Just by changing out the brake fluid skews the results, does it not?
Just by changing out the brake fluid skews the results, does it not?
No, not at all. I ran a full session for 20 minutes and lost brakes just inside of turn 11 on the checkered flag lap. There was enough time in the session to compile useful data... such as tire contact patch, rotor temperatures, tire temperatures, and lap times. Here's my tire contact patch from session number 1. As you guys can see I was giving away 10% of my overall tire contact. You can see how I was folding the tire onto the shoulder and giving away 5/8 of the tread wear area and trading it for the shoulder. Notice the tire wear on the shoulder is also lower than the optimized tread wear tire contact patch triangle on the tire. A little hint here for those guys not familiar with racing... the little triangles on the shoulder of your tires... those are optimum tire contact patch markers. You adjust your suspension to wear inside the marker. You use inner and outer tire temps and get them as close together as possible and then cross reference the tire markers to evaluate your tire contact which translates to effective grip. Session #1 tire patch... http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/y...psae3681fe.jpg This was mid day with more spring tweaking... http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/y...ps9d2f1793.jpg ...and then I finally got it right after 8 sessions. Now it's done. This tire and suspension combination has been optimized for ideal tire contact patch. Only fine tuning is required in the future. I shrunk the tire roll patch to just over 1/8", the wear signature is on the optimized grip triangle and the inner and outer tire temps are near identical. Only took 130 laps to figure it out LOL... http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/y...pse8c3b28d.jpg Let the tires tell you where to make your suspension adjustments ;). Grip is fast and slip is rollerskates.
Where'd you end up on camber front and rear?
Very cool! I never saw a reply from ya so I didn't think you were going or I would have come to help!
Tires look good! A few things that come to mind from what I've seen. Did you pull tire pressures? I used to get a 30 psi change from a hot Sumitomo HTRZ2. It made the tire look like it was wearing properly but I was riding the middle quite a bit more. Keep in mind that you'll bend a slick quite a bit more from both the additional traction level and slip angle differences. I found that with a slick I need about 2-3 degrees more camber.
How did the coolant temps go? Boil over at all? I found the stock Mitsu gauge to be a big POS. I've tested 2 so far, the one I had in the car and a spare. One stops at 195 degrees and the other at 197~ish degrees. (using a thermometer that's made for cooking candy on a range top of all things) I couldn't get a good read with the IR pyro, too much shiny in the pan to work correctly.
What were you using for track times out there? Any vids or pics?
I've thought about doing that with my car as well, to improve cooling and also keep splash/debri to a minimum since it's a DD...curious to see what you come up with and would like to hear ideas. I was thinking of a vent at the rear end of the engine bay with a channel funneling to the rear turbo, in hopes to pull from the cowl, down the firewall past the turbo and on out the bottom of the bay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Erron Spalsbury
So J. what is your final optimum setup then? 600lb 50/50 with fine tuning? That's an 11kg spring? What were your fine tunnings? Looks like I'll be going with a 50/50 split for sure, when I get to upgrading my suspension.
I added two degrees in front and a degree and a half in the rear.Quote:
Originally Posted by familyMAN
I sure could use your help on Sunday man!Quote:
Originally Posted by Erron Spalsbury
I was using every bit of the 40 minute break to measure this and measure that and adjust. here and and there to get springs swapped. I never experienced any problems with overheating and I decided to revert back to the OEM hood. I did in fact have a piece of aluminum light installed to flat bottom the nose of the car all the way to the firewall. We had a beacon set up that we were pinginig lap times of off. My lap times were pretty consistent around 2:04 without tearing up the tires too much. I did in fact lose 3rd gear entirely around 4 o'clock. The secret to your boil over problem is capacity. Add another gallon or two of coolant. It will take longer to revisit a slice of and give you more time on the track. As you know, I'm using a NASCAR radiator and no fan. It even worked with a stock hood
I was thinking about our radiator and I don't think the setup on our radiator is that good of an design. I'm looking to build a custom radiator for my car where it's dual pass instead on our .75 pass which it's how it seems to be lol. Look at this radiator here. The design is awesome. The coolant doesn't just drop down like factory and some hot coolant actually could reach the radiator outlet. In this design as you can tell the coolant goes horizontally from one side through half the radiator and drops down on the other end and comes back horizontally again to the same side it started from the other half of radiator. this should give plenty of time for coolant to cool down before going back to the engine. The only modification you need to do here is to cut and turn the upper radiator hose/ pipe 180 degree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Erron Spalsbury
http://cdn.speednik.com/files/2012/02/rad3.jpg
Lol... Good idea ;)
http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/y...psa42242cc.jpg
Where did you get that bad boy? I'm actually talking to someone who can make a bolt on one for my car and he can offer upper pipe also if anyone is interested. I already have upper hard pipe from IPS so I'll just need to cut that and weld it again with the end turning 180 degree to face the other way. Maybe we can get couple people interested in this so we can run a group buy on these?
Kinda like the C&R I used to have in my car! LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by J. Fast
http://imageshack.us/a/img93/5074/radfans.jpg
What are you running in your car now?
This radiator is 575 cubic inches. My Fluidyne is 1750 cubic inches. Three times the capacity. The next one I get will have a water to oil cooler integrated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Erron Spalsbury
Full size all aluminum one. Like the 3sx.Quote:
Originally Posted by mehrshadvr4
Was the C&R smaller in size? I'm looking to make a bigger dual pass using Griffin core. If you are interested I can ask what he will charge for two.
A little bit, yes. See in the pic are the feet towards the top of the image. It was about 2 inches shorter than a stock radiator.Quote:
Originally Posted by mehrshadvr4
Edit: Yes, please! Two should be cheaper than one, right?
Out of curiosity, how much for a third? :) I would like mounts to use my stock fans though (two AC fans).
I'll ask him about this. He said he'll look in to see how much the core would cost them he'll let me know. :) We are looking at 2.5" radiator core. I looked at koyo and it's 2" thick so It'll hold more coolant for sure. :D
How did you figure that out without the measurements?Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Fast
Still has stock radiator mounts. The spread on the stock radiator slot is like 28" and the height of the mounts is 17.5". You have an additional 2-3" standoff on the lower radiator mount and those 13.5" diameter fans overlap into the end tank like 1.5". Appears the actual core is around 25" wide and 14" high. Looks like it has 2" deep end tanks which typically tie to 1.6" core on 2" C&R radiators.Quote:
Originally Posted by Erron Spalsbury
You were close, but it was quite a bit bigger than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Fast
OK This is what we got, the only core suggested by Griffin and Becool radiator fabricators is an 18x15x2.75. He did the drawing and the overall size will end up at 24x15x3 this will cool a 1500hp drag engine or up to 800hp road race engine. As far as pricing he said $780 for one and $580 for three. It would be nice if we can get more people into this to get the price lower unless you guys are fine with this? :) Let me know if you guys are interested in this.
I'll have to measure to see if that will fit my setup. Concerned with depth.
You should only measure the 2.75" core since the tanks will make it a 3" wide. I will ask him to make the radiator as far from the engine as he can.
Just a back on track question here, as I'm planning on getting coilovers at the end of the month and have been leaning toward the Megans since they have the mounting bolt for the lines, which seems like they did more R&D than the others.
So, what do these specs look like to you guys? I was thinking of going with 10k all around, since front is 12k and rear is 8k, was gonna go with a 10k at a 50/50 biased setup like what's been found to work in this thread.
Ideas, objections, suggestions? Figured I'd ask here before I go inquiring and spending money blindly, I'm looking for a well handling road course car biased toward over steer rather than under steer. suspension is currently otherwise stock
SPRING RATES:
F: 62mm ID; 180mm length; 12 kg/mm
R: 62mm ID; 200mm length; 8 kg/mm
DAMPER SPECS:
F: 120mm stroke; 260mm length; M2 valving code
R: 115mm stroke; 240mm length; A1 valving code
M2 Valving
Attachment 5669
A1 Valving
Attachment 5670
The dampener characteristics of those are way different than mine. This is one of the dyno plots for one set of my dampeners.
http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/y...ps20341adb.jpg
I put my suspension geometry measurements and weights on a cut sheet and it was designed for this exact stance and a BFG R1 racing tire.
http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/y...ps95f618ad.jpg
I can offer no opinions on the Megans as I went down a different road and have never been in a vehicle with them setup properly.
I'll admit I don't know how to read the charts, that's why I posted up those, so someone else can observe and compare.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Fast
Also, since you posted a picture of your car, do you rub at all, being that low? You DD that car, don't you? It looks really low like you'd rub and looks like your tires stick out enough, that if you hit a pot hole you'd eat a fender, though it's hard to fully tell from the side shot
I do not rub the fenders or bottom out. I have to put 1,800lbs on a corner to bottom out. Theres just not that much weight to transfer from the adjacent corners. The highest estimated load on a corner I expect to see is roughly 1,000lbs. That's the max load rating on the tire before it deforms ;). That's 1.5" of suspension travel for me, plenty of room. There's 2.5" of compression travel till an additional 250lb bump stop.
The big thing to look at on the valving is wether or not the wheel rate will blow thru the valving at speed. If your valving tapers off to early or is too low the dampeners won't attenuate the spring/wheel travel and you'll smack the bumpstops and overwork the dampeners.
How did you go about figuring all of your weight transfer out? It sounds like you've broken down everything into variables and figured out how to calculate your requirements.Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Fast
Your shock dyno appears to be softer than the Meagan's, so I'm gonna guess I'll have the valving required?
I live in a rough roaded town, so it'd be nice to be able to calculate all of this so i can know how much I can lower and still take pot holes and such. I don't wanna have to screw with ride heights/spring rates dd vs track, I can sacrifice street drivability for track drivability. My front tires stick out a little so if I were to go too low and bottom out, I'd eat a fender.
I figured everything out by measuring and building a template... like this one http://farnorthracing.com/newimages/marked_sheet.jpg. http://farnorthracing.com/newimages/plumbob.jpg I Pretty much followed Dennis Grant's formula for modeling and planning to build a professional suspension and used WinGeo 3.5 to build a model. From there I found my own way. A good starting point was this little gem Autocross to Win (DGs Autocross Secrets) - Suspension. Once I collected all the info I had the data entered in a dynamic calculator like this... Autocross to Win (DGs Autocross Secrets) - Dynamics Calculator . Positive results followed as expected.
Something doesn't look right to me regarding the dampener plots Nihil posted. It's typical to see more rebound bias in dampeners to offset the springs. Compression dampening typically dampens unsprung mass and rebound dampening assists sprung mass. In a two degree of freedom system the springs and dampeners are coupled in compression so the rebound force should equal the total opposing forces. Is this not correct? The Megan dyno plots appear to be way off. They bias for compression (positive force on the shock dyno) and do not account for the weight of 1000lb corners coming out of compression. They only bias rebound for around 150lbs of force?
http://www.3sgto.org/attachments/tra...correct-a1.jpg
That's what I was wondering...Kinda understand the graphs, just don't know what good vs. bad is. So what you're saying here, is, and as I observe it, compression is going to be stiffer than the rebound, so, it'll take more force to compress and less to rebound, slower compression stroke and quicker rebound stroke, correct? Yours show closer to a 50/50?
Speaking from moto suspension, you typically run a more firm compression and less firm rebound, to get back to full stroke quick enough to absorb the next obstacle, though cars aren't going through as much obstacles unless offroad. So I don't know how far off meagan is or what's good vs bad.
Here's a few alternatives measured and spec'd to our chassi.
Fortune Auto 500 series: 91-99 Z15A Z16A Mitsubishi 3000GT 4WD 500 Series - Fortune Auto Coilover Superstore
http://www.fortuneautocoilovers.com/...Shock-Dyno.jpg
Bilstein:
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p...000GTStrut.jpg
Their bias to rebound is significantly different than the Megans. Megans are opposite.
That makes more sense for a car. Though, what spring rates are their valving charts set up for? I'd think, with a car, the suspension is a lot slower so more rebound vs compression would make sense
When you compress a 600lb spring 2" you load 1200lbs on it. You want to have the rebound bias to unload the spring smooth so you don't blow thru the valving. The bilstein plot is for stock springs. 300lb springs with 100lbs of compression so like 400lbs till rebound blow off. If you install double the spring rate you want to double the valving. No shocks on the market do that. A 700lb spring should have rebound bias atleast equal or greater. Megans are not an upgrade when I look at the dyno plot at all. They have no bias built-in to unload the springs. They are too soft in rebound to hold the corners down. On paper they appear to likely induce bounce.
I agree, they seem to be bouncy. I'll have to track down more graphs for the other common brands.
First time I have seen the fortune auto. What do you think about those as a budget coilover?
Fortune valving looks pretty good.
I found another shock dyno online published by Fat Cat Motorsports with valving for off the shelf JIC FL2- TAR's for the Z16A (2006). I can translate it using the averaging method and re-plot on a standard shock dyno graph.
From what I'm seeing on the graphs, the JIC hysterisis is really small and there's not big spikes or anything. My take after seeing the empirical data is Dennis Grants little rant regarding aftermarket suspensions a few years ago was a little hyped. I could see it being justified with the Megan's because the valving is absolutely miles off for the spring rates but for the most part every dyno plot posted in this thread (with the exception of Megan's) looks pretty good.
Here's some more good info and a full cycle plot of JIC's not using the averaging method.
http://i788.photobucket.com/albums/y...psa8cc360b.gif
EDIT: I also forgot to mention I have dyno plot info on the TEIN EDFC adjustables as well. If I get some time I'll post those charts up also and combine everything for our specific chassi on one dyno chart like the dyno take 2 Toni has, except it will be for dampeners (hopefully fronts and rears). KW's and Ohlin DFV's... I have that data also :)
Here's some empiricals from Greg Haye @ GT Motoring
This first average plot is for off the shelf KW's. Blue line is the front and the Black/Grey line is for the rear.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7289/8...21212bed_b.jpg
These are Ohlin DFV off the shelf valving. Blue line is full soft with low speed bleed in road setup. Grey line is full hard in track configuration.
Fronts:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7285/8...92e35ee7_b.jpg
Rears:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7286/8...c01cfa9e_b.jpg
KW's front to rear's look like they might be difficult to phase together. Off the shelf Ohlin's look much better and are closely resemble the valving for my JRZ's and Muellerized setup on my red 2G.
I've never been in a KW appointed 3/S but have some immediate questions with the front to rear progressive/digressive bias. Anyone have any ride and/or track feedback for the KW's?
Cool, I knew something was up with the JIC's.
Somewhere I have the dyno plot from mine from a few years ago.