So my interest in a good handling W reignited with ZZP announcing that they'll release BCracing *proper* coilovers and not just coilover sleeves... What's everyone's opinions on em? Personally I'd like to grab another W, get it as low as possible, put back the old sway bar setup and the rest of misc suspension stuff and see what a W can do
What's everyone's views on actual coilovers?
- Thread starter GTpEazy
- Start date
WickedGoat
New member
If you want to afford them, then go for it. Best way to lower it aside from air bags which also gets pricey. I look at it this way... with coil overs or bags, you will always be in control of how low you wanna go.
Well the idea is the lower the car, the less spring rate necessary to keep the car flat. Airbags aren't exactly the ideal suspension for going around bends. With that said the current coilover sleeves that's available to us will blow with the struts given which are GR2s/AGXes things of that nature when you're going 2.5-3" low. Unlike those, the new coilovers will not have those issues when trying to go that low. Last time around I had a bit of roll but the car was relatively stock height with the sway bars, I'm guessing if the car gets low enough with the sway bars, MC cradle and new bushings for the cradle it should in theory finally be a competent handling car. But that's just me, I wanna hear what everyone else has to say.
Javi
New member
ZZP/BC coilovers are suppose to offer a better driveability over the AGX and can go lower?
however problems like bad suspension geometry where you need to notch the strut holes, get camber bolts,craddle spacers or shorter dogbones to "correct" the bad geometry and get the car aligned within spec. We need drop spindles where we can keep stock geometry maybe add AGX on stock springs while being lowered 1.5" if anyone wants to go lower they can add lowering springs.
ZZP/BC coilovers one more step in the wrong direction with the W-body platform.
however problems like bad suspension geometry where you need to notch the strut holes, get camber bolts,craddle spacers or shorter dogbones to "correct" the bad geometry and get the car aligned within spec. We need drop spindles where we can keep stock geometry maybe add AGX on stock springs while being lowered 1.5" if anyone wants to go lower they can add lowering springs.
ZZP/BC coilovers one more step in the wrong direction with the W-body platform.
Bio248
DUI BABY
the BC coilovers will trump the hell out of shocks with sleeves on them. they don't lose travel as you lower the car. they're still going to be overpriced because ZZP will tax them. buy direct from BC if at all possible and upgrade to swift springs (will be an upcharge).
PS - if your goal is handling...you don't slam the car. and your theory of lower = less spring rate is hilarious. you need MORE spring rate. otherwise i cry for your fenders, tires, and wheels.
PS - if your goal is handling...you don't slam the car. and your theory of lower = less spring rate is hilarious. you need MORE spring rate. otherwise i cry for your fenders, tires, and wheels.
I'm a Bio major, so forgive my lack of understanding of physics, most of which I pick up on the forums... but it made sense that the lower car would need less overall stiffness to keep the car flat. School me bio.
*Also ZZP confirmed they'll not be more expensive than the coilover sleeves available as of now, so expect a $1k-1.5k price tag, most likely around the $1k mark
Bio248
DUI BABY
expect to pay somewhere around $900-1300 depending upon vendor, current deals, etc. for those. not bad, but i still would buy them from whoever has the lowest price at the time and not rely on ZZP to be your go-to source.
the way the spring rates work is like this: if you want to be really low you need stiffer spring rates to keep the wheels and tires out of the fenders. a softer rate will allow too much compression of the spring and cause conflict between these pieces. most of the springs that are recommended, or what they come with, will be some compromise between ride quality and handling. if you keep your wheel and tire specs in check you can probably roll with these without issue and still get the car ~3" lower than stock, maybe a little more. beyond that you're going to want stiffer spring rates and to fine tune the front versus the back to aid in handling.
typically the stiff springs you have the more flat it will handle. the stiffer springs you have in the front the more the car will want to understeer. the stiffer springs you have in the rear the more the car will want to oversteer.
the suspension style on this car will dictate that the front spring rate is higher than the rear for more neutral handling by about 15-20%. it'll also make sure the ride quality isn't as harsh. the rear of the car being stiffer will make more different for harsh/sharp bumps/dips in the road than the front will. the front also has more weight over it.
too stiff of springs and the car will want to pogo off of bumps and the tires will leave the ground. this is bad. too soft of springs and the car will be floaty and bathtub around corners. soft springs can be partially counteracted by larger sway bars. too stiff of springs cannot.
because i know that the spring rates from BC are going to be measuring in kg/mm i would, off the top of my head, recommend a 8k/6k (448lb/336lb) front/rear setup for the average user. increasing spring rate by 2k (front and rear) for people wanting to go lower than the norm. however, i'd be interested to see what BC/ZZP figure out as appropriate rates for the wbody.
is that enough to be dangerous? heh.
the way the spring rates work is like this: if you want to be really low you need stiffer spring rates to keep the wheels and tires out of the fenders. a softer rate will allow too much compression of the spring and cause conflict between these pieces. most of the springs that are recommended, or what they come with, will be some compromise between ride quality and handling. if you keep your wheel and tire specs in check you can probably roll with these without issue and still get the car ~3" lower than stock, maybe a little more. beyond that you're going to want stiffer spring rates and to fine tune the front versus the back to aid in handling.
typically the stiff springs you have the more flat it will handle. the stiffer springs you have in the front the more the car will want to understeer. the stiffer springs you have in the rear the more the car will want to oversteer.
the suspension style on this car will dictate that the front spring rate is higher than the rear for more neutral handling by about 15-20%. it'll also make sure the ride quality isn't as harsh. the rear of the car being stiffer will make more different for harsh/sharp bumps/dips in the road than the front will. the front also has more weight over it.
too stiff of springs and the car will want to pogo off of bumps and the tires will leave the ground. this is bad. too soft of springs and the car will be floaty and bathtub around corners. soft springs can be partially counteracted by larger sway bars. too stiff of springs cannot.
because i know that the spring rates from BC are going to be measuring in kg/mm i would, off the top of my head, recommend a 8k/6k (448lb/336lb) front/rear setup for the average user. increasing spring rate by 2k (front and rear) for people wanting to go lower than the norm. however, i'd be interested to see what BC/ZZP figure out as appropriate rates for the wbody.
is that enough to be dangerous? heh.
Turbocharged400sbc
New member
You won't be able to lower a much farther without the entire strut cartridge being shorter as the typical BC coilovers have the spindle trunnion as adjustable on the body the problem is is that are CV shaft is so close to the bottom of the trunnion so you're not able to really lower it that way only thing you can do is make the shaft sit farther into the strut body.
Since the roads never seem to be getting any better only worse I hesitate to think about even lowering it
Bio248
DUI BABY
they're already going to be shorter than the typical shock and BC also makes a different lower section, the "extreme low", which i'm sure they could get worked up for people as well.
the shock spins down into the lower shock body, that's how the height is adjusted. however, yes, the lower you go the farther the shock will protrude from the bottom of the lower mount which will eventually run you into the CV shaft. once you get that far and still want to go lower you just lower the perch that's holding the preload on the spring and droop them. however, i don't think any of these guys are going to do that because that's REALLY low.
people too scared to lower cars because of roads shouldn't even be looking at coilovers as an option unless they want them to corner balance the car. i'm pretty sure none of these guys want to do that, either. my car wasn't low enough for me when it was corner balanced so i wrecked that and just went lower with a more aggressive alignment. it did handle well, though.
the shock spins down into the lower shock body, that's how the height is adjusted. however, yes, the lower you go the farther the shock will protrude from the bottom of the lower mount which will eventually run you into the CV shaft. once you get that far and still want to go lower you just lower the perch that's holding the preload on the spring and droop them. however, i don't think any of these guys are going to do that because that's REALLY low.
people too scared to lower cars because of roads shouldn't even be looking at coilovers as an option unless they want them to corner balance the car. i'm pretty sure none of these guys want to do that, either. my car wasn't low enough for me when it was corner balanced so i wrecked that and just went lower with a more aggressive alignment. it did handle well, though.
Turbocharged400sbc
New member
From all my work on the turbo Regal custom suspension... I've found that the main issue is the control arm mounting points. my roll center kit can only correct three quarters of an inch before even the spherical joints sleeve comes near the rotor.
So that means the only other option is to raise the inboard mounts at which point the best option is to move the Cradle upward by removing the OEM mounts entirely and mounting it's solidly to the unit body.
I'd still like to gain some negative camber on compression rather than gaining positive camber.
The only other option for my role Center is to go to a conventional heim joint which means welding a threaded sleeve to the outboard end of my zzp lower control arms with a double adjusting sleeve.
At which point I can get maybe an inch and a quarter of roll center correction just using my mobile pin and the heim joints with modified lower control arms.
Good be sweet to modify the subframe to put more anti dive/anti rise geometry on the control arm angle.
On the whole I'm actually quite happy just moving the strut rod up three quarters of an inch with my spherical mounts.
So that means the only other option is to raise the inboard mounts at which point the best option is to move the Cradle upward by removing the OEM mounts entirely and mounting it's solidly to the unit body.
I'd still like to gain some negative camber on compression rather than gaining positive camber.
The only other option for my role Center is to go to a conventional heim joint which means welding a threaded sleeve to the outboard end of my zzp lower control arms with a double adjusting sleeve.
At which point I can get maybe an inch and a quarter of roll center correction just using my mobile pin and the heim joints with modified lower control arms.
Good be sweet to modify the subframe to put more anti dive/anti rise geometry on the control arm angle.
On the whole I'm actually quite happy just moving the strut rod up three quarters of an inch with my spherical mounts.
Well Bio I thought a 400# front spring and 350# rear alongside my 22 mm rear bar and 33 mm front bar along with a large drop would be a significant upgrade over old car which was 200# vogtlands up front and 300# springs rear at stock height. The car had more roll than I'd like.
But Bio, how do I get near 1 G of lateral grip? (Assume 245 width tires, 200-300 tw rating, also assume car has LSD)
Um with an open parking lot with 200 ft of open space, chalk and math? Also, get you some better tires, the V is very capable, why not get yourself some decent tires ... even A/S performance tires ought to do.