SCCAForums.com

I know it's the nature of the beast for a front drive car to have some wheel spin on acceleration, but  my co driver from yesterday (owned and raced nationally in a similarly prepared  car)  and I think it's excessive. 

STS classed Suspension and tire set up is as follows:

Bushings were upgraded but I forgot which brand.  DOH!

GC coilovers with koni shortened and revalved spss race shocks with 450 front springs and 600 rear (Note his car had off the shelf Koni sports that were not shortened, so big difference in droop) Spring perch is set in the lowest (closest to the ground) setting

ST rear sway bar set at full firm 

No front Sway bar but spun the wheels with a CF bar also

15 inch Shaved Bridgestone RE01R's with 60 runs on them

Camber: 3.2 front and 3 rear

When I say excessive, 100 feet of spin coming out of a turnaround. The front suspension doesn't seem to droop much when the front end is raised, maybe 1.5 inches. I think  that may have something to do with it. Is there any way to shim the top of the shock to bring down the a arms?  Any thoughts? Co driver thinks we left 2 seconds on a 60 second course due to wheel spin. Help please!!

 

Dominic 

---

Dominic
70 914/6

89 STS Civic Si

That looks like a lot of front camber combined with not enough rear bar.

I second that.

---

125 STS '89 Civic Si
RPGproduction.com/Toyo Tires/Moton/NABC-Ethanol Racing

WAYYYY too much front camber for that car.....and rear for that matter.....

 

Try taking tire temps at the next event and see what the difference is between the outside and inside. I'm going to guess its pretty significant even without any wheel spin.

Your braking will suffer from that alignment as well.

---

I live my life one cone at a time........

Thanks for the quick replies! I took the specs off a reputable shop's website, thinking they were gospel! I guess nothing is carved in stone in racing.

Any recommendations on the camber setting for both front and rear? It'll be a two driver car in case that matters.

Which bar for the rear?  

---

Dominic
70 914/6

89 STS Civic Si

I agree, too much camber...My CRX Si suffers the same fate, so I'm currently looking for Skunk 2 upper control arms with adjustable ball joints...

---

OzCop

"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

Lots of front rebound will hold the inside wheel in the air in a corner.

---

2007 Mazda MX-5 MRS (C-stock)

DominicL:

The front suspension doesn't seem to droop much when the front end is raised, maybe 1.5 inches.

That seems mighty odd. Your setup sounds awfully similar to mine and in addition to not having much wheelspin problems, with no front bar the suspension just droops and droops and droops in the front when I jack it up.

---

Brian Davis, 89 Civic Si, 158 STS

I would recommend the ASR rear 32mm bar, a couple pounds lighter and significantly more responsive with less rear camber, -2.6 front and -1.7 ish would be a good starting point.....

---

Jason Tipple
REALSPEED/
2001 STS national champ
2007 FSP national champ

mitchman:

Lots of front rebound will hold the inside wheel in the air in a corner.

 The Konis are set on full soft, although i did try full firm  to see if I could hold the inside wheel from coming up. No difference to a little worse.

turbohappy:

with no front bar the suspension just droops and droops and droops in the front when I jack it up.

I'm going to look into it tonight, Brian. I got the car off the trailer and into the garage. BTW, are your front shocks shortened?  I think my shocks may be too short. I can't get any less camber then what I have with the ingalls adjusters and the shortened shocks. Going to disconnect the shock from the top and see what happens when I lift the car up. Besides alignment, I believe this is part of the problem. Maybe I can shim the shock down a bit.............

---

Dominic
70 914/6

89 STS Civic Si

REALSPEED74STS:

I would recommend the ASR rear 32mm bar, a couple pounds lighter and significantly more responsive with less rear camber, -2.6 front and -1.7 ish would be a good starting point.....

 

Thank you Jason. I was looking at that same piece on Cy Lee's STX car this past Sunday. Looks a helluva lot more durable then the ST bar.

---

Dominic
70 914/6

89 STS Civic Si

DominicL:

REALSPEED74STS:

I would recommend the ASR rear 32mm bar, a couple pounds lighter and significantly more responsive with less rear camber, -2.6 front and -1.7 ish would be a good starting point.....

 

Thank you Jason. I was looking at that same piece on Cy Lee's STX car this past Sunday. Looks a helluva lot more durable then the ST bar.

I don't know if you knew this but my car was once owned by Jason -- he won Nats in STS in '01 with it. 

Anyway, I missed Sunday's event, we could've talked.  It looks like I'll be selling the ASR rear bar soon.  Let me know if you're interested and we'll talk price.  Nothing wrong with it, quite the opposite, it's a really nice piece. 

Your problem is interesting.  I've seen your car around but haven't taken a real close look.  Even if your camber settings aren't ideal, they don't seem "off" enough to be costing you 2 seconds without something else going on.  Will you be at Citizen's Bank Park this Sunday? 

---

Cy
Evo 9 RS

I played around with camber once on my red car. Lowered the car onto the bump stops so it had over -4* of static camber. The DL1 didn't show but a few hundreths of a second time lost to 60'. Wheelspin was only the tiniest bit worse, and braking performance wasn't affected very much either. Peak accel g's at peak lateral g's dropped by ~.01, with a minor increase in wheelspin which could have been just as easily been attributed to an increase in lateral grip (~.02). CN: I don't think it's your camber settings.

I think your problem is coming from excessive chassis roll and an excessive roll stiffness imbalance front vs. rear. With how soft your front springs are, your lack of droop travel is also an issue if 1.5" of droop is the number you grabbed at the wheel. I would recommend upping your front spring rates by 50-75%, adding back in a front bar (the bigger the better, a 2nd gen GSR front bar is a good start), and dialing out some of your rear camber. You also want to make sure that you have at least 2.5" of droop at the wheel from your static ride height. If not, get the droop limiters in the shock shortened (will require getting them rebuilt again) or if you can, lower the car until you do.

---

Nate Whipple
NER
188/88 DSP ITR

solo-x:

I played around with camber once on my red car. Lowered the car onto the bump stops so it had over -4* of static camber. The DL1 didn't show but a few hundreths of a second time lost to 60'. Wheelspin was only the tiniest bit worse, and braking performance wasn't affected very much either. Peak accel g's at peak lateral g's dropped by ~.01, with a minor increase in wheelspin which could have been just as easily been attributed to an increase in lateral grip (~.02). CN: I don't think it's your camber settings.

 

What are these numbers compared to?

---

I live my life one cone at a time........

DominicL:

I'm going to look into it tonight, Brian. I got the car off the trailer and into the garage. BTW, are your front shocks shortened?  I think my shocks may be too short. I can't get any less camber then what I have with the ingalls adjusters and the shortened shocks. Going to disconnect the shock from the top and see what happens when I lift the car up. Besides alignment, I believe this is part of the problem. Maybe I can shim the shock down a bit.............

Yes, they are. I wonder if it's something else though, like bushings binding or something.

---

Brian Davis, 89 Civic Si, 158 STS

Whiplash_Motorsports:

solo-x:

I played around with camber once on my red car. Lowered the car onto the bump stops so it had over -4* of static camber. The DL1 didn't show but a few hundreths of a second time lost to 60'. Wheelspin was only the tiniest bit worse, and braking performance wasn't affected very much either. Peak accel g's at peak lateral g's dropped by ~.01, with a minor increase in wheelspin which could have been just as easily been attributed to an increase in lateral grip (~.02). CN: I don't think it's your camber settings.

 

What are these numbers compared to?

same car, same tires, same toe settings, same day, same pressures, but with the ride height 1.5" higher. if you're looking for peak numbers, those are nearly useless when trying to compare other cars. You have to include noise from chassis roll, installation angles of the logger, etc. For example, Andy's logger showed g forces in his STS car that my DSP R would LOVE to hit. Like a dyno, best to compare same car, same day, same logger, with no changes to installation offset.

---

Nate Whipple
NER
188/88 DSP ITR

Cy:

DominicL:

REALSPEED74STS:

I would recommend the ASR rear 32mm bar, a couple pounds lighter and significantly more responsive with less rear camber, -2.6 front and -1.7 ish would be a good starting point.....

 

Thank you Jason. I was looking at that same piece on Cy Lee's STX car this past Sunday. Looks a helluva lot more durable then the ST bar.

I don't know if you knew this but my car was once owned by Jason -- he won Nats in STS in '01 with it. 

Anyway, I missed Sunday's event, we could've talked.  It looks like I'll be selling the ASR rear bar soon.  Let me know if you're interested and we'll talk price.  Nothing wrong with it, quite the opposite, it's a really nice piece. 

Your problem is interesting.  I've seen your car around but haven't taken a real close look.  Even if your camber settings aren't ideal, they don't seem "off" enough to be costing you 2 seconds without something else going on.  Will you be at Citizen's Bank Park this Sunday? 

Yes, Cy I will be there. I took off the front wheels to see if I could adjust some of the negative camber out and the passenger side tire was worn on the inside edge, probably from spinning so much. The left tire is worn similar but not as much. For whatever the reason, I'm not getting the full contact patch down. It's not only in the turns but also when launching the car. This is what makes me believe it's more related to the lack of droop. I'm down to about 2.5 negative on the front wheels now which is all i can get with the Ingalls adjusters on the car now. Out of the full width, I'd say 5 inches of the inside of the tire is worn. I was talking to Eric on Sunday but not much about the problem I was having. It was brought to my attention by Scott Boito who co drove the car Sunday. He said his sts prepped Civic had nowhere near the wheelspin that my car had and felt he (we!) should have been closer to Eric's time.

If the rear bar is for sale, I'm interested.  I may be interested in the tires you have for sale as well.

 

Thanks,

Dominic 

---

Dominic
70 914/6

89 STS Civic Si

turbohappy:

DominicL:

 BTW, are your front shocks shortened? 

Yes, they are. I wonder if it's something else though, like bushings binding or something.

I'll find out tonight when I disconnect the shock but I have a hunch that the shocks have been shortened a bunch. I shot an email to Proparts to see if I could dig up some specs on them. We'll see.

 And this is what i like most of this sport besides the adrenaline rush. Everyone helps everyone!! Thanks to all and I'll report back soon.
 

---

Dominic
70 914/6

89 STS Civic Si

DominicL:

Cy:

Will you be at Citizen's Bank Park this Sunday?

Yes, Cy I will be there.

Cool.  My Civic will be there; if you haven't figured it out by then, we can compare cars side-by-side and see if anything is obviously different.  1.5" of droop isn't normal.  If it's not the shocks maybe something is binding (like Brian said) -- or is the wrong part, installed incorrectly, broken, bent or ??.  Your setup (spring rates, camber, swaybars, etc.) sounds pretty much "by the book" and should work well and without the crazy wheelspin you have. 

DominicL:

If the rear bar is for sale, I'm interested.  I may be interested in the tires you have for sale as well.

The rear bar is now pretty much spoken for (since my earlier post).  I'm swimming in tires, though, I'll give you a good deal...   

---

Cy
Evo 9 RS

solo-x:

I played around with camber once on my red car. Lowered the car onto the bump stops so it had over -4* of static camber. The DL1 didn't show but a few hundreths of a second time lost to 60'. Wheelspin was only the tiniest bit worse, and braking performance wasn't affected very much either. Peak accel g's at peak lateral g's dropped by ~.01, with a minor increase in wheelspin which could have been just as easily been attributed to an increase in lateral grip (~.02). CN: I don't think it's your camber settings.

I think your problem is coming from excessive chassis roll and an excessive roll stiffness imbalance front vs. rear. With how soft your front springs are, your lack of droop travel is also an issue if 1.5" of droop is the number you grabbed at the wheel. I would recommend upping your front spring rates by 50-75%, adding back in a front bar (the bigger the better, a 2nd gen GSR front bar is a good start), and dialing out some of your rear camber. You also want to make sure that you have at least 2.5" of droop at the wheel from your static ride height. If not, get the droop limiters in the shock shortened (will require getting them rebuilt again) or if you can, lower the car until you do.

Yes i double checked it tonight and it's 1.5 passenger side and 1.25 on the drivers side. How much does it effect the handling if the a arms aren't parallel  to the ground? On my car they are already pointing up. I can go lower but was concerned about this. I had a hunch that this was due in part to the lack of droop.

 

---

Dominic
70 914/6

89 STS Civic Si