MR2 Championship

TokyoDave #38 wrote: No doubt the whiteline bars can be used in all positions with other shocks/springs but maybe not with lowered & cut ones. It is a trade off we may have to work around.

David B.

The problem is david all failures bar one have been with the tein S tec springs which most people are running.

Yeah - Susan Boyle....gone to her head a bit I think. She should have done a few blind dates when she was younger and just sung down the phone to get some interest!!

Sorry to sound condesending. Meant to be more tongue in cheek really.

My point is not to introduce adjustable anything. The reference to the range of the white line droplinks is to show that the designers know that when you shorten springs you must lenghten the droplink to put the ARB back to the original angle where it will a) work as intended and b) not foul the chassis. I will return the ARB to the OE angle, measure the distance and either extend the existing ones or buy whiteline adjustables, adjust and weld shut.

Like everything in life, you change summink and summink else is affected. Just makes sence to me to reduce the knock on effect by lengthening the DL.

Ooh, and I'll stick a set of bump stops in

Diversity have talent, and they are british. Think they'll win.

mark73 wrote:

TokyoDave #38 wrote: No doubt the whiteline bars can be used in all positions with other shocks/springs but maybe not with lowered & cut ones. It is a trade off we may have to work around.

David B.

The problem is david all failures bar one have been with the tein S tec springs which most people are running.

Me being one of the Tein S brigade

Anyone know what the S in Tein 'S' stands for??

Had a chat with a chap who used to be the Tech head at Toyota GB and now is at Toyota Europe. He runs Jonny Milner's GT4 and is well regarded in the Toyota World.

He suggested that race spring for the MR2 should be about 50% stiffer than OE.

LuckyP wrote:

mark73 wrote:

TokyoDave #38 wrote: No doubt the whiteline bars can be used in all positions with other shocks/springs but maybe not with lowered & cut ones. It is a trade off we may have to work around.

David B.

The problem is david all failures bar one have been with the tein S tec springs which most people are running.

Me being one of the Tein S brigade

Anyone know what the S in Tein 'S' stands for??

Yes,its a four letter word and it stink's

As TEIN say on their own website these spring's are a dress up spring and for anyone who doesnt understand this,they are lowering springs where the main aim is to make the inside of your wheel arches look pretty not to give you a big gain in performance.

Pete,i would say your mate is not far off the mark there matey with the 50% the teins are less than 10%, harder but i cant be presise because unless you dino a set of teins we dont even know what poundage they are.

LuckyP wrote:Anyone know what the S in Tein 'S' stands for??

Style. Unlike most manufacturers Tein are honest enough to sell their lowering springs as a cosmetic item rather than a performance item. That's not to say that they aren't uprated compared to stock and the fact that they have a different drop front to rear and quote their spring rates in their marketing literature shows me that they've put more thought into it than just "Lets drop it 40mm innit".

mark73 wrote:The problem is david all failures bar one have been with the tein S tec springs which most people are running.

Where's the logic in that Mark? That's like saying "all of the problems so far have been with the mk2, therefore the design of the mk2 must be at fault". Let's not forget that most of the drivers at Cadwell were running Tein springs and suffered no problems at all. Zac finished second in both race using the Bilstein / Tein / Whiteline combination.

mark73 wrote:but i cant be presise because unless you dyno a set of teins we dont even know what poundage they are.

140lbs/in front, 269lbs/in rear. Do you have the stock Toyota figures for comparison?

There are other considerations to increasing the spring rate within the confines of the stock strut, such as the wire diameter and the risk of becoming coilbound.

*All* high performance suspension available off the shelf for the MR2 is adjustable - end of story. We therefore end up racing on the best of the "streetable" stuff that's designed to give a bit more performance but not be too uncompromising for road use.

If things start going daft with suspension development and the only way to be competitive is to spend over a thousand pounds on custom parts then I will look at introducing controlled parts to keep everything on an even keel. Currently a set of series legal performance shocks, springs and top mounts will set you back over £1k+vat. A set of basic adjustable coilovers comprising the same components can be had for just £650 inc vat.

The key to this series has always been about keeping the cars even and the competition down to driving skill. There is a balance to be found between equalising the performance of the cars and still making them entertaining to drive.

Patrick

To bring it back on topic

Patrick, do you think the std length of the droplink is a contributing factor to these three failures? I know my lack of bumpstops could have further complicated the situation but both Cross and Henderson had theirs in.

I was fortunate to have mine fail in practise. Should it have failed in the race, I too could have shunted into some poor innocent like JC did.

Are you doing any trials with the springs off to see if intereference is caused by the OE length with the shortened springs or do you think it's best for us to trial a longer DL and announce our findings.

It's just in my mind, your word holds more clout than an individual racer.

BTW - anyone out there already lengthened theirs?

Hi Pete,

Yes, we are looking into it but the only people that responded with drop link lengths are you and James - both of which were on cars that failed! I had one of my guys measure the drop link lengths on our hire cars on Friday but as yet haven't seen the results. I'll pick it up again on Monday.

Patrick

Thanks buddy.

See you at the weekend.

Any more news Patrick on the droplink lenth? We've bitten the bullet and lengthen mine. The ARB is now back in the OE position (angle) and the ARB stops short of hitting the chassis. Time and the exit curb, will tell

I see your point and agree we should certainly try and remain sensible on our decisions which impact budget. However this problem has confused me.

As you know i had the failure (fns). I was running what i have been told many have over the last few years but these are the first failures. I also understand many have been using the front ARB on the stiffest setting as well during this time!

Correct me if i am wrong but if the ARB was catching on the chassis and preventing the upward movement of the wheel (by being connected to the strut which is connected to the wheel hub), with enough force, the drop-link would rip out of the bracket in a direction away from the spring. This theory was excepted by me but having inspected my shocks properly since my last post the failure was the opposite of this! i.e. the link pushed out upwards towards the spring!
Perhaps as a wheel was forced up rather than that energy being absorbed by the ARB twisting. The ARB began to deform/twist and then the force pushing the opposite link up increased to a level where it pushed the drop-link through its mounting bracket (so is the ARB too stiff or is the bracket too weak?). Might be barking up the wrong tree completely!



I have had mine repaired though and see how i get on!


See you all at Anglesey hopefully



James (car 23)

Just to report that the + 30 mm, cut sleeve and weld solution seems to have worked OK.

Patrick did you run with any cars modded? Increased or decreased length?

Pete