whats the best way to reduce body roll?
02-13-2005, 08:25 AM
#1
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Washington
Posts: 152
whats the best way to reduce body roll?
i already droped the car a couple inches, but want o ged rid of all the body roll. swaybars? front or rear? ayone whith insight please let me know
02-13-2005, 04:09 PM
#4
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Orlando, Florida
Posts: 3,525
Originally Posted by mfbenson
Don't take curves so fast. 
:D What springs did you get? I would think aftermarket springs would help do away with the body roll. You can always get sway bars and new shocks/struts...
02-14-2005, 03:17 AM
#11
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Posts: 2,912
More tire grip will get your car to lean even more.
If you want the lean gone, do front and rear lower sway bars. That does the most. Better tires, and stiffer/lower spring/strut setup will help as well.
But from my racing experience, sways make the biggest difference for the car "leaning" left and right.
If you want the lean gone, do front and rear lower sway bars. That does the most. Better tires, and stiffer/lower spring/strut setup will help as well.
But from my racing experience, sways make the biggest difference for the car "leaning" left and right.
02-15-2005, 11:42 AM
#14
Senior Member
SL Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Washington
Posts: 152
i got the H&R oe sport. they droped the car 1.9 front 1.7 rear and did away with some of the roll, but the TC has quite a bit of it..i think the front and rear sways sound good to me..is anyone actually running the hotchkis bars on a lowered tc?
02-15-2005, 12:03 PM
#16
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wheaton, IL
Posts: 2,030
Sway Bars, it's what they are designed to do!
They are often called Anti-Roll bars in Europe.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question432.htm
They are often called Anti-Roll bars in Europe.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question432.htm
02-15-2005, 04:36 PM
#18
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 329
sway bars resist body roll by loading the outside tire (the one that is already loaded), swaybars in general reduce ultimate cornering ability, no free lunch.
The "best way" to reduce body roll is a stock height stiff linear set of springs.
Why stock height? Cause lower springs changes the roll center of a Mc-strut and the car will have more tendency to roll. Unless the spring rate is increased.
Why linear, cause they are stiff during initial turn in where the front struts take a set as you go into a turn.
http://e30m3performance.com/myths/We..._transfer2.htm
'The key point is that as a MacPherson strut suspension is lowered, the length of this lever arm increases. Just compare A1 to A2 in the figure above. Thus even though the car is lower, it will tend to roll more! This is not what many people expect when they lower their cars'
I can provide reams of data, direct experiecne, etc to show you why you can't lower a strut and improve performance. and um most Hondas ( I assume many people are from Hondas) have A arms up front. While my VW and others has a strut front which I've worked on, raced for 30 years.
Good write up on bump steer, camber change, and roll center.
http://www.h2sport.com/SportSpindle.pdf
The "best way" to reduce body roll is a stock height stiff linear set of springs.
Why stock height? Cause lower springs changes the roll center of a Mc-strut and the car will have more tendency to roll. Unless the spring rate is increased.
Why linear, cause they are stiff during initial turn in where the front struts take a set as you go into a turn.
http://e30m3performance.com/myths/We..._transfer2.htm
'The key point is that as a MacPherson strut suspension is lowered, the length of this lever arm increases. Just compare A1 to A2 in the figure above. Thus even though the car is lower, it will tend to roll more! This is not what many people expect when they lower their cars'
I can provide reams of data, direct experiecne, etc to show you why you can't lower a strut and improve performance. and um most Hondas ( I assume many people are from Hondas) have A arms up front. While my VW and others has a strut front which I've worked on, raced for 30 years.
Good write up on bump steer, camber change, and roll center.
http://www.h2sport.com/SportSpindle.pdf
02-15-2005, 11:39 PM
#19
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Whittier, CA
Posts: 150
The info above is great. But being a manufacturer you have to find the happy spot for the products. Much of what you discuss is of racing applications (I assume). We try to make it a comfortable ride on the street and a good performer on the track. That many times is a variable rate spring (sometimes a linear rate - depends on the application) for the vehicle. We have track tested our xB (see linkhttp://www.hotchkistuning.com/bin/mi...%20Testing.htm) and came up with a good combo. By the way I am prejudice because that is my car. I am not saying we are the best or worst. We are just another product on the market, with numbers to back up the claims.
As the say there is many ways to skin a Scion.
As the say there is many ways to skin a Scion.
02-16-2005, 02:32 AM
#20
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 329
in general the more spring, the less applied bar, hence the need for bigger bars to keep the same applied bar. Swaybars have there place of course, but NOT as the principle or "best way” to take car of body lean. Of course as an integrated package is probably the “best way”.
I learn from the track as well as the street. The progressive springs are NOT optimal for a McPherson strut suspension. As you said this is really a race setup and the compromise on the street is a progressive in many if not most cases. However it is disingenuous of the many makers and sellers of springs to say that progressives give the best of both worlds: ride and performance. Progressive springs compromise performance to generate a better ride. Progressive springs are soft during initial compression which means a soggy turn in and it also means that at the ideal portion of the suspension ie non-compressed where camber and castor angles are both at there respective maximum values are / is being wasted compressing the soft coils of the spring instead of turning the car. There are of curse stiff to real stiff progressive that do not compromise performance but they don’t ride well either, yes the do ride better then just a plain stiff linear spring. So any blanket statements on the matter are subject to large caveats.
All in all, I can’t think of a single OEM performance car with progressives. All OEM feel that the performance benefit of linear springs overrides the comfort of a progressive.
I would agree that Hotchkiss has an integrated package, and since I have not tried it, I would be the first to say my IMO. I do note that your setup is listed as linear and very firm. Especially in the rear!
I personally never drop my ride that low, but this is a personal choice and clearly your company is producing a superior product for the people that want lower stance and performance.
I personally would prefer a near stock height, less stiff linear spring, damper and probably only a RSB but may indeed need both of your bars in the future.
As stated in my first paragraph, the stiff linear spring is going to show less applied bar (less roll) hence you kit addresses this with uprated bars kudos to your engineering talent. The counter is also true, stock springs do not need more bar especially in the front and installing such will cause a loss of ultimate grip.
http://www.hotchkistuning.com/cgi-bi...atalogno=19425
I learn from the track as well as the street. The progressive springs are NOT optimal for a McPherson strut suspension. As you said this is really a race setup and the compromise on the street is a progressive in many if not most cases. However it is disingenuous of the many makers and sellers of springs to say that progressives give the best of both worlds: ride and performance. Progressive springs compromise performance to generate a better ride. Progressive springs are soft during initial compression which means a soggy turn in and it also means that at the ideal portion of the suspension ie non-compressed where camber and castor angles are both at there respective maximum values are / is being wasted compressing the soft coils of the spring instead of turning the car. There are of curse stiff to real stiff progressive that do not compromise performance but they don’t ride well either, yes the do ride better then just a plain stiff linear spring. So any blanket statements on the matter are subject to large caveats.
All in all, I can’t think of a single OEM performance car with progressives. All OEM feel that the performance benefit of linear springs overrides the comfort of a progressive.
I would agree that Hotchkiss has an integrated package, and since I have not tried it, I would be the first to say my IMO. I do note that your setup is listed as linear and very firm. Especially in the rear!
I personally never drop my ride that low, but this is a personal choice and clearly your company is producing a superior product for the people that want lower stance and performance.
I personally would prefer a near stock height, less stiff linear spring, damper and probably only a RSB but may indeed need both of your bars in the future.
As stated in my first paragraph, the stiff linear spring is going to show less applied bar (less roll) hence you kit addresses this with uprated bars kudos to your engineering talent. The counter is also true, stock springs do not need more bar especially in the front and installing such will cause a loss of ultimate grip.
http://www.hotchkistuning.com/cgi-bi...atalogno=19425