Imports

[uk86ze]

Mazda Day.

 

[Revheadnz]

 

[Time_Attack]

That Z31 isn't a mazda.

 

[homeforsummer]

That Z31 isn't a mazda.

That explains it. I was just about to ask what kind of Mazda it was...

 

[Keef]

I wonder if we can cite this:

Which has arguably fantastic handling... and thanks to its light weight, can actually use suspension that is much softer than the standard car... and does so.

Not a good example, seeing as that car comes with R-compound tires from the factory. Put R-comps on a minivan and you'll flip it over by the time you get through a slalom.

Mazda Day.

Somebody misplaced their 300ZX lol.

 

[homeforsummer]

Not a good example, seeing as that car comes with R-compound tires from the factory. Put R-comps on a minivan and you'll flip it over by the time you get through a slalom.

It's not a bad example, though. The standard RenaultSport Megane handles very well indeed on regular compound, less track-biased tyres (it just doesn't grip as well) but the R26.R actually manages to ride better too as they've been able to soften the setup thanks to reducing the weight.

Handling doesn't necessarily equal grip, and vice-versa. A 1960s Lotus Elan is a beautiful handler, but has far less grip than many modern cars.

Incidentally though, it's also supposed to have a nice ride. Why? Softer setup, taller tyres, and you could drive the hell out of it on roads that would have the average stiffly-sprung and rubber-band-tyred hot hatch backing off as they skipped back and forth on the rough surface...

 

[CodeRedR51]

You have no idea how badly I want that.

Somebody misplaced their 300ZX lol.

I was like...wait a second.

 

[speed junkie]

Firstly, stop throwing rally videos at me. Especially not ones from my own country. I've been right up to these cars when they've been flying past, you've probably not been within a thousand miles of them.

The typical "I saw it in real life so I'm right" statement. 👎

Theres a massive difference between a purpose-built rally car that costs upwards of £500k to anything you can get on the street.

Tell me something I don't already know.

You'd be surprised how soft rally cars can run, mainly because they're so much lighter (the Group A Impreza you put a video up of weighed in at around 1050kg I seem to remember despite tens of meters of roll-cage and safety gear to weigh it down; a road-going WRX at the time was nearer 1200kg)...

Read the reply above.

...so don't need to run as stiff to get the cornering capabilities they're after - it's the same principle as the Lotus Elise, which has a fantastic ride because it's light enough not to require mega-stiff suspension to make it handle.

It doesn't matter how stiff the springs are as long as, in relation to the weight of the car and the tire's capabilities, the same result is achieved. So regardless of the spring rate those cars are running, the end result is still a car that behaves the way it does in terms of stiffness.

So those setups aren't necessarily stiffer - and certainly not up to circuit standards. They're just very well set up, and often tens of thousands of dollars will have gone into making sure they work a certain way on a certain surface.

You are over-thinking it. The reasons their dampers are as "expensive" as they are is not because of some magical, secret ability they have that somehow defies the laws of physics. They still have, most likely, digressive valving characteristics with whatever springs they use to support the weight of the car and most importantly the tires they have. Thats it.

And apparently you're right about the common sense thing, because you aren't getting it - for a given wheel and tyre combination and an equal rolling radius, your ride will improve with a smaller rim diameter and taller tyre.

Correction: your ride will become softer and less predictable.

I never mentioned setting up the whole car in my post.

Correct me if I'm wrong but neither did I.

I am simply talking about wheels and tyres. That's it.

And on that road-going Legacy, you'd be far better off batting down a country road on the standard wheels it was on rather than anything bigger, unless you're prepared to spend thousands setting it up.

Is my point clear now?

And I still say that on that road-going legacy I can get a wider and slightly larger wheel and fit a better tire and end up with a car that can corner and brake better than it did before with a slightly stiffer ride (or what you would call worse) due to the stiffer sidewalls.

And yes, the point you have been trying to make has been clear from the very beginning. I just disagree with it.

 

[uk86ze]

That Z31 isn't a mazda.

That explains it. I was just about to ask what kind of Mazda it was...

Somebody misplaced their 300ZX lol.

Lol. I was just checking if people would notice it. Honest.

 

[niky]

It doesn't matter how stiff the springs are as long as, in relation to the weight of the car and the tire's capabilities, the same result is achieved. So regardless of the spring rate those cars are running, the end result is still a car that behaves the way it does in terms of stiffness.

The question is whether stiffer is always better. And the problem is... there's an optimum stiffness for handling in any given situation, and stiff as possible is not it.

Correction: your ride will become softer and less predictable.

Errh... depends on what pressures you're running. More tire means you can pump them down on daily drives and pump them up stiff enough to prevent sidewall flex on the track. And with some UHP and R-Comps available in the relatively tall 50 and 55 aspect range, the sidewalls are more than stiff enough to make up for the extra height.

And then there's the question of how much is too much and how little is too little. There's no way you're going to get a 70 series tire to perform on the racetrack... just as there's no reason to go for 35 series tires on a street car.

Again... too stiff is too stiff. Too little sidewall and the tires will simply skip at the edge of adhesion instead of digging in, leading to oversteer or understeer depending on which end of the vehicle goes first. It's the same a springs... having springs that are too stiff on one end of the car negatively affect adhesion.

You are over-thinking it. The reasons their dampers are as "expensive" as they are is not because of some magical, secret ability they have that somehow defies the laws of physics. They still have, most likely, digressive valving characteristics with whatever springs they use to support the weight of the car and most importantly the tires they have. Thats it.

Let's not forget infinite adjustability, extra-large external reservoirs, and the need to specifically set them up for each and every event, otherwise they'd be a bit too soft or a bit too stiff. For a road car, you have to make a non-adjustable or a moderately adjustable system work for a much larger range of driving environments.

For environments like ours, erring on the soft side is a good idea. If you have generally smooth paved roads, like Japan or the US (forgive the stereotyping), you can err on the side of stiffer. But again, there is such a thing as too stiff.

And I still say that on that road-going legacy I can get a wider and slightly larger wheel and fit a better tire and end up with a car that can corner and brake better than it did before with a slightly stiffer ride (or what you would call worse) due to the stiffer sidewalls.

I'd agree with wider. Larger? Depends on what the stock profile is... but it's not necessarily a given.

 

[homeforsummer]

The typical "I saw it in real life so I'm right" statement. 👎

The typical "I'll dismiss it because I have no comeback" statement 👍

And if you're aware of the massive difference between purpose-built rally cars and road cars, why bother bringing it up?

It doesn't matter how stiff the springs are as long as, in relation to the weight of the car and the tire's capabilities, the same result is achieved. So regardless of the spring rate those cars are running, the end result is still a car that behaves the way it does in terms of stiffness.

So you concede that weight has a large part of play, and that a lower weight can get away with a softer setup and benefit from a better ride yet still maintain handling capabilities?

You are over-thinking it. The reasons their dampers are as "expensive" as they are is not because of some magical, secret ability they have that somehow defies the laws of physics. They still have, most likely, digressive valving characteristics with whatever springs they use to support the weight of the car and most importantly the tires they have. Thats it.

Then tell me why they're not cheaper, if they're so similar to road-going units.

As Niky has said, they're built to a much higher standard, with a much greater range of adjustment, with much greater durability. And because of the better build, they're much better at what they do.

So no, I'm not over-thinking it. Rally dampers are one thing, road ones are quite another.

Correction: your ride will become softer and less predictable.

Is a softer ride not what I've been saying all along? I know I used the word "better" before but it was used in context, as the whole time I've been talking about the car's ability to handle badly paved roads.

And "less predictable" is pushing it. I'm talking about a difference in an inch or two of rubber, not balloon tyres.

Correct me if I'm wrong but neither did I.

You brought in the subject of dampers. I was just talking about wheels and tyres.

And I still say that on that road-going legacy I can get a wider and slightly larger wheel and fit a better tire and end up with a car that can corner and brake better than it did before with a slightly stiffer ride (or what you would call worse) due to the stiffer sidewalls.

Stiffer is only worse in context. What I've been saying all along, in other words. Trust me, if the roads around here were like a racetrack I'd be first in line to set my car up like one.

As it is, fast driving is more fun and you can go quicker over here on the average country road if you have a car with some compliance. I'm pretty sure that was what I've been saying all along.

 

[McLaren]

This was funny as hell watching people chug these nasty drinks just to fill up the wheel.

 

[Revheadnz]

I kinda like that CR-V, I always thought it would be a cool idea for a sleeper to drop a B18C with a reasonably large snail into one of those.

 

[homeforsummer]

I kinda like that CR-V, I always thought it would be a cool idea for a sleeper to drop a B18C with a reasonably large snail into one of those.

That engine looks lost in such a big engine bay though! I wonder if it's actually a smaller unit than whatever the CR-V normally has, or whether they've found a way of mounting it lower?

 

[-Fred-]

That engine looks lost in such a big engine bay though! I wonder if it's actually a smaller unit than whatever the CR-V normally has, or whether they've found a way of mounting it lower?

It's because they tucked away every wire and plastic piece you'd normally find around it. All B-Series engines were dimensionally similar to within a few mm's, mostly in height. The newest trend is to tuck the radiator within the bumper support... which makes the engine look absolutely lost in the bay.

 

[niky]

CR-Vs and Escapes, being nothing but tall cars, have the engine situated where you might find them in a Civic (CR-V) or a 626 or Mazda6... down low... which gives you a ton of space above and around the engine.

Also makes them pretty worthless in a flood... unlike a truck-based SUV or even other crossovers... sinc the airboxes breather hoses are also down there, instead of up high in the bay or at hood level... pretty glaring oversight on Honda's part, given that the CR-V is now on its third generation and they still haven't fixed that.

Nice set up... or it would be if he didn't omit the strut bar and remove all the underbody cladding... but I guess that's the point. Minimalist engine bay.

 

[homeforsummer]

Love those clean engine bays. Probably one of my favourite non-performance related modifications. You'd get OCD about driving it in anything other than absolutely perfect conditions though so the whole thing didn't get dirty after every trip...

 

[CodeRedR51]

That CRV is probably sporting a head swap. (B20 Vtec)

 

[Keef]

Errh... depends on what pressures you're running. More tire means you can pump them down on daily drives and pump them up stiff enough to prevent sidewall flex on the track. And with some UHP and R-Comps available in the relatively tall 50 and 55 aspect range, the sidewalls are more than stiff enough to make up for the extra height.

After my seat was installed it gave me a much better idea of what vibration or bounce was coming from where. Then when the summer was over and I took off the Azenis tires, which have very stiff sidewalls even for their class of tire, and switched to snow tires which were just the opposite, I found that my ride went to hell. The sidewall stayed the same, but they got softer, and that resulted in lots of secondary vibrations that the suspension didn't control. It felt similar to what you'd feel in a car with a flimsy structure, and before "it's a Civic" gets mentioned, it's pretty obvious that the car's structure didn't degrade because of changing tires lol.

I much preferred the stiffer, more direct ride quality my summer tires gave as opposed to lesser tires. I'm looking forward to making the change on the RX7, as right now I've got to deal with these balloon tires sounding like a bass drum every time I hit a bump and flopping around and vibrating afterwards.

Nice set up... or it would be if he didn't omit the strut bar and remove all the underbody cladding... but I guess that's the point. Minimalist engine bay.

Meh, the undertrays on Civics and stuff don't go back far enough to cover the whole engine. They end just after the radiator, but you'd still be able to see the ground. Pretty ugly really. Also, I can't hardly tell what that car is in the pic. Civic? Integra? I'm calling it a Prelude because it looks dumb lol.

 

[homeforsummer]

Meh, the undertrays on Civics and stuff don't go back far enough to cover the whole engine. They end just after the radiator, but you'd still be able to see the ground. Pretty ugly really. Also, I can't hardly tell what that car is in the pic. Civic? Integra? I'm calling it a Prelude because it looks dumb lol.

On the Civics I've seen the undertray usually stops just short of the front of the block. As far as I'm aware it's to help the underbody aero a little as that massive gap in front of the engine would cause quite a bit of turbulence otherwise. Probably stops a fair bit of water and grime getting kicked up there on a manky day too.

Also, you could be right, those light cut-outs look a bit like where the pop-ups on an earlier Prelude might sit.

 

[ND4SPD]

Meh, the undertrays on Civics and stuff don't go back far enough to cover the whole engine. They end just after the radiator, but you'd still be able to see the ground. Pretty ugly really. Also, I can't hardly tell what that car is in the pic. Civic? Integra? I'm calling it a Prelude because it looks dumb lol.

I want to say prelude for some reason as well. I think it's those vents in the headlights.

 

[-Fred-]

92-96 4th gen Prelude it is, indeed.

 

[WeinerSchnitzel]

Question; where do they put all the stuff that was previously there?

 

[Jim Prower]

And why Bianchi Green?

 

[CodeRedR51]

As far as I'm aware it's to help the underbody aero a little as that massive gap in front of the engine would cause quite a bit of turbulence otherwise.

Helps with cooling as well. Circulating air can get trapped in front of the motor, blocking air from flowing through the radiator.

 

[Horde_R35]

Question; where do they put all the stuff that was previously there?

In the garbage ! Or sell it later for a few euros!

 

[-Fred-]

Question; where do they put all the stuff that was previously there?

The wiring and fuses are between the fenders and the chassis, usually (hidden from grime and road debris by the fender guards), or in the firewall underneath the dash (such as the brake & clutch masters) whereas in this particular case, everything related to the intake side of the engine has been replaced by a set of individual throttle bodies, which means there's no piping and air filter.

And since this is a California car and it apparently never rains in Cali, the wiper assembly's been taken out, as well.

I can understand the trend to an extend, working in a cluttered engine bay is certainly not fun, but I think some guys are pushing it just a little too far.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

pictures

Burn them all

 

[McLaren]

Burn them all

Then how about you post something?

Because nearly all those cars are no different from the others being posted in here.

 

[Perfect Balance]

The typical "I saw it in real life so I'm right" statement. 👎

The typical "I'll dismiss it because I have no comeback" statement 👍

I've been to a few track days and autocrosses before. Usually they are filled with hundreds (and quite literally thousands at the latest one) of people who have been "right up to these cars when they've been flying past" and couldn't tell you where the lug nuts were. Same goes for any other race that has happened pretty much, well, ever. Don't act like standing beside something somehow makes you more qualified to know the engineering involved.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how you came to that conclusion.

Just saying.

EDIT:

Looks just about stock, but...

Sequential transmission.

What's this?

And from NoriYaro's page; "The V-Cam system makes sense in this case, because the owner is apparently the owner of a kindergarten close to where I live, and just likes to take the car on nice weekend drives in the mountains! I went for a little street ride in this car with an anonymous driver at the wheel, and let’s just say that it wasn’t just the straight-cut gears that were making a “hee hee hee” sound!"