I have an 05 auto: I have a type s bar on the rear and everything else is stock.....what should my next move be? I was thinking ct rear and type s solid front.....then maybe tracking down an aspec coilover setup. I want to retain 17inch wheels. Any other mods that i should do while I am doing suspension?

 

are the aspecs hard to find?

 

So, I have it on 2 good sources that no less than 3 different TSXs are running 2" hollow bars on their RACE cars.

As such I am still thinking a 22 on a TSX is small for improved handling, and a 24 on a TL might also be improved upon, even for the street. If a racecar is running that huge of a hollow bar, 50mm+, then I can't see why a 25-27mm rear bar would not make an improvement on the street on a car with good tires and suspension. Maybe relativity doesn't work this way, and bigger isn't better...but 27mm hollow bar with 4-5 adjustment points should give really great handling on the street.

 

Absolutely not on a street car!

Race cars have spring rates where the inherent disadvantages to a large swaybar are not so bad.

Throw a 50mm bar on a car with a stock, a-spec, or most any aftermarket offering and it's going to cause all kinds of issues.

For real handling you want stiff springs, not large swaybars.

I would also check that info. The 2" bar may have a longer leverage point too making the overall stiffness less than you would think.

With what you're suggesting, you would be picking up the inside tire on any moderate turn. It would be impossible to put the power down exiting a turn with the inside tire off the ground. Not to mention best traction is with all 4 tires on the ground.

 

Yes but what I am saying is that folks running Tein SS set firmer and other more aggressive systems than the Aspec might benefit from more diameter than a 22mm bar.

As a matter of fact one of the racers I was speaking w yesterday was having the problem of picking up inside front tire but they only had a 22mm CT bar. They are thinking a larger bar might actually be needed to keep the attitude of the car flat. 2 other teams were running bars in the 2" range, one of the was realtime.

Actually for the wheel lift issue I was wondering if indeed more chassis bracing would help.

 

sorry more than 22m in case of tsx, 24 in case of heavier tl.

 

The problem is, it's not picking up the inside wheel from body roll. It's either too short of springs or most likely the swaybar is picking it up. It's extremely rare for a car to be able to pick up the inside tire from cornering alone.

 

As a matter of fact I was also told the front bar on the car was too large, my source told me. The rear bar I can't see contributing to the front wheel coming up... A larger rear and smaller front in this mentality would help the car.

Anyway, just spicing up the conversation again.

 

We need spice lol. Discussions like this help the entire board, no matter who's right and who's wrong.

I didn't know it was the front tire that was leaving the ground. That might make it kind of hard to put the power down exiting a corner lol.

Too stiff of a rear bar won't make the front tire leave the ground, that's for sure. As the spring rates go up, the negatives of large bars go down somewhat.

The only thing I would watch out for is running lowering springs that don't have enough droop which can cause this problem.

Here's what happens when you have waaay to large or a rear bar coupled with short springs lol..... This is one of those instances where you just made your modded car handle worse than stock.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rHr4aQZg4c

 

But don't the lengths of the dampers dictate the droop? The 3-wheeling in the driveway is a function of having a rigid chassis, firm rsb, and lowered ride. And I think this is the perfect example of a good chassis and a performance suspension, but clearly does not have the articulation and travel needed for the street.

But picking up the rear inside tire on a FF car under hard braking and cornering is IMO the nature of the beast. It is an indicator to me that the car is set up well enough and being driven hard BECAUSE the front tires are gripping so much. Only way this would be bad is if it was causing instability.

Obviously this is not wanted on a FR car, but on an FF the rear is just following and as long as it is stable you want the most traction in the front as possible.

 

I should've clarified that. The dampers do dictate the droop, many aftermarket have less travel.

You really want all 4 tires on the ground. I've been over on the road racing forums, specifically some of the Miatas and RX-7s. Those guys seem to really know their stuff and that's where I went when trying to get an idea of where to go with the TL. It's not too out of the ordinary for a FWD car to lift a tire on good rubber when cornering at the max but it's something you want to avoid if possible.

That car in the video is horrendous. The only place it *might* do ok at is a track with no bumps. The suspension basically has no preload. As it goes over imperfections, specifically dips there's no suspension to follow the road resulting in the tires losing contact.

The RX7 guys are running pretty sane spring rates because like the TL they go into negative camber as the body leans so it's not as big of a deal to have a little lean as it is in most cars. You're better off firming up the ride a little and concentrating on the balance rather than getting every last degree of roll taken out of it.

After my installation of the H&R front bar, I needed more rear stiffness than the Progress bar would give me. The Progress bar is ok but borderline too stiff for the a-spec springs I'm running so instead of drilling another set of holes in the rear bar and firming it up some more to bring the balance back, I opted to stiffen the rear springs about 30%. This exceeded my expectations. The left and right sides don't feel so tied together like they used to.

I'm not saying it would be a bad idea to offer stiffer swaybars for the TL but you would need to market them as a race only product and only for people that are already running a stiff spring. I could only imagine the trouble people would get themselves into running a 28mm rear bar on a stock suspension car.

The problem is, people around here don't try and understand how things work or how different suspension mods interact with each other. They need a "kit" with all the research already done.

A set of race springs, Koni yellows, and large bars with a very neutral balance along with no more than a 1.5" drop (usable suspension travel kills a huge drop), type S tophats for non type s models would be an awesome setup to market as a "race" suspension kit. As far as I'm aware, no one offers an entire kit.

One thing I can say is that the H&R bars are made of a stronger material than the Progress. The H&R bars feel larger than they really are.

 

The anti-swaybar is not a spring. If both sides of the car go up, then, No change in ride quality. If both sides of the car go down, then A ok! No change in ride quality.

But if you go into a curve and one side goes up while the other side bears down, then that motion puts a twist on the bar. So, the more ridged the bar, the more it resists the twisting, and it keeps the car more flat in a curve. You have to think about the 90 degree angle of the bar on both ends.

remember.. I'm the engineer. haha

 

Opinions vary.

http://www.acuraautomotiveparts.org/...s=&view=normal

 

right. it stabizes the springs. or "spring stabilizer".

The chassis is suspended in air by the springs.

The chassis movement is controlled by anti-sway bars, pan hard bar,shocks, etc etc..

 

The swaybar IS a torsional spring. I thought you were a Mechanical engineer? Dude, come on, this is basic.

When one wheel hits a bump and the other doesn't, the bar twists, becoming a spring effectively increasing spring rates at the outside wheels. Ever hear of torsion bar suspension many trucks have used for years? Not sure why you have to come on here and try and prove me wrong all the time when you yourself are ALWAYS wrong.

 

You just described a torsional spring.

 

A torsion bar is a spring.

Industrial Engineers know this too.

 

ok I'll agree to a torsional spring. but only when one side is higher or lower than the other side. And it doesnt really make the car ride rougher by having a heavier duty anti-sway bar. So all it does is resist the swaying effect of body. (And no, I'm Electrical. )

 

Gotcha. There are two of you on here.

That's exactly how it works. Does nothing when both sides hit a bump evenly and becomes a spring when only one wheel hits a bump or the body leans.

If you go big enough you'll eventually see a ride comfort decrease but not so much with the popular ones for the TL. With my front H&R bar, ride quality definitely took a hit because every imperfection in the road that only affects one side is felt. The bar is something in the order of 600% stiffer than the OEM auto trans bar. This is as far as I'm willing to go on a daily driver. It's still at the point where I can take co-workers out in it and they don't notice the ride is bad but anymore than this and I would likely get comments.

 

well, this is where the opinion comes in. I dont necessarily disagree with you but I think you're axaggerating it somewhat. And this 600% thing is saying 6 times more resistive to sway. I think that sounds high given the fact that these TL's can only mount a 27 or 28mm anti-sway bar. On my Camaro, I had a 35mm/25mm sway bar. http://www.lmperformance.com/830/17.html

What we really need to find out is the torque rating. like pounds per inch. That will tell you exactly if its 6 times more resistive to sway. Also, one thing people forget is not all 28mm bars are created equal. I had metal shop in highschool and there are different ways to harden metal. So depending upon how the bar was hardened, then one 28mm bar may resist more or less than another. So again, its best to judge a sway bar by its torque rating not the millimeters

 

I checked it out on the calculator. 25mm hollow to 28mm solid. Going from a mild steel to chromemoly. Huge increase in stiffness. 6 times stiffer doesn't equal 6 times more resistance to sway. If that were true, the car would have no sway.

The H&R bar has a shorter leverage arm, stronger material, solid vs hollow, and a 3mm increase.

In fact, I just did it again and I get a 617% increase just from 25mm hollow to 28mm solid not taking into account the lever arm.

Here it is. http://buildafastercar.com/tech/Sway...ate-Calculator

 

well, I like how the calculator takes into account material and arm length so at least someone is thinking right. But you said "600% stiffer than OEM". well, to me that still doesnt say much. 600 times what? 600 times 0 is 0. 600 times 2 is 1200. Is an OEM swaybar = to 1 2 or 3? So, If it takes 20,000 to keep a TL flat in a curve then how much do we have now? So X times 600% = "something". So 600% may be a little more or a lot more.. How am I suppose to know what 600% feels like? Because I don't knwo how much I have now or how much I need to stay flat in a curve.

Nevertheless, even if we could put a definately number on how much sway a solid bar can handle, it is still subjective to the weight of the car and how stiff the springs are. Because springs do actually help to keep a car flat even though thats not its primary purpose. And that varies from car to car. So then we REALLY don't knwo how much it will sway. because 600 times X = something; and spring tensions are different and cars don't weigh the same.

 

I've never made any claims as to what body roll reduction might be. All I stated is the H&R FSB is over 600% stiffer than the stock swaybar. You say "stiffer than what" and go off on a tangent. I already stated 600% stiffer than the stock bar. It seems like you're trying to argue for argument's sake.

Check out the bump rate in the same calculator and that will give you an idea of the stock bar and aftermarket bar. Everyone here is well aware of weight, CG, geometry, and everything else that effects roll. The point being, you can't have a 600% increase in spring rate without noticing a decrease in ride quality.

If I had to guess, I would say that 600% increase cut roll in half.

The bar will lift up the inside wheel during hard conrnering. It works off of the existing springs. If you increase coil spring rate, it also changes swaybar effectiveness too.

I guess if you want to know the answers you're going to have to get out there in the real world and try it for yourself.

 

well, even if the thing is 600% stiffer, I don't think that translates 1 for 1 a totally stiffer ride. Just because my car goes over a bump or in a pot hole, for 1/2 a jizz, the car stays like 99% flat. Springs and Shocks has far more to do with ride quality than a sway bar. just my 2 cents.

 

No one has ever disputed this.

Swaybars offer the best roll resistance for the least amount of ride quality penalty. Otherwise swaybars wouldn't exist and we would all run stiff springs.

However, I suspect most of the TL's roll resistance is from the swaybars, especially Type-S models.

Running a 600% stiffer swaybar and hitting a pothole doesn't mean it's going to feel 600% harder. Look at the lb/in swaybar figures per wheel and in relation to the coil springs and it will give you an indication of overall stiffness change. This is the only true way to determine ride quality change and even this has it's limitations.

Running stock springs with an ultra stiff swaybar will let the swaybar lift the untouched wheel a little when the other side hits a pothole reducing the impact felt.

What this also does is reduce the independence of the suspension which is bad. This is why you can't just run super stiff swaybars with soft springs.

And remember, body roll is just one part of the game. Many more factors involved in getting a car to handle than just roll. In fact the TL goes into negative camber when it leans so all in all, a little lean is not a bad thing in a TL. Keeping the tires planted on the ground over bumps is.

 

The sway bar will have different effective stiffness given the height of the car as well because of the attitude of the lever arms (arms of the sway bar and the angle of actuation the endlinks input), so let's not forget to make this issue really complicated!

This is why we sell adjustable endlinks.




I hate cars - the lean is not what causes the camber effect, it is compression. This is why static neg camber is not necessarily a bad thing. You get the contact patch of a loaded suspension without needing to load it. Lean is not good though because it reflects a change in center of gravity toward the outside of the car making a loss of traction more disastrous. Once that weight gets going its harder to stop it.

Compliance is a good thing, I agree with that was well. But only to a point. This is where body control (ie, good dampers) comes into play. Large bumps should be absorbed, smaller ones should not as much, and none should upset the chassis. But as a swaybar will help prevent lean this gives a greater feeling of stability without having to sacrifice ride, a larger bar in the rr of a FWD is a great idea in a lot of cases.




Sorry if my comments don't fit the conversation, I didn't really read the last few posts very well.

 

Actually the height makes no difference on swaybar stiffness. It's free to pivot in it's bushings, the same as when you hit a speed bump with both sides at the same time.

The adjustable endlinks are for preload.


The CG doesn't change that much during lean. You may be thinking of instant center.

The lean is compression of the outside springs.

Most cars go into positive camber with the outside of the tires going outward as the car leans which is very bad. The more it leans the less traction you have. With the TL it's the opposite and it's the reason why it doesn't require much if any negative camber to corner well.

It's really great that the TL can have a flat contact patch during straight driving for maximum braking and acceleration and have the suspension go into negative camber as it corners, counteracting the tire's natural tendency to go into positive camber. The point is to have the tire flat, not positive and maybe just a touch of negative while loaded in a corner.

What you want is a car that takes a set quickly in a corner. You don't want to turn the wheel and have it keep leaning and finally lose traction as it finally settles out.

I agree with you here. The suspension's purpose is to keep the tire flat and in contact with the road at all times. That's why ultra stiff or too much shock damping is not a good thing on the street in real life. The car will become skittish over bumps. Same with too soft.

Still though, swaybars are supposed to be balance tools, not the sole bodyroll reducer. You're still better off with stiff springs and small bars as long as you don't mind the ride penalty. I ordered my large swaybars knowing I was making a big compromise.


No worries, it's a lot to read. The more I get into this, the more I learn and realize how much I didn't know. I've been hanging out on the roadrace forums for a while now and doing my own experiments with the TL that will hopefully benefit those who are looking to truly corner better.

 

I was just reviewing the "pothole" effect. I was looking in my manual but couldnt see a clear picture of the TL but I think it works just like it did on my old camaro. The sway bar did not even touch the wheel and it was not effected by the wheel movement. The ends of the sway bar is connected to the body of the car and the bushings that holds the sway bar in place, secure it to the subframe. So the wheel movement from hitting bumps or holes doesn't have anything to do with the sway bar controlling the body from leaning left or right. So you can forget about pot-holes. Or "A stiff ride" from having a more heavy duty anti-sway bar.

 

when I say stiff ride, I mean a "harsher" ride as a result from hitting bumps. because the sway bar does not press down or up on the wheels!! Both ends are connected to the body of the car. So when you go into a curve, the car leans and this puts a torque on the bar itself. And thus we know a heavier bar will resist that lean.

 

I'm done trying to explain this to you. All I can say is research it more. This is basic knowledge.

 

all you have to do is look at it. That's how I approach any problem. Just look at it. Literally. crawl up under your car and look at it. It's only a metal bar sitting there. And you can see what it is attached to. A few years ago, I realized how many components of the suspension are independant of each other. And each one serves a specific purpose. And since the name above calls the bar a spring stabilizer, all that means is that the bar has some bending to it when a force is applied and then it recovers from the force as a spring should. But that doesn't mean it's a spring for the vertical movement of the car. No. It's a bar that resists body sway, not tire movement in the vertical direction.

 

Its threads like this that keep me coming back to the 3G section...seriously if I see one more thread about stretching tires and slamming i'm going to choke a bunny.

 

Figure it out Chad. You're still not getting it. You get no more help from me because you think you have it all figured out.

 

whatever bro.

 

aside from ^ the rsb promotes under steer, yeah?

 

Oversteer, tail happiness. The 24mm an auto trans TL with the stock hollow 25mm front bar will make it a bit tail happy but not too bad. The 24mm with the stock TL-S front bar should be just right.

 

That's one of the problems I've found, I expected to come in here, search around a little, and make a decision on a suspension based on performance. Instead, this forum is biased toward looks over function but it's kind of fun doing the research.

 

So tell me guys, is 2kg rear coilover spring increase a tail happy conclusion. Will it just make the car more balanced?