spacey
So bananas! B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
Posts: 62 
Age:: 21
Vehicle:: 91' 180sx
|
Post by spacey on Jul 15, 2013 16:03:04 GMT 10
So i guess i should put this up because i drive an s13..... and everyone know s13 drivers are the guinea pigs for the automotive world... small, furry, and will eat any thing... any ways.... BC V1 Coil overs  I put these in my 180 the best part of 6 months ago as a some what cheap coil over because the stock suspension was showing its age... badly. I did minimal research on the interwebs, however through briefly skimming random forums i couldnt find too much negativity to towards BC as a brand, sure there wasn't any glowing reviews about how they were the best things since unicorns, but more importantly people weren't saying they were crap (see no name ebay coilovers) So i bite the bullet and forked out for the entry spec V1's, and i don't regret it in the slightest. Yes they have a reasonable spring rate... (8 front, 6 rear) so if you like your boaty comfortable feel maybe try something else, and the 30 way adjustable dampener works quite well, in the aspect that i am able to adjust it with moderate accuracy, you can really feel a difference between 5 clicks. I have also heard good things (first hand) from someone running the ER series (which has the external reservoir) on a track mx5. Pretty much what it boils down to is you're going to get what you pay for, don't expect gold plated, rainbow farting, godliness. Do however, expect a coilover which will preform more than adequately for street use, and will stand up for a beating round a track when the occasion calls for it (unsure on how they go for regular track use). So if your thinking of coilovers, they might be the cost effective option for you.... but then again.... might not be JDM enough. |
|
F@BOY
May have actually contributed something
The Walbro Man
Posts: 112
Age:: 20
Vehicle:: Sit n' Spin
|
Post by F@BOY on Jul 30, 2013 17:24:49 GMT 10
Why not KW V1's :c
|
|
spacey
So bananas! B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
Posts: 62
Age:: 21
Vehicle:: 91' 180sx
|
Post by spacey on Jul 31, 2013 13:44:40 GMT 10
ive never seen KW's before :S
|
|
F@BOY
May have actually contributed something
The Walbro Man
Posts: 112
Age:: 20
Vehicle:: Sit n' Spin
|
Post by F@BOY on Aug 1, 2013 4:07:42 GMT 10
ive never seen KW's before :S For reference, KW's are the only coilover brand on the market that will never rust or corrode, due to the materials used in construction, and the treatment processed they use, not to mention they're german so you know you're getting a great product. It blows my mind that you've never heard of (or just seen?) KW... Here are some quick links you could look at. www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticles/articletype/categoryview/categoryid/154/kw-suspensions.aspx |
|
spacey
So bananas! B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
Posts: 62
Age:: 21
Vehicle:: 91' 180sx
|
Post by spacey on Aug 2, 2013 8:28:18 GMT 10
ive never seen KW's before :S For reference, KW's are the only coilover brand on the market that will never rust or corrode, due to the materials used in construction, and the treatment processed they use, not to mention they're german so you know you're getting a great product. It blows my mind that you've never heard of (or just seen?) KW... Here are some quick links you could look at. www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticles/articletype/categoryview/categoryid/154/kw-suspensions.aspxthanks, yea i think they are a bit out of my price range, but they look like a good set, also im glad you sent me that link, ive never heard of motoiq before, ive now spent the last 2 days reading as much as i can on that web site, their articles on suspension setup are really good |
|
|
|
Post by FortKid on Aug 2, 2013 8:35:37 GMT 10
|
|
spacey
So bananas! B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
Posts: 62
Age:: 21
Vehicle:: 91' 180sx
|
Post by spacey on Aug 2, 2013 8:46:54 GMT 10
thanks, and remember all tuner stuff has its roots in race car stuff, its good to know how things work on that kind of level |
|
|
|
Post by FortKid on Aug 2, 2013 8:47:26 GMT 10
was just reading the motoiq thing on under and oversteer and it is horribly wrong.
|
|
spacey
So bananas! B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
Posts: 62
Age:: 21
Vehicle:: 91' 180sx
|
Post by spacey on Aug 2, 2013 8:52:45 GMT 10
are you talking about the tire pressures cause i always thought it was opposite to the way they put it?
|
|
|
|
Post by FortKid on Aug 2, 2013 9:04:37 GMT 10
the actual definition of over and under-steer is not anything like what that diagram says.
If the cars path is wider than the pure geometric path of the wheels, than you are under-steering. (this assumes accelleration in the inward direction, which is sort of given for cornering)
Actual over-steer is an unstable condition. Imagine of you turned the wheels x degrees and the car turned....and then kept turning until it spun. That is over-steer in its proper definition.
The term also only technically applies to steady state cornering.
That diagram on motoiq is what happens if you exceed the limit of the tires traction, at which point the terms of under and oversteer aren't really applicable anymore.
That moto iq article is effectively bro science.
|
|
|
|
Post by FortKid on Aug 2, 2013 9:06:34 GMT 10
from wikipedia:
"Standard terminology used to describe understeer and oversteer are defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) in document J670[1] and by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in document 8855.[2] By these terms, understeer and oversteer are based on differences in steady-state conditions where the vehicle is following a constant-radius path at a constant speed with a constant steering wheel angle, on a flat and level surface.
Understeer and oversteer are defined by an understeer gradient K that is a measure of how the steering needed for a steady turn changes as a function of lateral acceleration. Steering at a steady speed is compared to the steering that would be needed to follow the same circular path at low speed. The low-speed steering for a given radius of turn is called Ackermann steer. The vehicle has a positive understeer gradient if the difference between required steer and the Ackermann steer increases with respect to incremental increases in lateral acceleration. The vehicle has a negative gradient if the difference in steer decreases with respect to incremental increases in lateral acceleration.
Understeer and oversteer are formally defined using the gradient K: if K is positive, the vehicle shows understeer; if K is negative, the vehicle shows oversteer; if K is zero, the vehicle is neutral.
Several tests can be used to determine understeer gradient: constant radius (repeat tests at different speeds), constant speed (repeat tests with different steering angles), or constant steer (repeat tests at different speeds). Formal descriptions of these three kinds of testing are provided by ISO.[3] Gillespie goes into some detail on two of the measurement methods.[4]
Results depend on the type of test, so simply giving a deg/g value is not sufficient; it is also necessary to indicate the type of procedure used to measure the gradient.
Vehicles are inherently nonlinear systems, and it is normal for K to vary over the range of testing. It is possible for a vehicle to be understeer in some conditions and oversteer in others. Therefore, it is necessary to specify the speed and lateral acceleration whenever reporting understeer/oversteer characteristics."
|
|
|
|
Post by FortKid on Aug 2, 2013 9:10:05 GMT 10
All road cars understeer because actual oversteer is not stable to be driven. Unless you drive one of these:  or a dedicated formula drift car, you won't really experience a car that naturally oversteers. |
|
spacey
So bananas! B-A-N-A-N-A-S!
Posts: 62
Age:: 21
Vehicle:: 91' 180sx
|
Post by spacey on Aug 2, 2013 9:24:01 GMT 10
i think oversteer and understeer have been over simplified for people to help it make sense, and to be honest i dont have a problem with this as that wiki article says "Vehicles are inherently nonlinear systems, and it is normal for K to vary over the range of testing" but if the only thing you can fault them on is there over simplified definitions, id say their doing alright, especially due to the excessive misinformation on the net today
|
|
|
|
Post by FortKid on Aug 2, 2013 9:26:51 GMT 10
it isn't simplified it is WRONG
they are taking a term that has a defined meaning by the society of automotive engineers and using it to describe something that it isn't.
That is what is called "wrong".
|
|
The Possum
Spends way too much time here
Still likes his own dick though.
Posts: 432
|
Post by The Possum on Aug 5, 2013 23:19:59 GMT 10
I love it when threads get nerdy.
|
|
