I've never really got the no front ARB method to work on my mk1. It seems to lack turn in feel without it so I always end up back with the bar installed. Gurds
Nope, not convinced its required on a mk2 ibiza which has shorter beam arms than a golf and is already well braced. Also, read that triangulation adds a lot to the anti-roll stiffness of the beam which i dont want. And adds unsprung weigh to an already heavy part.
Most people know my rough spec, because it is on my blog and thread. So it is quite soft on the front and solid on the back. A chunk of front camber, standard caster (need better top mounts). Rear beam has some camber, but no toe - fancy playing with this, but not had time. Tyre pressures are sensible. BEAR IN MIND MINE IS A MK1. I find the slightest difference in tyre pressures and damper settings changes the balance front-to-rear. I think the set-up works pretty well at the moment, especially as I can finely tune it in that way. The car is pretty stable, but moves around on all 4 contact patches at the same time when driven really hard. If I went stiffer at the front, I reckon it would loose a fair bit of grip on turn-in. Although maybe I would have better front traction on the inside wheel (when getting back on the power) as a result of less weight transfer. I could combat the negative affect on turn-in with rear beam geometry.... All things to try. I really enjoy the way it drives at the moment, apart from the inside front wheel spin I get in some corners. I am going to take the front ARB off to save some weight - it is not doing much at the moment - having been ground down to a pencil.
I'm sure I mentioned a blade would be good for you, and you said it would be to expensive! lol Go on, how much does one cost and where from?
It was expensive. I must be mad. If it works it will be for sale from me for mk2/3 platform - 80 to 160% stiffness of 22mm Eibach bar, 7 steps of adjustment
Great, I'm sure you have done your homework and it will be good, I would love one, is it adjustable from incar?
Nope - double the cost - very easy to do outside, pull a spring loaded pin, rotate blade section, pin re-engages, job done
That's fair enough.! I guess if you were on a 24hrs event incar adjustment would be desirable but for a track day or sprint you could quickly find settings that work for you in all conditions. It would be very interesting to test one of these and feel the effects.
Both chaps I spoke to didn't think it was a good idea for sprints and hillclimbs - some of the tracks are just too bumpy, more akin to tarmac rallies, and traction is a big thing to keep in mind. Startline traction also. We have done a lot of mods to the damper valving which give much firmer low speed damping than previous so that will give an effect of stiffer springs on body control, but without the traction penalty. The blade arb is very tuneable also so the car will work in wet as well as dry conditions. Basically trying to keep options open - it takes longer to change springs than arb and damper settings. Was seriously thinking of trying a progressive spring setup but the right weight range for my car was not available - that might have worked with no front arb We will see if it all works I guess
Still dont understand why alot of ppl on this forum want to use a soft/no arb and stiff springs. Stif springs make you lose traction a arb dont.
It's horses for courses. Like Rob said, hillclimbing can be quite bumpy hence using less spring and more bar (where needed). However bars and springs work in different ways. An ARB effects the how quickly weight transfer happens. Too much bar at the front and you end up with the inside front wheel loosing grip as it try's to lift off the floor. So you can lose grip with too much ARB. This leaves you with raising the spring rate again. Most good books read that springs should be setup 1st with ARBs used to fine tune. Gurds
