suspension: racing or original?

I have a question on which suspension I should buy for my cars: racing or original? I noticed a couple differences:
1. Racing costs 17000 while original costs 16200
2. You can't adjust shock absorbers in racing suspension.
3. You can't adjust shock bound or rebound in original suspension.
Which would I be better off sacrificing?
 
happyperson
I have a question on which suspension I should buy for my cars: racing or original? I noticed a couple differences:
1. Racing costs 17000 while original costs 16200
2. You can't adjust shock absorbers in racing suspension.
3. You can't adjust shock bound or rebound in original suspension.
Which would I be better off sacrificing?
Bound and rebound IS the shock absorber, you must not have realized that...
 
Think of the originals as a "simple" version of racing shocks. If you're not comfy with tuning all your own stuff, the originals can make your life a lot easier. On the other hand, if you're oober picky, or oober good at setting up your cars the way you like em, then racing shocks are the way to go. Personaly, if I have a car that has the orgs as an option, I usualy go with em (like the stage 5 turbos). It's just quicker to get going IMHO.

P.S. I also like the orgs for series races that go from long to short tracks due to their simplicity.
 
Canadian Speed
Think of the originals as a "simple" version of racing shocks. If you're not comfy with tuning all your own stuff, the originals can make your life a lot easier. On the other hand, if you're oober picky, or oober good at setting up your cars the way you like em, then racing shocks are the way to go. Personaly, if I have a car that has the orgs as an option, I usualy go with em (like the stage 5 turbos). It's just quicker to get going IMHO.

P.S. I also like the orgs for series races that go from long to short tracks due to their simplicity.

I rarely change the bound or rebound settings on my cars. Would I be better off with the original? Also, which would be better for improving 1/4 mile times, or would it be equal?
 
happyperson
They are seperate sections in the suspension settings, so they must be different things.
That is the most arcane logic I think I have yet encountered. It is all of, and nothing more, than what Canadian and I have already told you; shock absorbers do only one thing: absorb shock. They do this during the bound and also during the rebound stroke. You can fine tune your bound and also your rebound settings to control and possibly enhance your cars response and handling. If, for some reason, you would rather not have the ability to independently adjust your bound and rebound, you can use the original option. You will notice that when doing so the bound and rebound registers are greyed out, which demonstrates you can use one or the other, because they are redundant.
 
shock absorbers(correct name is DAMPERS) dampen the spring oscilation. the springs absorb the shocks.

ive noticed that with the 'original' suspension, you have a wider spring stiffness range, from the same as racing minimum, with a harder maximum.
 
stewart
shock absorbers(correct name is DAMPERS) dampen the spring oscilation. the springs absorb the shocks.

ive noticed that with the 'original' suspension, you have a wider spring stiffness range, from the same as racing minimum, with a harder maximum.
Actually, I hear they deport you if you call them "shock absorbers" in Britan, but in the country where they were invented, that is the correct term.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_absorber
The springs actually contain and store vectored energy, the shock absorbers convert that energy into heat.
 
stewart
shock absorbers(correct name is DAMPERS) dampen the spring oscilation. the springs absorb the shocks.

ive noticed that with the 'original' suspension, you have a wider spring stiffness range, from the same as racing minimum, with a harder maximum.

I've noticed the same. Plus, you have a wider range for ride height too. You can usually lower the car more with original than with racing.
 
Back