Optimum ride heights
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Optimum ride heights
After spending quite a few months researching about suspension dynamics and speaking to a lot of highly regarded people in suspension set up, It's clear to me that there a major difference in so called optimum ride heights.
A few examples on a Hawkeye Sti.
Chevron say
Front 345-350 Rear 335-340 hub to arch.
Scoobynet members
Front 380 rear 360 hub to arch due to roll centre being affected.
PCA dynamics
Say the front should be lower than back as seen on P1 and RB320. This helps lower roll centre at front reducing under steer and helping turn in.
I have played around with my cars ride heights and I have noticed less roll at slightly higher ride height but also noticed less responsive turn in and under steer.
A few examples on a Hawkeye Sti.
Chevron say
Front 345-350 Rear 335-340 hub to arch.
Scoobynet members
Front 380 rear 360 hub to arch due to roll centre being affected.
PCA dynamics
Say the front should be lower than back as seen on P1 and RB320. This helps lower roll centre at front reducing under steer and helping turn in.
I have played around with my cars ride heights and I have noticed less roll at slightly higher ride height but also noticed less responsive turn in and under steer.
#3
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: derbyshire
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trust in what simon at chevron says the guy knows suspension he set my car up for every sprint last year his cars won 2012 2013 2014 in s2 2014 overall winner 2014 s1 and had a lot more on the podium in each class
#4
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (30)
I've had all kinds of cars back off in the bends and mine just stays as flat as a pankake no matter how much you push.
Go and and have a chat with chevron, you may have to wait your turn and it may seem like it takes ages to get the job done but I can assure you it's well worth waiting for.
Siv
#5
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
This is going to be interesting.
Just to say; hub to arch distance is a good datum - it doesn't mean it directly indicates the suspension heights.
ie. Because the front hub to arch distance is, say 20mm greater at the front, than the rear: doesn't mean the front suspension is 20mm higher.
Just to say; hub to arch distance is a good datum - it doesn't mean it directly indicates the suspension heights.
ie. Because the front hub to arch distance is, say 20mm greater at the front, than the rear: doesn't mean the front suspension is 20mm higher.
#6
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did speak to Simon. I was going with his custom B14 kit until we got on to the subject of RB320 Bilstein's.
I asked how his B14 would compare and he said the Bilstein's fitted to the Rb320 are the best damper for fast road use.
He even mentioned about trying to get his B14's made with a softer low speed bump and more bump travel to try and get the same level of compliance.
So this has ended up in me buying the Rb Bilstein's and springs.
Will measure the ride height and compare once fitted.
I asked how his B14 would compare and he said the Bilstein's fitted to the Rb320 are the best damper for fast road use.
He even mentioned about trying to get his B14's made with a softer low speed bump and more bump travel to try and get the same level of compliance.
So this has ended up in me buying the Rb Bilstein's and springs.
Will measure the ride height and compare once fitted.
Last edited by InTurbo; 25 April 2015 at 11:40 AM.
Trending Topics
#10
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (11)
I played with ride heights a little when I had my custom made B14s from Jamsport and found that in a Forester STi it handled the best (better turn in, rolled less and would power steer progressively and predictably out of bends) when the front was ~0.8-1cm lower than the OEM height and the rear around 0.5cm lower than the OEM height.
When the car was 2cm lower than OEM height (alround) using STi pink springs it rolled more but the car was still progressive and predictable at the limit.
When the car was 2cm lower than OEM height (alround) using STi pink springs it rolled more but the car was still progressive and predictable at the limit.
Last edited by fpan; 23 May 2015 at 02:15 PM.
#14
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm going to keep the oem bars on for now. The car corners very level as it is.
I've also noticed the at the current ride height it feels like I have a stiffer rear bar. I think by having the back higher it makes the front turn in better and gives less understeer but with out the extra harshness of having a thicker bar.
At first I didn't like the ride height compared to where I had my BCs but has grown on me now.
Hopefully be getting the alignment done Saturday morning.
Hear is a pic of the ride height as it is now.
I've also noticed the at the current ride height it feels like I have a stiffer rear bar. I think by having the back higher it makes the front turn in better and gives less understeer but with out the extra harshness of having a thicker bar.
At first I didn't like the ride height compared to where I had my BCs but has grown on me now.
Hopefully be getting the alignment done Saturday morning.
Hear is a pic of the ride height as it is now.
#15
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
[QUOTE=InTurbo;11687170]I've also noticed the at the current ride height it feels like I have a stiffer rear bar. I think by having the back higher it makes the front turn in better and gives less understeer but with out the extra harshness of having a thicker bar.(/QUOTE)
100% agree.
I'll have a go:
The positive rake induces greater load transfer at the rear, reducing rear grip.
All done without a big rear bar, restricting the independence of the rear suspension - fast and comfy; perfect.
And, you can still fill it full of people, fuel and things.
100% agree.
I'll have a go:
The positive rake induces greater load transfer at the rear, reducing rear grip.
All done without a big rear bar, restricting the independence of the rear suspension - fast and comfy; perfect.
And, you can still fill it full of people, fuel and things.
Last edited by 2pot; 25 May 2015 at 04:40 PM.
#16
Scooby Newbie
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I played with ride heights a little when I had my custom made B14s from Jamsport and found that in a Forester STi it handled the best (better turn in, rolled less and would power steer progressively and predictably out of bends) when the front was ~0.8-1cm lower than the OEM height and the rear around 0.5cm lower than the OEM height.
When the car was 2cm lower than OEM height (alround) using STi pink springs it rolled more but the car was still progressive and predictable at the limit.
When the car was 2cm lower than OEM height (alround) using STi pink springs it rolled more but the car was still progressive and predictable at the limit.
I've got some jap coils on my fozzy sti and the springs are goosed, I'd want to go back to shocks and springs. Probably going to go for impreza sti shocks and springs, not sure to go for oem stuff or aftermarket
#19
does anyone have any info on what a classic should be?
my car is far to low and handles terrible
i want to get it sorted...going to add more castor this weekend and raise up a bit i think
my car is far to low and handles terrible
i want to get it sorted...going to add more castor this weekend and raise up a bit i think
#20
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chevron also set there cars with a slightly higher ride height in the front to help reduce dive under braking as the Sti has a high front brake bias.
Prodrive solved the same problem by having a well designed front spring assister (bump stop) to reduce the cars pitching under braking.
Two different ways of solving the same problem. But two different ride heights
Chevron front higher Pridrive front lower.
Prodrive like the front lower as this adds more resistance to roll at the rear and lowers roll centre at the front, helping to reduce understeer and help turn in response.
Chevron use a roll bars and extra caster/camber to do the same affect so again two different ways of going about things.
Last edited by InTurbo; 28 May 2015 at 05:54 PM.
#21
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
So, when Chevron say, for a Hawk:
Front 345-350 - They can't be referring to optimum, bumpy, B-road, heights?
As the front, Prodrive rb320 road height, is 355mm; and 363mm for the 'normal' Prodrive Hawk.
I assume, the Chevron front B-road height, is more like the 'normal' Prodrive Hawk?
Front 345-350 - They can't be referring to optimum, bumpy, B-road, heights?
As the front, Prodrive rb320 road height, is 355mm; and 363mm for the 'normal' Prodrive Hawk.
I assume, the Chevron front B-road height, is more like the 'normal' Prodrive Hawk?
#22
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
335-345 front - you might want to look at whiteline kit kca313, if under 340mm front.
340-345 rear.
Ensure you're not constantly engaging the stiff part of the bump stops, by running too low. Or change your bump stops.
Don't over do the bar size.
Roll-rock:
If the spring rate is relatively low and the sta bar is too stiff, a suspension movement, initially, occurring on only one side of the vehicle, will be transmitted to the other side, inducing an unsettling 'roll-rock' motion.
HTH
Last edited by 2pot; 28 May 2015 at 02:10 PM.
#23
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, when Chevron say, for a Hawk:
Front 345-350 - They can't be referring to optimum, bumpy, B-road, heights?
As the front, Prodrive rb320 road height, is 355mm; and 363mm for the 'normal' Prodrive Hawk.
I assume, the Chevron front B-road height, is more like the 'normal' Prodrive Hawk?
Front 345-350 - They can't be referring to optimum, bumpy, B-road, heights?
As the front, Prodrive rb320 road height, is 355mm; and 363mm for the 'normal' Prodrive Hawk.
I assume, the Chevron front B-road height, is more like the 'normal' Prodrive Hawk?
Last edited by InTurbo; 28 May 2015 at 05:58 PM.
#27
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (11)
You will ruin the handling by putting Impreza STi shocks and springs on the FSTi, the car will be too low.