Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 51

Thread: Auto Dynasty Lowering Springs from Amazon.

  1. #11
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Mitsu
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    1,359
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    256
    Thanked 305 Times in 239 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Eggman View Post
    This makes sense to me, as I would expect most of the weight of this platform is on the front suspension.

    I'm curious - does anyone know the weight distribution on these cars? Has anyone measured?

    We had weight distribution discussion a while back and it is something like 61/39 as I recall. This has little bearing on spring rates as there are other factors such as anti-roll bar and mechanical leverage to take into consideration. Otherwise you don't see whole picture.

    Stiff front + soft rear = understeer, and this is not what you want.

    From measurements AD rear springs are ~20% stiffer than stock, and they work well with TEIN rear shocks, much better than OEMs and TEIN. No seesaw, no bottoming out or topping out like with 2 others. Cannot simply try fronts because TEIN shocks need square end at the bottom.


        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 46.4 mpg (US) ... 19.7 km/L ... 5.1 L/100 km ... 55.7 mpg (Imp)


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to cyclopathic For This Useful Post:

    Littlestan (04-07-2016)

  3. #12
    Mileage Miser
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Abbotsford
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    144
    Thanks
    56
    Thanked 41 Times in 28 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by namco View Post
    I wish that Auto Dynasty would put what the spring rates actually are.

    The oem springs arent stiffer. As i wrote in my review, the rear is so stiff now that when high speed hard conering the rear skitters. Kind of like hopping.
    I think what's happening is we're having a difference in definition perspective.

    You're saying, correctly, that the *result* of replacing the rear OEM springs with the Amazon rear springs is a stiffer ride.

    I'm saying, correctly, that the rear OEM springs are notably stiffer as I have physically confirmed previously.

    If you take a quick look under the car with the Amazon rears installed, you'll notice what I did;
    practically ALL the first stage is preloaded and compressed. This is a result from too soft a
    spring. A progressive spring needs to retain some of it's first stage compression in order to
    function as it was intended. The resulting stiffness you are feeling is akin to bolting a solid piece
    of steel in place; stiff but unforgiving.

    I think we're on the same wavelength but talking about different things.

  4. #13
    Moderator Eggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Ohio ☼
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    3,121
    Thanks
    2,098
    Thanked 755 Times in 560 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cyclopathic View Post
    We had weight distribution discussion a while back and it is something like 61/39 as I recall. This has little bearing on spring rates as there are other factors such as anti-roll bar and mechanical leverage to take into consideration. Otherwise you don't see whole picture.

    Stiff front + soft rear = understeer, and this is not what you want.
    So, are you saying that the front spring rate is the same as the rear?

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 49.6 mpg (US) ... 21.1 km/L ... 4.7 L/100 km ... 59.6 mpg (Imp)


  5. #14
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Mitsu
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    1,359
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    256
    Thanked 305 Times in 239 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Littlestan View Post
    I think what's happening is we're having a difference in definition perspective.

    You're saying, correctly, that the *result* of replacing the rear OEM springs with the Amazon rear springs is a stiffer ride.

    I'm saying, correctly, that the rear OEM springs are notably stiffer as I have physically confirmed previously.

    If you take a quick look under the car with the Amazon rears installed, you'll notice what I did;
    practically ALL the first stage is preloaded and compressed. This is a result from too soft a
    spring. A progressive spring needs to retain some of it's first stage compression in order to
    function as it was intended. The resulting stiffness you are feeling is akin to bolting a solid piece
    of steel in place; stiff but unforgiving.

    I think we're on the same wavelength but talking about different things.
    They are not progressive they are dual rate and designed to have ~150lbs on compression and ~50lbs on rebound. As a result the resonance frequency for compression and rebound is different and it helps to eliminate seesaw.

    It has been a while since we had OEM shocks but the impression I had they had too little rebound damping.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 46.4 mpg (US) ... 19.7 km/L ... 5.1 L/100 km ... 55.7 mpg (Imp)


  6. #15
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Mitsu
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    1,359
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    256
    Thanked 305 Times in 239 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Eggman View Post
    So, are you saying that the front spring rate is the same as the rear?
    They are stiffer but not by much when compared to OEM fronts. Definitely stiffer than AD rears. .they have more uncompressed coils than rear but are wound up us using thicker wire. I will take a look at them on weekend

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 46.4 mpg (US) ... 19.7 km/L ... 5.1 L/100 km ... 55.7 mpg (Imp)


  7. #16
    Mileage Miser
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Abbotsford
    Country
    Canada
    Posts
    144
    Thanks
    56
    Thanked 41 Times in 28 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cyclopathic View Post
    They are not progressive they are dual rate and designed to have ~150lbs on compression and ~50lbs on rebound. As a result the resonance frequency for compression and rebound is different and it helps to eliminate seesaw.

    It has been a while since we had OEM shocks but the impression I had they had too little rebound damping.
    Dual rate springs are just another type of progressive rate spring. However, a dual rate springs progression is from a first rate (flex rate) to a second rate (ride or road rate) as opposed to the continually changing rate of a traditional progressive rate spring.

    And I can personally testify to noticeable 'seesaw' with the rear
    AD's installed versus nearly none with the rear OEM's. As you
    say, the shock dampening has a lot to do with how these
    behave, but I cannot suggest using the rear AD's to anyone
    running the stock shocks for anything other than looks.

  8. #17
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Mitsu
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    1,359
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    256
    Thanked 305 Times in 239 Posts
    @Stan with TEIN dampers which are designed for lower ride height we experienced opposite: seesaw on OEM springs and in addition to that topping out. The ride height was almost 2" higher. With AD springs travel is about 4.5" on compression. With OEMs it is ~6" with 2” less on rebound. This is spring limited I suspect you see different picture if OEM shocks limit compression stroke.

    Also we had installed 3/8” vinyl tubing on middle section, which should have increased ride height by 3/4" and also changed balance point.

    With regards to fronts initial impression they are stiffer than stock but not by much. The reduction in body roll you see is likely due to lower height not stiffer spring rate. I will try to make measurements to see how they compare to stocks.

    TEIN basis springs are rated 168/118lbs f/r (3/2.1kg). AD rated 175/205. We all know 205 rear is bogus, by loading rear and doing crude estimates they are ~20% stiffer than OEMs and TEIN rears.

    We have UR sway bar coming in couple days, and I will have to stiffen front springs because as is it blows on big hits. Unlike OEM TEIN shocks don't have enough damping on impact and need stiffer spring rates I will see what can be done there.

    If I were doing this again on the budget, and as namco pointed out it is hard to justify anything expensive for this car, I would put AD springs, do tubing on rears, replace rear shocks and then look for cheaper rear sway bar. Put better tires and camber bolts.

    $70 for springs, $5 for vinyl tubing, $80 for pair of shocks, $12 for camber kit. RT-43s are ~$60ea, the only expensive part is the sway bar..

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 46.4 mpg (US) ... 19.7 km/L ... 5.1 L/100 km ... 55.7 mpg (Imp)


  9. The Following User Says Thank You to cyclopathic For This Useful Post:

    Littlestan (04-08-2016)

  10. #18
    Moderator Eggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Ohio ☼
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    3,121
    Thanks
    2,098
    Thanked 755 Times in 560 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by cyclopathic View Post
    They are not progressive they are dual rate and designed to have ~150lbs on compression and ~50lbs on rebound.
    This is interesting information. Where did you get this from? Also, I didn't know springs would act different from compression and rebound.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 49.6 mpg (US) ... 21.1 km/L ... 4.7 L/100 km ... 59.6 mpg (Imp)


  11. #19
    Where's the leak ma'am? Marklovski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Seattle
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    354
    Thanks
    63
    Thanked 88 Times in 64 Posts
    Don't get the Teins Street Basis. They have loads of problems on a bunch of cars.
    Fuel Log: Good enough
    Instagram: @zoras_sapphire

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Marklovski For This Useful Post:

    Littlestan (04-08-2016)

  13. #20
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Mitsu
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    1,359
    Garage empty: add car
    Thanks
    256
    Thanked 305 Times in 239 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Eggman View Post
    This is interesting information. Where did you get this from? Also, I didn't know springs would act different from compression and rebound.
    Springs are wound with the same gage wire, so the stiffness is defined by number of coils engaged. If you look at the pictures in this thread http://mirageforum.com/forum/showthr...-spring-thread there's roughly 3.5 coils in compressed state, and another 6 locked out. So the rate should be 3.5/9.5 or ~1/3 on rebound. The wind in middle section is pretty uniform so it is pretty much on/off no transition. For the part of rebound stroke middle section stays locked.

    With vinyl tubing gap between middle coils was ~1/4", and there is ~390lbs of load per rear wheel. Compressing first stage gives 1/4"*9 = 2.25" * 50lbs =113lbs, then 265lbs/150 = ~1.75" of 2nd stage.

    Interestingly without vinyl tubing we'd have 3.4" 170lbs of 1st stage 1.4" of 2nd stage for 0.8" loser ride height.

    This is rough estimate too lazy to do it correctly.


        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2015 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 46.4 mpg (US) ... 19.7 km/L ... 5.1 L/100 km ... 55.7 mpg (Imp)


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •