Notices

Bigger Roll bars and uk roads

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 28 December 2014, 11:02 AM
  #31  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,840
Received 41 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

if its skitish how hard are your BC`s set ?
Old 28 December 2014, 11:26 AM
  #32  
Linksfahrer
Scooby Regular
 
Linksfahrer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Torpoint
Posts: 677
Received 48 Likes on 40 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by InTurbo
Well I finally had both my roll bars replaced on Tuesday. I did a straight swap from 24mm front and rear, to 22mm front and rear.
I've done a fair few miles since then and the car is more compliant over uneven roads and does handle bumps better. But still not where I want the car to be in terms of control while on our A/b roads.

I've not noticed any increase in roll either. Maybe it's not pushed hard enough on the road to see the benefit of having a larger bar.

I've also been able to increase my dampers two clicks this before would of made the car to nervous on a less than perfect A or B road.

Although this has been an improvement I still think think there is more to be done. might try fitting the original front bar at some point to see if that helps things further.
Ahh , again interesting , glad to see you have some progress.

I run Standard roll bars and my BC run Front with 6 maybe 8 clicks if im pushing it around on my own, I don't touch the rears much as I don't feel it makes as much difference as front so these are normally staying on 6.
the reason for not running 8 or more is if Im running slow through towns
it tends to just not to be as comfortable so 6 clicks does the trick.

My car never feels nervous, it does have that capacity on me though.
Old 28 December 2014, 01:19 PM
  #33  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JDM_Stig
if its skitish how hard are your BC`s set ?
Tried a few settings so far.
There set at 12 front 10 rear at the moment. This feels the best compromise.

14 front 12 rear makes the steering very light and unstable even on flat roads

10 front 8 rear is a bit soft and rolls on fast corners

8 front 6 rear is very soft and feels dangerous on fast corners
Old 28 December 2014, 01:21 PM
  #34  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Linksfahrer
Ahh , again interesting , glad to see you have some progress.

I run Standard roll bars and my BC run Front with 6 maybe 8 clicks if im pushing it around on my own, I don't touch the rears much as I don't feel it makes as much difference as front so these are normally staying on 6.
the reason for not running 8 or more is if Im running slow through towns
it tends to just not to be as comfortable so 6 clicks does the trick.

My car never feels nervous, it does have that capacity on me though.
What spring rate and ride height are you running?
Old 28 December 2014, 01:27 PM
  #35  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bonesetter
Try and post a pic of your car. You may indeed need to raise it a little, looking back over my info the '05 on has an 'ideal' height of 380/360.

Your control arms should not be level
Took a photo this morning. As you can see it's not that low. 360 front 350 rear.
Also a pic of the control arms. They are horizontal. Not such a good photo of the front as it's hard to get under there.




Old 28 December 2014, 01:31 PM
  #36  
JDM_Stig
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
 
JDM_Stig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Mount Weather
Posts: 5,840
Received 41 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by InTurbo
Tried a few settings so far.
There set at 12 front 10 rear at the moment. This feels the best compromise.

14 front 12 rear makes the steering very light and unstable even on flat roads

10 front 8 rear is a bit soft and rolls on fast corners

8 front 6 rear is very soft and feels dangerous on fast corners
in the wet I run very close to ur softest setting and its awesome, absorbs the bumps with ease but still feels very planted,

You posted your camber & toe settings,
Front camber is 1.15
Front toe 0.03
Rear camber is 1.30
Rear toe 0.06
Is the camber actually -1.15 front and -1.30 rear ?
I know I run a little more camber then this with no tyre problems.

I run the Eibach ARB`s front and rear which from memory are 25mm rear and 23mm front.

Last edited by JDM_Stig; 28 December 2014 at 01:35 PM.
Old 28 December 2014, 04:25 PM
  #37  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JDM_Stig
in the wet I run very close to ur softest setting and its awesome, absorbs the bumps with ease but still feels very planted,

You posted your camber & toe settings,
Front camber is 1.15
Front toe 0.03
Rear camber is 1.30
Rear toe 0.06
Is the camber actually -1.15 front and -1.30 rear ?
I know I run a little more camber then this with no tyre problems.

I run the Eibach ARB`s front and rear which from memory are 25mm rear and 23mm front.
Yeah the camber is negative
Old 28 December 2014, 04:49 PM
  #38  
Linksfahrer
Scooby Regular
 
Linksfahrer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Torpoint
Posts: 677
Received 48 Likes on 40 Posts
Default

I just checked my Sales recieipt Im wondering if mine are same rated as yours , Ergo if the spring rate is higher the damping will not be the same.

Mined are coded BC F-02-BR-Ra-6kg/5kg

I am aware that GDB are 4kg rated

http://www.bc-racing.co.uk/applicati...-ra-12956.html

As I have an MYO5 I m not using the
5/4Kg/mm Subaru Impreza GDB (Not 05+ STi) And therefore damper setting comparision is not useful , unless your using the same.
Old 28 December 2014, 10:18 PM
  #39  
SouthWalesSam
Scooby Regular
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (1)
 
SouthWalesSam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Brecon
Posts: 802
Received 27 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by InTurbo
Sti Brembos, drilled discs, black diamond predator pads. Dot 5.1

Why do you ask?


Because, BC coilovers aside, I'm running a similar front setup up to you on my bugeye wagon: Powerstation 'fast road' geo, Whiteline ARBs, Anti-lift kit, uprated brake discs, higher tyre pressures, Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetrics, etc.


I have been unhappy with the slow turn in, harder ride and reduced confidence from dulled steering feel.


Last week I chucked away my juddering, heavy-weight 'big brake' kit for a set of AP 6pots and discs.


The lighter weight brake setup saved several kilos at each corner. So, with lower unsprung weight I figured I could run lower pressures and, experimentally, I dropped my pressures back down to 34/33. Instant transformation!


Queue better ride, feel, flow and turn-in through bends and a much more confidence-inspiring steer. It's the closest that the bugeye has felt to my lovely old classic wagon. Just from changing the front brakes and tyre pressures....


So it was just a thought.
Old 31 December 2014, 07:33 PM
  #40  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Bit of an update. I raised the ride height today and I'm very pleased with the results.
The rear was 350mm from centre of hub to bottom of arch and front was 360mm

I have increased the rear by 10mm and the front by 20mm. (Bonesetters recommendations)
I took the car out for spin and even though my geometry is probably now way out there is a huge improvement.
Roll has reduced massively and the car feels a lot more stable at speed.

It's the best the cars felt since having the Coilovers put on, I was out for nearly an hour enjoying the car.
Really can't wait to get it booked in for another alignment and corner weighting now.

Last edited by InTurbo; 31 December 2014 at 07:34 PM.
Old 01 January 2015, 10:35 AM
  #41  
bonesetter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
 
bonesetter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,491
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Great news

Yeah, although your car didn't 'look' that low, as you crucially spotted your control arms positioning said otherwise

It always makes me smile knowing how the lower the car goes the more in rolls
Old 01 January 2015, 12:08 PM
  #42  
-Nic-
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (4)
 
-Nic-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bonesetter
Great news

Yeah, although your car didn't 'look' that low, as you crucially spotted your control arms positioning said otherwise

It always makes me smile knowing how the lower the car goes the more in rolls
The more susceptible to roll it is. It may actually roll less if you've increased spring rates or anti roll bar resistance.
Old 01 January 2015, 01:07 PM
  #43  
bonesetter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
 
bonesetter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,491
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Changing the pick-up points deals with RC lowering, then you don't have to alter arb & springs
Old 01 January 2015, 05:51 PM
  #44  
2pot
Scooby Regular
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (3)
 
2pot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,838
Received 90 Likes on 78 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bonesetter
Changing the pick-up points deals with RC lowering, then you don't have to alter arb & springs
Do you mean fit the, badly named, anti-lift kit?
I don't know why anyone would want an ALK fitted to a primarily road driven car. Anti-lift is built into road car suspension for a number of reasons.
I'm not worried about alleviating flat-out, corner exit understeer - and if I was, I'd get stiffer springs and revised geometry, rather than intentionally introducing an increase in pitching, via an ALK.
Just my opinion; very interesting thread.
Old 01 January 2015, 05:56 PM
  #45  
bonesetter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
 
bonesetter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,491
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Anti-lift and roll centre correction are very different
Old 01 January 2015, 07:10 PM
  #46  
2pot
Scooby Regular
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (3)
 
2pot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,838
Received 90 Likes on 78 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bonesetter
Anti-lift and roll centre correction are very different
You mean the Whiteline roll centre/bump steer kit? - that I do like - ONLY on a thoughtfully lowered car.

Last edited by 2pot; 01 January 2015 at 07:22 PM. Reason: add caveat
Old 01 January 2015, 07:38 PM
  #47  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bonesetter
Great news

Yeah, although your car didn't 'look' that low, as you crucially spotted your control arms positioning said otherwise

It always makes me smile knowing how the lower the car goes the more in rolls
This has been a good learning curve.
Done a lot of research today about roll centre and camber curve. And it seems Lowering a MacPherson strut suspension system to far causes more harm than good.

During suspension compression, if the control arms are horizontal suspension camber will go positive pushing the tyre on to its outside edge loosing grip in corners and becoming unstable over bumps.

Also having no downward angle to the control arms moves your roll centre further from your cars centre of gravity causing the lateral forces acting on your car to be greater causing more roll.

Last edited by InTurbo; 01 January 2015 at 07:43 PM.
Old 01 January 2015, 07:51 PM
  #48  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

As you can see from my earlier photo, I increased the rear ride height by 10mm and its given a obvious downward angle to the rear control arm.

Old 04 January 2015, 09:53 AM
  #49  
bonesetter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
 
bonesetter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,491
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

How have you been getting on now that you're on the slippery slop of chassis dynamics?

Happy with the car's handling/grip?
Old 04 January 2015, 10:42 AM
  #50  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bonesetter
How have you been getting on now that you're on the slippery slop of chassis dynamics?

Happy with the car's handling/grip?
Im booked in for an alignment later in the week, so will let you know how I get on.
Still deciding if to go with my original settings so I can do a direct comparison, or try something a bit more agressive.
Was talking to Simon at Chevron the other day and he runs slightly more Toe and camber on his set ups.

Also commented in me getting a roll centre kit and adjustable roll bar links before having him set the car up. Might do this depending how this next alignment goes.
Old 04 January 2015, 11:03 AM
  #51  
bonesetter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
 
bonesetter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,491
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

What sort of use does your car get?

If it's purely a hooner then why not go more aggressive on the geo? More camber and a little more toe-in?

If you're not doing many motorway miles then I would probably go with more negative camber up-front anyway

RC kit is not absolutely needed now your ride height is the way it is, plus the Whiteline kit comes with the bump steer stuff which is questionable whether it works at all (I wouldn't bother with that if it was me), plus it's pricey

There are other upgrades you could consider of course - increasing castor up front is always nice on the Impreza. The kit I would I would go for is the offset bush only and not the one which lowers the pick-up point
Old 04 January 2015, 11:33 AM
  #52  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

The car is more of a weekend toy, but it does the occasional long journey for days out ect..
And I've not noticed any odd tyre wear on the current setting so could be set up slightly more agressive.

I was thinking of maybe
Front toe 0.06
Front camber -1.30
Rear toe 0.08
Rear camber -1.40
Old 04 January 2015, 11:38 AM
  #53  
Linksfahrer
Scooby Regular
 
Linksfahrer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Torpoint
Posts: 677
Received 48 Likes on 40 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bonesetter
What sort of use does your car get?

If it's purely a hooner then why not go more aggressive on the geo? More camber and a little more toe-in?

If you're not doing many motorway miles then I would probably go with more negative camber up-front anyway
I run 1.5 camber front , which seems for my BC's to be just ok on motorway , more than this and you will start to sense that you have to hold the wheel , this effect becomes more pronounced in the slow lane where the trucks put tram lines into the tarmac. Id be wary of over doing toe in, although it gives a bit of a self centering effect , the tyre wear can be awful.
Old 04 January 2015, 11:54 AM
  #54  
bonesetter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
 
bonesetter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,491
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

For a weekender 'fast road' set-up as a rule of thumb I usually go about .5 deg less camber in the rear than in the front if you want the rear to be a bit more active, or equal. But I wouldn't really go more camber in the rear

I prefer max grip front (zero understeer) and a rear which can be trimmed on throttle to help with a line change etc

I would probably try and max out on front camber, so anything up to 2° will be fine. Your geo tech will need to slacken both clevis bolts front and rear (I believe the BC's have slotted holes for camber adjustment, so make sure your tech knows this)

As the rear suspension compresses on a GC and GD chassis, the wheels toe-out, so you need static toe-in to have zero toe when cornering

Something like this


Last edited by bonesetter; 04 January 2015 at 12:30 PM.
Old 04 January 2015, 12:10 PM
  #55  
InTurbo
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
 
InTurbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oxford
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Thanks for all your input. That geo looks like what I'm after. Will post back when is all done.
Old 04 January 2015, 12:44 PM
  #56  
piehole1983
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (7)
 
piehole1983's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Belfast
Posts: 2,999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Very interesting thread. I'm refreshing a few bits on my GC, refurbing some STI shocks, new cusco anti roll bars, bushes etc and will obviously need to have the toe and camber checked out. I'm not wanting to lower the car at all by the way. My car is a weekend machine and won't be making many long journeys, based on this do any of you have a recommendation for toe and camber angles? Mostly normal driving with the occasional blast around some local twisty roads.
Old 04 January 2015, 11:03 PM
  #57  
Arnie_1
Scooby Regular
 
Arnie_1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

It's so fun to watch Bonesetter at work. Good info there.

With that said, on a standard car, there is no better bang-for-the-buck upgrade than a larger adjustable rear ARB. You get less understeer, less roll and better rotation for very little money. All good and fun things. And with the adjustability, you can tune your setup for prevailig conditions.

The fun starts when you want to improve things further, when the suspension bug really bites! At this point you need to be honest with yourself and think about what you really want to do with your car before throwing parts at the car. Remember that its all a balancing act between: driveability, safety, maximum cornering, tyre wear, comfort and money.

One thing, back to the purpose of the large swaybar/arb advice ... it is very true that overly large bars combined with stiffly spring coilovers will definitely lead to a skittish, unsettling ride on a B-Road. Just lots of roll stiffness there, and some loss of suspension independence as well. I personally don't like to run big bars and big spring rates on a car that sees bumps and b-roads. They are no fun and are slow.

Using larger swaybars to tune suspension sort of came about because in the past, there weren't as many spring rate options available, i.e. coilovers were pretty pricey for Imprezas. So most folk only had one set spring rate (Eibachs, P1's, TEIN, etc.) and any suspension tuning and adjustment was happening at the ARBs, alignment and tyre pressures. They became the main way to quickly and inexpensively get results. With the advent of the cheap coilover, BC/Megan, etc. the average punter now had access to to spring choice. Unfortunately, the larger ARB philosophy remained and got mixed in with very heavy spring rates. Fine on a glass smooth road/track, absolute crap on a bumpy b-road. The more "mature" tuners out there are now picking milder bars when combined with heavy spring rates, or somewhat stiffer bars when combined with softer spring rates (as a very basic rule of thumb) but always in relation to the type of tyre they are using. The more stick, the higher the spring/roll rate. Of course, as Bonesetter has already aluded to, there are so many other aspects of suspension tuning (geometry, ride height, tyres, pressures, etc. etc.) that its tough to make blanket recommendations. It's why Bonesetter's initial question "what do you want to do with your car" is so important. For example, i would be less critical about handling issues when someone says, its a show car and boulevard cruiser. I#d recommend setup and parts that make his/her car look dope rather than blast them for using 2cm spacers and stretched tyres.

Last edited by Arnie_1; 05 January 2015 at 05:04 PM.
Old 05 January 2015, 01:09 AM
  #58  
Linksfahrer
Scooby Regular
 
Linksfahrer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Torpoint
Posts: 677
Received 48 Likes on 40 Posts
Default

"I personally don't like to run big bars and big spring rates on a car that sees bumps and b-roads. They are no fun and are slow. "

Seconded Best regs Linksfahrer
Old 06 January 2015, 10:44 AM
  #59  
bonesetter
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
 
bonesetter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,491
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

Arnie - good to see a post of yours here - just doing my best to hold the fort in your absence
Old 07 January 2015, 02:59 PM
  #60  
Arnie_1
Scooby Regular
 
Arnie_1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

My one or two posts during the xmas break. I've been gone too long. Will try to troll the forums more often. I miss it.


Quick Reply: Bigger Roll bars and uk roads



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:52 AM.