such a thing, but only one or two of us would ever try such a thing. The owner of this company brings a few of his ponies out to play.
Dean, you'll like looking around on their site! They can do custom, anything - for a price, too.
http://www.mpi-ferrari.com/

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

Sometimes I feel like a nut, sometimes I don't.
I've been able to follow you except for this. Is this similar to what Phil was trying to accomplish?

SlickTrackGod

I think you mean 86TA Phil? I tried to search a little right now and came up with this thread a few others were trying a rack and short spindles and I see Phil resonsed on it. I remeber seeing someone else trying to build the stock spindle arm different by adding amaterial and changing the OEM tierod end mount inward(but I didn;t find that yet in that search)- I think it was Pablo but not cerrtain. Anywways all I have seen they still were trying to go under the steering arm like OEM, not over it and moving the swaybar etc. This also would require a slightly longer rack that the OEm steering geometry because I am extending about 1.5 to 2" longer each side. The A-arms extended .5" each would take up 1" of that width, so someone would need a rack about 1"-1.5"wider then the 3rd gen drag link specs so as to keep the tierod assemblies the same length as the now longer A-arms.

https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/susp...on-almost.html

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

Same Phil, different thread. Yes, still going under arm.
https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/susp...-spindles.html

You still have to move the tie rod mount on the spindle, correct? Not just different attachment.

SlickTrackGod

I never saw that post but what Phil did there is pretty much ifentical to the bracket idea I just showed above. The only difference is my rack tierod idea would mount above it. Im not surprised he came up with that sense he seemd like a sharp guy- my utmost compliment to him.

EDIT- I was looking at this earlier on my phone. Once I got on a real computer I could see the thread link better and noticed the second page. Yes that is the post I was thinking of but I never swa the earlier design Phil did on page one. I saw the later design but that does not apply to what I was going to do with the top mounted tierod end. The plate he made in his first design came back much further to the sindle and he used an existing bolt hole to mount it. Mine would not go that length. It would be much smalle and no need for al the bulky plating and welds. Just the used of two pcs of 5/16" steel plates welded perpendicular would be plety because of the trangular shape of the top flat plate. There is only lateral (x) force with barely 30* of (y)force and absolutely no (z ) force in axis X,Y, & Z

Dreambird

This is very interesting and informative I am learning so much for my car which I am building to autocross! This strut mount idea how hard would it be to get some dimensions for it so it could be manufactured by a local machine shop? I have been thinking of the power rack but didn't think to mount it on top that's a great idea. So now we just need to figure out this sway bar detail

SlickTrackGod

I would not refer to it as a strut mount because we associate a strut mount with top strut shaft attachent point in the car.

I would call it either a "lower strut mount" or perferably I call it a "strut relocation block"

It is improtant to note the the addition of extended ball joints would aid in the amount of lowering that this block can be drilled for to minumise overall SAI length and use a flat designed strut mount up top.

The plates blocks really should have fixed hole sized (Bolt hole bores) envelope mount to the spindle(just like the strut has already), and a knurled slip fit dual face that the strut mounts onto (Alot like the spindle block shape). I would knirl the surface BECAUSE I would design the top hole fixed "and" the bottom hole "slotted" for a little adjustment range. Once clamped tight the knurlls would prevent slippage between the strut and the block mounting surfaces. Same exact bolts would be used so each side would have 4 rather than the 2 OEM bolts. THe drop in mount holke patterns to lower the strut bdoy for increased travel would depend on it you have extended ball joints or not. So many variiables with a public one for all design that it would have to have that one bolt hole slotted.

Build it and the swaybar will come into play easily afterwards. Tht is quite simple to mount or use extended blocks under the OeM mounts or what ever have you to retrofit and clearence based on your paticualr situation. All dependes on ride heights and wheel sizes and swaybar needs etc etc

SlickTrackGod

Brian (TEDSgrad), please look back at post 83. I edited my response after I got on a real computer and could better see the link. I only quickly looked at the first page on my phone screen and did not realize it went to a seond page. I in fact made the final comment on that thread. 6months or so ago when I read clicked on that post I resonded on some page two descussions and glance enough on page two at Phils 2nd design that I never went back to page one to realise he had a first design also.

That first design is a much closer resembulance of what I was planning on building (somewhat, his was a little rough, long, and mismatched with an extended 2nd thread hole pattern than my intentions). Mine would have been about 2/3rds that length and of course they are using the stock draglink geometry where I would use a raise mount rack- big difference in system geometry between theirs and mine.

Dreambird

Thanks for the clarification on what to call the bracket. Ok that makes sense , so the bracket would come off the spindle at 90 degrees , then down depending on whether you are using ext ball joints or not. So if I where to use aftermarket strut mounts I would not have to drop the lower strut mount down for more travel? The adjustable slotted bolt hole would be used to fine tune the SAI depending on the width of the wheel tire combination which should be slightly positive in your opinion? Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks again for the great insight and knowledge you are providing.

SlickTrackGod

Compare these two photos so you understand the "black" lines represent the spindle in this photo. Be creative with you design and test fit. You'll have to do a few rough scrap metal fitments to get measurements and test fits until you can come up with the proper clearences in the steering swing. I will say that if you are not following what I mean then I would not suggest rtrying this uless you have very advance understanding of chassis geometry and what all is changing.

It simply could be a block of aluminum the same thickness as the spindle part which slips into the strut. It could simply be mounted in single-shear even though I would perfer something machined out of billet in double shear mount onto the spindle side. This is an example of a single-shear block plate which would be simple to cut and drill in your home garage with primative tools to get a mockup correct.


I still don't like seeing the talk with "lower strut mount"- it even confuses me for a second just seeing the words "strut mount". I am going to ask we label this a SRB (strut relocation bracket)

SlickTrackGod

THere is no very much room under there that EVEN IF this fits on one car at a certain height and tire width, and deaybar size, and brake caliper size, etc etc- it may not fit on other combinations and ride heights.

You have to consider both full lock swings of the steering movement as well as wheel travel while in each full turn...AND you have to account for floating caliper movement as pads wear and the possiblity they clear when new pads are in but would contact when pads wear down the the floating calipers move to one side more. Alot going on under there- just be careful if you try this. I think most definately the OEM swaybar position would be in the way and has to be altered. For a mockup I would just remove it as well as remove the spring - then you will have to run the suspension through full travel and steer without the springs or swaybars hampering test movement on jackstands. Again, if this all sopund confusing then please do not try this. This is a critical suspension mount point you do not want breaking, failing, or causing brake failure or steering lockup unexpectedly from things bending or breaking.

I other words, you better know what you are up against.

SlickTrackGod

To give an example, when I built my front Wilwood brake setup custom 1 off- I took alot of risk having a few very expensive specialty parts made prior to me even being able to work out a fitment. I had to then keep working on ideas and positions of the caliper, the offset, the clocking, the bracket style, the strength of it and the safety and logevity of it lasting..ALL WHILE maintainingimportant features I wanted, and subsequently is the only brake package I know of so far that anyone has developed for these cars that had all these characteristic important to me :
#1- retained the factory steering stop on the spindle,
#2- fit inside a factoy 16" Iroc wheel being 6pot 13" rotors
#3- maintained closer to OEM offset then even the OEM 1LE upgrade in rotor to wheel mounting face width. Every other aftermarket brake package I measured pushes the wheel mounting surface outward and thus the wheels generally hit the fenderlip if the car is very low- Mine did not. I worked on it and worked on it and reengineered it many times while constanting changing ideas until I made it work...and it worked well. But it was not easy.

Dreambird

I will continue to read and learn to better understand what is involved with this kind of change the suspension. What information is out there to read or video material to watch , I have read the herb Adams chassis book. This will probably be a down the road project to try, I do have 2 months of at a time with my job so when that time comes I should have plenty of time.

SlickTrackGod

That is all find and dandy also but you will have to buy a pyro and do some track or skidpad testing of each prtotype as well as be able to set you own alignemnts on the fly with the proper tools or else you are just merely guessing at something that you hope is in the right direction...and hopefully not too much past the right direction of improvement.

Gotta know what that footprint is doing both inside and out. Gott know where your ride height will be and where your roll centers are working. you make these changes later and you might as weel just throw everything you did out the window and start again.

Decent Longacre pyro is about $340 minimum, up to over $400 easy for a deluxe model.
http://www.longacreracing.com/catalo...id=193&catid=7

Longacre Digital Camber/Caster gauge I have is about $300
http://www.longacreracing.com/catalo...d=1299&catid=5


Toe plates another $100
http://www.longacreracing.com/catalo...d=1676&catid=5

If not then you will be your alignment mechanics best friend paying him maybe a $1000+ in multiple trips and lost track time having to spend and wait on the next changes to see if they were enough or too much.

Frustrating to hear all this I know, but you can see why the average person is in now way able to invent and R&D something of this nature. Most fabricators /aftermarket vendors do not have this knowledge or this equipment either. It's the main reason why you see racing team organizations be the ones to make and sell these items first, then the fabricators all follow their lead in trying to steal ideas they know mostly nothing on how they work in changing geometry of multiple things.

Dreambird

I was planning on the camber caster toe tools sounds like I need to add the pyrometer as well. What I may do is start driving it in its current state with all these tools to start learning how to use them and understand what changes affect the tire temps to get a good base understanding then get more involved in the changes you have described. My current setup consists of fully adjustable rear suspension, bilstein shocks and struts, eibach springs, ls1 camaro front and rear brakes, unbalanced engineering race torque arm which I modified the rear mount to be adjustable to better adjust pinion angle, stock 16'' crosslace wheels.

SlickTrackGod

you do not need to do any of this with OEM 16x8 wheels. That block would be uneccessary unless you need to go wider wheels and do all of the suspension modifications and steering modifications I decribed, otherwise you would not even be able to move your wheel inboard so this block would be pointless.

So just know this type of custom setup would only be needed for someone seeking to try and use a wider front wheel- and that would also need to be a 17" diameter minumum for this package idea to even begin to work because it need to fit over the steering knuckle when the OEM tierod mounts.

Dreambird

TEDSgrad

iTrader: (4)

The Grip, v 1.0, we started debating the merits of drop spindle with 17/245 tires vs ext BJ with 17/275.
It sure takes a lot to do it right. Rarely do people go up to 17's and stay at 8".
Brakes aren't cheap, either. And many over-buy thinking they're getting more. I tried to follow Dean - didn't keep factory stop because of the drop spindles, only .3" added to track width (close to the 1LE), AND I did get a super 6pot inside the factory wheels, 2 pc 13" rotors, and found alum hubs. I DIDN'T BLAZE THE TRAIL, THOUGH!


Here, you can see ONLY four- 20 min track sessions (1 day) on brand new BP-10's. The track is clockwise and these are the pads of the driver's side (touched the rotors, but didn't score them). Many right-hand turns pressure the outside pad more. I'm going to need a better pad and some air ducts (for the track)! Fright mixed with exhilaration, the smell of hot brakes.........boy, I've got cabin fever bad this winter!

SlickTrackGod

Yes but that is why I always have preached the 3rd gen platform was intended for the 8" front wheel. People always want to go wider but the scrub radius will not allow it without side effects. Expecially with the drop spindles. Going wider just means more postive offset and thus much more scrub. The drop spindles with 9.5 is really a problem with I am sure without ever tryingit has ALOT of hard brake zone wandering. I am experienced enough in lots of different types of vehicles that bad scrub is just plain a simple hard to deal with in corner setup.

The mount face of the Delco Morraine 10.5" stock brake setup is 3" offset the backingplate bolt hole surface. Here are a few others just for brake package comparison-
10.5" oem - 3.000"
1LE OEM - 3.337"
13" C4 HD's on 1LE hub- 3.618"
My custom 6pot 13x1.25 Wilwood setup- 3.150"

You can see jsu tthe brake package alone will change variables on each indicidual scrub radius when using the same wheel. There can be up to a 5/8" difference there alone. Now going to a 13" C4 + a 9.5" wheel puts it out another .750 to a total of 1 3/8" more positive scrub radius compared to a factory OEM brake on a factory OEM 8" wheel. that is quite a bit of SAI angle needed to correct it. You then go to a drop spindle and add another 3/4" and you are darn near close to 2" more srcub radius. The only thing the drop spindles do is REALLY favor a better camber curve for an extremely lowered car on a short track autox type setup because you can use ALOT of static camber so as to overcome the massive positive scrub- however, you are only using equvilent to about a 7" wide wheel in straight line braking The inner 2/3's of the tread is the only footprint) so you have less straightline braking grip then a car with less static camber on an 8" wheel- where you gain is the cornering grip, but at a loss of a little control due to wandering.

Againif you look at figures and consider my short legth of the overall strut postion, even though I was slightly inverted on my control arms I did not get massive body roll AND I kept within the camber curve enough not to produce camber loss in articulation. THe lateral relation of the balljoint to the sturt mount (becasue of short distance stayed close to the same with still slightly on the gain side) and mopre importantly t the steep angle of the strut in caster change with articulation. Without body roll you need not as much camber gain as a car that roll more obviously. The Caster was much more critical to help the camber curve and overcome the SAI. I did not have that much SAI trouble and I had much more caster gain then the average 3rd gen by far....but as stated I had to wastch for bump steer. It is the reason I did NOT go to 6* staic. I stayed at 4.5 because at static 6* I would gain dynamically too much and go into bumpsteer.

you can see why I wanted to go to a 9.5 front and pull my hubcentric spacer so I could use the 3.150 mount surface I built. The trick was using a negative offset wheel with a 3/16" spacer to clear the big caliper I had and move the strut with a SRB as well as extend the lower control arm a 1/2". My SAI would drop at a lesser angle and hit the 1" inward mark on scrub, my fenders would tuck, and I would jave LOTS of room up top with the strut mount sitting static at -0.8 camber on street use and could adjust it way inboard for up to easily past -3.0* for track days because of a slightly longer A-arm distance. That was where the car was headed next. I did not need camber gain increase because I lacked body roll to V8 cars have.


I had my next steps worked out ahead of time as to where I was ultimately going with that car (or at least was going to try. It was advancing nicely with all the custom stuff I had already accoplished- even things like adding the heavy Dynomat to the cockpit floorboard to increase negative roll weight and bring the car more to neutral roll axis.

SlickTrackGod

I will also point out that the longer length A-arms put the baljoint out more favorable for a camber gain on the race course with more static camber on this setup. It will occupany massive R compound grip and the cambe rneeded to keep the sidewalls from rolling over. The longer arm allows more camber gain when you relate it's balljoint position to the maxed camber setting of the strut mount.


All of that without the wandering in hard braking zones and good tire longevity and use of footprint

Dreambird

Was doing some research today and found these what does everyone think?


3rd Gen Camaro

Abercrombie 3rd Gen Camaro knuckles are capable of 58° of angle. to get this much with the wheels on your car you will have to ether trim box and extend your stock LCA's or get narrow tubular LCA's and extend them to allow for maximum wheel clearance. these knuckles are also designed to eliminate bump steer, dramatically quicken your steering response, and give a 10° ackermann spread.

3rd Gen Camaro Drift knuckles

$275

Dreambird

I also found these picts of a strut relocation block idea here is the quote form the post. https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/susp...project-2.html

Extending the A-arm is only done to move the wheel out more. This frees up more room in the wheel wheel which allows the wheel to be turned more before rubbing on anything. No one currently offers anything like this as far as I know. Everyone that does this custom makes their parts.

For those of you running the extended A-arms, how did you bring you negative camber back in spec? By extending the A-arm, your going to end up with a crap ton of negative camber which I highly doubt some aftermarket camber plates will be able to make up for. Unless you drill out the slots in the strut towers to extend them outwards, I don't see how the camber can be brought back in check without highly modifying the spindle. Using the extended A-arms without modifying the spindle will also limit the width of the front wheel that can be used.

When I mention modifying the spindle, the only thing I can think of right now is altering the strut attachment point. I would think you would need to fill in the holes where the strut would normally attach and then add a good bit of material to the spindle to return it to a more vertical location. This would bring the camber back in spec and allow a wider wheel to be used.

Here are some pictures to help you picture what I'm trying to get at with my spindle modification idea. The picture on the left is a stock spindle (but modified for a brake upgrade). The picture on the right is with the strut attachment point moved over to correct for the extra negative camber.
Drifting IROC Camaro project-brake-mod-spindle.jpg Drifting IROC Camaro project-brake-mod-spindle-mod.jpg
One thing to keep in mind with this is the strength. Since the strut will now be attached further from the hub, there will be more force on it so an extra brace may be needed below the extension.