Okay, DIY gurus...Need your help on this

[The HACK]

I'm about to get a set of ACS sports springs. FWIK it's a 1.5 inch drop up front and 1 inch drop in the rear.

Now, doing some research on sports springs it appears to me almost ALL springs drop the front more than the rear. Call me stupid (rhetorical, no need to call me stupid) but wouldn't that shift the center of gravity FORWARD and actually throw the balance of the car off? As is, my car is balanced at 52/48 and it's handling is superbly neutral (I can manage to carry off perfect 4 wheel drifts, no oversteer, no understeer), I'd hate to have to lose the perfect balance for a set of springs.

Any thoughts?

[Raffi]

Originally posted by The HACK


Any thoughts?

Yeah, get Bilstein PSS9 coilovers so you can adjust the ride height! :D I guess you could somewhat balance out the handling by playing with the tire pressures, but I :dunno: how effective that would be...

BTW, any word from Roy on the SSK install?

[The HACK]

Originally posted by Raffi


Yeah, get Bilstein PSS9 coilovers so you can adjust the ride height! :D I guess you could somewhat balance out the handling by playing with the tire pressures, but I :dunno: how effective that would be...

BTW, any word from Roy on the SSK install?

He's out of town until tomorrow. I'll call him to schedule a time next week. Are you okay with taking an afternoon off?

[Kaz]

Maybe they assume you're like a lot of people and haul half your posessions in the trunk of your car. :lmao:

[DougDogs]

Originally posted by Kaz
Maybe they assume you're like a lot of people and haul half your posessions in the trunk of your car. :lmao:

Look at that, I thought you only get double posts at the .org:lmao:

[The HACK]

Yeah, thanks for posting that twice Kaz. :lmao:

Still, I wonder what the benefit is of dropping the front .5 inches lower than the rear. :dunno:

[Kaz]

Originally posted by The HACK
Yeah, thanks for posting that twice Kaz. :lmao:

Still, I wonder what the benefit is of dropping the front .5 inches lower than the rear. :dunno:

Sorry, the network connection to here seems screwy.

I guess dropping the front lets the r1cers scrape more.

[in_d_haus]

I think the companies do it for the look as much as anything. Most people like the front rake look

[·clyde·]

Looks would be my guess too.

FWIW, a car doesn't have to have great static balance in order to do four wheel drifts. If it did, I never would have been able to it in my Mustangs.

[Mr Paddle.Shift]

I seriously doubt it will throw the CG forward. Imagine a see-saw, hinged exactly in the centre. Now attach a spring each to the end of the see saw. Suppose we use identical springs, then the see-saw should be levelled at equilibrium. Forces of the springs acting on the see-saw cancel each other out. But if we use a shorter spring on one end and a higher spring on the other, the see-saw will be at a gradient. CG stays the SAME, but the forces acting on the see-saw are now different.

Now when a car accelerates or deccelerates, the *weight* transfer from the rear to front/front to rear of the car is exactly these acting forces from the springs. CG still stays at the same point.

The shorter spring should have a higher spring constant to overcome the immense force from braking at a higher speed.

And not to mention a better look for a lowered front.

My ALPINA suspension didn't do a tad higher or lower compared to OEM sport suspension. But the handling is superbly neutral and harmonious.

[The HACK]

Originally posted by VinceTopasBlau3
I seriously doubt it will throw the CG forward. Imagine a see-saw, hinged exactly in the centre. Now attach a spring each to the end of the see saw. Suppose we use identical springs, then the see-saw should be levelled at equilibrium. Forces of the springs acting on the see-saw cancel each other out. But if we use a shorter spring on one end and a higher spring on the other, the see-saw will be at a gradient. CG stays the SAME, but the forces acting on the see-saw are now different.

Now when a car accelerates or deccelerates, the *weight* transfer from the rear to front/front to rear of the car is exactly these acting forces from the springs. CG still stays at the same point.

The shorter spring should have a higher spring constant to overcome the immense force from braking at a higher speed.

And not to mention a better look for a lowered front.

My ALPINA suspension didn't do a tad higher or lower compared to OEM sport suspension. But the handling is superbly neutral and harmonious.

Thanks Vince. You just gave me JUSTIFICATION to order the springs. :thumbup:

Not that I'm going to pass up such a sweet deal to start with.

[Kaz]

Doesn't this also justify Nissan's argument with the G35 for its having 52:48 weight distribution? :dunno:

[StevzZ3]

Hey Hack
From what I have seen, it seems the rear is LOWER than front, at least with Eibach and H&R. I added 10mm deeper hats in front to level it out.

[Raffi]

Originally posted by The HACK


He's out of town until tomorrow. I'll call him to schedule a time next week. Are you okay with taking an afternoon off?

Unless I HAVE to, I would rather not - that would mean I have to work later the rest of the week. :thumbdwn: If they're open on Saturdays, I would rather go then - probably the week after the DV run. Let me know...

[Imola Ed]

Being somewhat of an ACS (can't believe I can't say *****), I can say that I highly doubt ACS would ever develop a suspension component that would compromise, rather than enhance, your car's handling behavior. They're very good at what they do.

[Hunter]

Originally posted by The HACK
ALL springs drop the front more than the rear. Call me stupid (rhetorical, no need to call me stupid) but wouldn't that shift the center of gravity FORWARD and actually throw the balance of the car off?

That is too complex to call without doing some computer modeling or real world testing.

A lot has to do with where the mass is compared to the axels. The front axel is closer to the front bumper than the rear axel is to the rear bumper. If you put 100lbs on the front bumper, it may add 1% to the front axel, but if you move the 100lbs to the rear bumper it may add 2% to the rear axel. It is the same 100lbs, but in the rear it is further beyond the axel, so it has a greater effect.

By giving your car a more nose down angle, you *may* distribute more of the engine’s weight to the rear axel and actually improve the balance. Or you may not, it is really quite complex to figure out without doing some test to see.