Hi,
Generally if a cars ride is classed as 'harsh', would you expect it to be the dampers or the springs? To clarify, my S3 has Koni shocks and H&R springs. I find the car too stiff when going over drain covers and potholes etc.
AMD and QST have indicated that it will be the springs causing the harsh ride but I thought it was the dampers, but maybe not. As an example, the R32 in some magazines is described as a rock hard ride but to me its just right, also driving a M3 is just right, stiff but not enough to make you think you are damaging your car. I have driven Sitas S3 with KW coilovers and that was much softer, also another S3 with H&R 'comfort' coilovers which was much softer.
If anyone knows AMD, on the way there you have to go over a train crossing - now i have to take that at like 5 miles an hour otherwise my car crashes badly (which makes me think its the shocks...)
Any thoughts or experiences with different suspension setups (on any car) as I dont want to buy new dampers when its the springs or visa versa.
Dunc
suspension question
Tom - I have tried the H&R comforts and they were just right, but I am loathe to (or cannot afford to) fork out almost a grand on coilovers (with fitting) when I have made that outlay already...
Note when looking into my suspension in the first place QST and AMD told me coilovers would be too harsh - they both recommeded Koni adjustables with H&Rs or the MTM springs (basically what they both sell)
Dunc
Note when looking into my suspension in the first place QST and AMD told me coilovers would be too harsh - they both recommeded Koni adjustables with H&Rs or the MTM springs (basically what they both sell)
Dunc
Hi Dunc,
I am no expert on suspension but have built a single seater from the ground up including the suspension design so I have a rough understanding of the princilples.
This is an area I am looking at currently on the RS4 as I am not 100% happy with the overall package that the H & R set up gives but more of that later.
OK, so we hit a pothole...what do we want our suspension to do? Well, we do NOT want the entire car to fall into the pothole. Instead, we want to allow the *wheel* to travel down into the pothole. This happens as the spring releases energy, forcing the wheel into the pothole. If the shock valving is stiff, it will limit the release of the energy from the spring, and the degree of independence between the body of the car and the wheel is reduced (in other words, the car follows the wheel into the pothole). As the wheel rolls up out of the pothole, the spring contracts and absorbs that wheel energy. Again, if the shock valving is stiff, then the shock will prevent the spring from absorbing that energy, and the body of the car will be forced to absorb that energy by moving upwards.
Both movements of the body of the car...crashing into the pothole, and being forced up out of the pothole are things we interpret as ride harshness.
Now, there is another circumstance where we would prefer the suspension to behave differently. Let's suppose you are taking a turn. As you begin to provide steering angle, the body of the car slowly begins to lean to one side. The weight transfers to the outside of the car, causing the springs on the outside to compress. This is a gradual motion, unlike the pothole example. The springs compress slowly. In this case, we want the aid of the shocks in resisting that compression, so we want the shock to stiffen up on the outside. On the inside wheels, weight is transferred away, causing the springs to unload. Again, we would like the aid of the shocks in limiting the amount of weight that is unloaded from the springs. In this example, if the body of the car were loosely attached to the wheels, it would be leaned over on it's doors. Instead, we want the body of the car to remain closely tied to wheel movements...which will give us the feeling that the car is on rails as we throw it into a turn.
You can see, the above examples are very different, and demand different things from the damper (shock absorber). The combination of these two different forms of behavior into one damper is known as digressive valving. What characterizes the different behavior is the piston speed of the shock. Based on different piston speeds, we want the damper to behave differently.
There are permutations to the above examples, where damper behavior becomes complex. Say you are in a turn, and you hit a rough patch of ripples in the road...almost like potholes. Well, being in a turn, you want the dampers to be firm, however, when you hit those ripples in the pavement mid turn, you suddenly want them to be soft. Stiff or soft, pick one, but you can't have both. The important thing is to set up the suspension so that it keeps the tires in contact with the pavement under all conditions. The minute the spring and damper combination are unable to keep the tire in contact with the pavement (and it's irregularities), you lose much needed grip. There are many more variables that play into this. All those variables must be managed in order to keep the tires on the ground, limit weight transfers (control body motions), and retain ride comfort.
So the simple answer to your question is that it is both , or indeed the combination of both.
What we need to find out is firstly what the spring weights are on the H & R springs, it maybe that you can soften these up without having a massive negative effect (and possibly a positive effect) on the handling characteristics.
Then its a case of trail and error with the adjustability you have on the shocks or investing in a set of higher end dampers such as the Stasis parts from the States which offer digressive damping.
Added to the above is the problem that the S4/RS4/S3 etc do not have any adjustability for setting the angles, ie Camber,Caster etc. This becomes more of a problem as you both stiffen the car and also lower it as you are also effecting these angles.
I am currently waiting on a set of adjustable upper links for the front suspension so that I can adjust the camber / castor to setting that I beleive will have a big impact on the handling and also dial out some of the changes bought about by the lowering etc, I may also look at doing this to the rear dependant on the results.
IMO for the S4/Rs4 etc you need to add a lot of negative camber to get the front to do more work in the turns as well as changing the castor and toe settings to compensate.
Also if you go too low you will start to see bump steer effects which is a whole new ballgame.
Bit of a long rant I'm afraid but hope it helps a bit !!!!
I am no expert on suspension but have built a single seater from the ground up including the suspension design so I have a rough understanding of the princilples.
This is an area I am looking at currently on the RS4 as I am not 100% happy with the overall package that the H & R set up gives but more of that later.
OK, so we hit a pothole...what do we want our suspension to do? Well, we do NOT want the entire car to fall into the pothole. Instead, we want to allow the *wheel* to travel down into the pothole. This happens as the spring releases energy, forcing the wheel into the pothole. If the shock valving is stiff, it will limit the release of the energy from the spring, and the degree of independence between the body of the car and the wheel is reduced (in other words, the car follows the wheel into the pothole). As the wheel rolls up out of the pothole, the spring contracts and absorbs that wheel energy. Again, if the shock valving is stiff, then the shock will prevent the spring from absorbing that energy, and the body of the car will be forced to absorb that energy by moving upwards.
Both movements of the body of the car...crashing into the pothole, and being forced up out of the pothole are things we interpret as ride harshness.
Now, there is another circumstance where we would prefer the suspension to behave differently. Let's suppose you are taking a turn. As you begin to provide steering angle, the body of the car slowly begins to lean to one side. The weight transfers to the outside of the car, causing the springs on the outside to compress. This is a gradual motion, unlike the pothole example. The springs compress slowly. In this case, we want the aid of the shocks in resisting that compression, so we want the shock to stiffen up on the outside. On the inside wheels, weight is transferred away, causing the springs to unload. Again, we would like the aid of the shocks in limiting the amount of weight that is unloaded from the springs. In this example, if the body of the car were loosely attached to the wheels, it would be leaned over on it's doors. Instead, we want the body of the car to remain closely tied to wheel movements...which will give us the feeling that the car is on rails as we throw it into a turn.
You can see, the above examples are very different, and demand different things from the damper (shock absorber). The combination of these two different forms of behavior into one damper is known as digressive valving. What characterizes the different behavior is the piston speed of the shock. Based on different piston speeds, we want the damper to behave differently.
There are permutations to the above examples, where damper behavior becomes complex. Say you are in a turn, and you hit a rough patch of ripples in the road...almost like potholes. Well, being in a turn, you want the dampers to be firm, however, when you hit those ripples in the pavement mid turn, you suddenly want them to be soft. Stiff or soft, pick one, but you can't have both. The important thing is to set up the suspension so that it keeps the tires in contact with the pavement under all conditions. The minute the spring and damper combination are unable to keep the tire in contact with the pavement (and it's irregularities), you lose much needed grip. There are many more variables that play into this. All those variables must be managed in order to keep the tires on the ground, limit weight transfers (control body motions), and retain ride comfort.
So the simple answer to your question is that it is both , or indeed the combination of both.
What we need to find out is firstly what the spring weights are on the H & R springs, it maybe that you can soften these up without having a massive negative effect (and possibly a positive effect) on the handling characteristics.
Then its a case of trail and error with the adjustability you have on the shocks or investing in a set of higher end dampers such as the Stasis parts from the States which offer digressive damping.
Added to the above is the problem that the S4/RS4/S3 etc do not have any adjustability for setting the angles, ie Camber,Caster etc. This becomes more of a problem as you both stiffen the car and also lower it as you are also effecting these angles.
I am currently waiting on a set of adjustable upper links for the front suspension so that I can adjust the camber / castor to setting that I beleive will have a big impact on the handling and also dial out some of the changes bought about by the lowering etc, I may also look at doing this to the rear dependant on the results.
IMO for the S4/Rs4 etc you need to add a lot of negative camber to get the front to do more work in the turns as well as changing the castor and toe settings to compensate.
Also if you go too low you will start to see bump steer effects which is a whole new ballgame.
Bit of a long rant I'm afraid but hope it helps a bit !!!!
************
Prawn
Prawn
Thanks for the rant Prawn. So you're saying that basically without active suspension or having to make manual adjustments for different conditions, you have to accept a compromise: If you want best handling and cornering grip, you have to accept a harsh ride; or if you can't accept a harsh ride you have to put up with not so good handling.
2001 Silver S4 Avant
AmD remap, APR R1 DVs, APR bipipe, Full Miltek exhaust
H&R coilovers, AWE DTS, Porsche front brakes, Short-shifter, 18" RS4 replicas
Defi-HUD boost gauge / turbo-timer (with afterrun pump modification), Phatbox
AmD remap, APR R1 DVs, APR bipipe, Full Miltek exhaust
H&R coilovers, AWE DTS, Porsche front brakes, Short-shifter, 18" RS4 replicas
Defi-HUD boost gauge / turbo-timer (with afterrun pump modification), Phatbox
Hi Dippy,
No not quite, what I am saying is that IMO the H&R etc whilst offering an improvement over std are still not quite right for the RS/S4 etc, by playing with spring rates, damper settings etc you should be able to get a better compromise, however IMO still not good enough.
Take Stasis as an example of what should be offered, they do not offer a single set spring rate but a choice, the final rate depends on A) Saloon or Avant, B) Type of driving, C) Customers preferance etc etc, can you imagine what H & R would say to that !
You would probably be very suprised how soft the suspension is on a lot of race cars, however they have a balanced set up which allows this.
I am looking into this on the RS and will report back anything I find that is useful, the trouble is most of the bits I need are in the States as they seem to be a lot further forward in this respect.
No not quite, what I am saying is that IMO the H&R etc whilst offering an improvement over std are still not quite right for the RS/S4 etc, by playing with spring rates, damper settings etc you should be able to get a better compromise, however IMO still not good enough.
Take Stasis as an example of what should be offered, they do not offer a single set spring rate but a choice, the final rate depends on A) Saloon or Avant, B) Type of driving, C) Customers preferance etc etc, can you imagine what H & R would say to that !
NO, you do not want a harsh ride unless the corner is totally flat, ie not a UK Road, you need a balance of damper/spring rates and roll resistance that is balanced with the weight, weight distribution and dynamics of the car.If you want best handling and cornering grip, you have to accept a harsh ride
You would probably be very suprised how soft the suspension is on a lot of race cars, however they have a balanced set up which allows this.
I am looking into this on the RS and will report back anything I find that is useful, the trouble is most of the bits I need are in the States as they seem to be a lot further forward in this respect.
************
Prawn
Prawn
Setting
Yes Prawn,
Can you PM me some reference settings, detail will be much appreciated.
Actually I could imagine an optimized setting would be more difficult and worth to spend time with indeed I would be able to get my car best performance all the time with higher confidence to drive rather than updrading the power alone.
Best Regards
Ben
Can you PM me some reference settings, detail will be much appreciated.
Actually I could imagine an optimized setting would be more difficult and worth to spend time with indeed I would be able to get my car best performance all the time with higher confidence to drive rather than updrading the power alone.
Best Regards
Ben
im also looking at this for my S3. Not sure on KW V2 or H&R Comfort.. I like a nice comfortable ride with improved handling, and less body roll. Especially around roudnabouts and left handers.. it rolls something crazy. I also want to limit nose drive and have a flatter ride when braking hard (on my porsche brakes)
Audi S3
I guess both will be satified the expectation over the stock setting.
I have the KW V2 which allows me to adjust a more agressive setting than daily comfort, in deed the kits are very good.
Since a satified balance setup could be very personal, I recommand go for a kits that at least allow you to make adjustment slightly toward your expectation after having them.
Cheers
I have the KW V2 which allows me to adjust a more agressive setting than daily comfort, in deed the kits are very good.
Since a satified balance setup could be very personal, I recommand go for a kits that at least allow you to make adjustment slightly toward your expectation after having them.
Cheers
H&R seem to be proven!Well I dont think so from the research I have done, as the front R32 bar is at least 23 mm. AMD did recommend this setup to me but I went with some other peoples personal experience (as AMD arent always right)
The rear is 19 mm which is okay, but I have (on advice) gone for a 22 mm front - too big on the front and you will introduce more understeer. I can vouch that 22mm front and 19 mm rear works. Car is more neutral - honestly the difference is amazing - its up there with chipping your car for satisfaction.
Note the Neuspeed kit comes with poly bushes too but it is more expensive than the VAG items. H&R also do the RBs but i dont know sizes/price.
Dunc
The rear is 19 mm which is okay, but I have (on advice) gone for a 22 mm front - too big on the front and you will introduce more understeer. I can vouch that 22mm front and 19 mm rear works. Car is more neutral - honestly the difference is amazing - its up there with chipping your car for satisfaction.
Note the Neuspeed kit comes with poly bushes too but it is more expensive than the VAG items. H&R also do the RBs but i dont know sizes/price.
Dunc
Thanks Prawn. I don't really understand any of this but I do like my H&R setup which is what counts for me (and I'm unlikely to try any other setup on my car).
2001 Silver S4 Avant
AmD remap, APR R1 DVs, APR bipipe, Full Miltek exhaust
H&R coilovers, AWE DTS, Porsche front brakes, Short-shifter, 18" RS4 replicas
Defi-HUD boost gauge / turbo-timer (with afterrun pump modification), Phatbox
AmD remap, APR R1 DVs, APR bipipe, Full Miltek exhaust
H&R coilovers, AWE DTS, Porsche front brakes, Short-shifter, 18" RS4 replicas
Defi-HUD boost gauge / turbo-timer (with afterrun pump modification), Phatbox
@Dunc
I've got the H&R adjustable bars on the S3, 25mm front 21mm rear........that with the H&R Coilovers(ran higher than spec with shimmed bumpstops) and forge tiebars to dial out the excess rear camber.
On track I've gone round the outside of Integra and Civic Type Rs,Mini Cooper S,Impreza Stis,Evo VI's etc and some of these cars(the Hondas in particular) should have been much nimbler and better handling than the S3 in tight 2nd gear stuff .
Really proved there worth at the Ring though,body control through fast sweepers was excellent.
I've got the H&R adjustable bars on the S3, 25mm front 21mm rear........that with the H&R Coilovers(ran higher than spec with shimmed bumpstops) and forge tiebars to dial out the excess rear camber.
On track I've gone round the outside of Integra and Civic Type Rs,Mini Cooper S,Impreza Stis,Evo VI's etc and some of these cars(the Hondas in particular) should have been much nimbler and better handling than the S3 in tight 2nd gear stuff .
Really proved there worth at the Ring though,body control through fast sweepers was excellent.
MTM RS4
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests