home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > Mechanical > performance & modifications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-27-2018, 01:44 PM   #26
mikep
The MP
 
mikep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 38° 27' N 75° 29' W
Default Round 2

IPD blue 7-9 series sport springs, stock 240 springs from a GT that turn out to be the softest 240 springs ever (swapped, probably) and some cheap coilover shocks and springs from Lawrence.













Black front 240 spring, from an unknown donor (taken from the front of a GT by VB242, hoping they were sweet springs).
85#/inch.

Next up, IPD blue 7-9 series sport spring, front.











Starts around 130#, 145# avg, 150# peak. Some rise due to seat issues. Not a progressive spring.

Next up, 240 rear, unknown donor. Was found in a 242 GT.





poncy 95#, but 50% stiffer when in a 240 rear arm due to motion ratio.

Next, IPD blue rear for 7-9 series.



What? The same as a stock 240 spring? No, there's more. It's progressive.


The rise at the end is unresolved, so we had to test to a higher pressure. We chose a distance, and that distance wasn't enough.








95# rising to 140# and staying there.
So at normal ride height, cushy. In a turn or under load, you get less compression.

teal coilover, 350#. (not volvo related)





Shock time.
(not volvo related)
"made in canada" Pro Shocks T40902SA
(below that WB 735)







As set, good for 300#ish springs, didn't try adjusting them. Didn't see how to.
These are still available in black, starting around $80 each in a variety of dimensions.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 240240 View Post
Everything about ancient rome was beautiful, so no 740s would exist.
mikep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2018, 01:48 PM   #27
mikep
The MP
 
mikep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 38° 27' N 75° 29' W
Default

I'll measure dimensions later. School is starting, need to sign off for a bit.
mikep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2018, 11:47 PM   #28
towerymt
the real Towery
 
towerymt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: VA, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikep View Post
1988 Hartford CT 244
Front springs 80 lb/in
449mm (17-5/8") free length
166mm overall Diameter
13.2mm (.520") wire diameter
5.5 free coils
11.5" installed height hanging
8.5" installed height sitting

Rear 91 lb/in
415mm (16-3/8") free length
129mm overall Diameter
11.85mm (.466") wire diameter
7.5 free coils
15.25" installed height hanging
12.25" installed height sitting

Measured the springs that came off my '92 240 sedan.

Front:
17-1/4" free length
0.540" wire

Rear:
16-1/4" free length
0.475" wire

Rear springs had some blue on one coil. Fronts are still covered in undercoating.

towerymt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2018, 03:13 PM   #29
jwernerny
Board Member
 
jwernerny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Fairport, NY
Default

I've got rear springs from a '94 964 (Mk I IRS), and a '92 944T if you want to measure them. PM me.
__________________
--
John Werner
* 1992 944T * 1988 764 GLE V6 * 2002 WRX Wagon (needs motor) * 2006 Honda Odyssey *
jwernerny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2018, 12:04 PM   #30
mikep
The MP
 
mikep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 38° 27' N 75° 29' W
Default

Cool. I would like to measure towery's springs, too.
mikep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 12:43 PM   #31
towerymt
the real Towery
 
towerymt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: VA, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikep View Post
Cool. I would like to measure towery's springs, too.
towerymt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 07:29 PM   #32
mikep
The MP
 
mikep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 38° 27' N 75° 29' W
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by towerymt View Post
I mean, i’ll buy you fried chicken first..
mikep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2018, 08:12 PM   #33
towerymt
the real Towery
 
towerymt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: VA, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikep View Post
I mean, i’ll buy you fried chicken first..
Now yer talkin. Schmaltz me up, big boi
towerymt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2019, 12:23 AM   #34
Marvelous3
Who engineered this?
 
Marvelous3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Atlanta
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikep View Post

Should ride like **** with the 1.5:1 motion ratio squared in back.
Rear vert rate would be 222lb/inch.
Front you lose a little, so 130-ish.
If I had that much rate out back I'd want at least 250 in front to keep it from pitching.
What is considered a "good" ratio for us? Grey car is 300 front and 200 rear and seems to ride super predictable. I sort of guessed when I bought springs at those rates but maybe I got lucky? I'd always read you wanted more spring up front than in the rear.
__________________

1990 240dl Kaplhenke Coilover Daily
1991 245+16 Valve Turbo Microsquirt
Need Hyundai or Genesis parts? PM me for Genuine Hyundai or Genesis parts
Marvelous3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2019, 03:10 PM   #35
mikep
The MP
 
mikep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 38° 27' N 75° 29' W
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvelous3 View Post
What is considered a "good" ratio for us? Grey car is 300 front and 200 rear and seems to ride super predictable. I sort of guessed when I bought springs at those rates but maybe I got lucky? I'd always read you wanted more spring up front than in the rear.
Good question.

Most cars have more weight up front, so you need more rate in front for a similar frequency as the rear.
Even with a 50:50 balance, most o.e. engineers go a little higher in front so it doesn't "pitch" over expansion joints or small bumps in smooth roads.
For performance, it really depends on the suspension type, your driving style, surfaces, etc.
A solid rear axle has an odd motion ratio in roll, so to avoid a huge rear bar, some people go higher in rear. Some anti-roll bars (like ours) have a huge motion ratio as well. In front, it's half as effective on the control arms, compared to on the strut. The rear is even worse, since the effective arm length is the length of the control arm it is bolted to.

300 front and 200 rear gets you roughly equal, which is a good starting point. The wagon with 350 front and 275 rear handled great with mild sways, but was bad to ride in on a bridge. The sedan we put together with 350 front and 225 read was very good. I think it had a 25mm ipd front, 19mm rear.
mikep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 01:30 AM   #36
woodenpudden
lacks goats
 
woodenpudden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Princess Anne, MD
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikep View Post
The sedan we put together with 350 front and 225 read was very good. I think it had a 25mm ipd front, 19mm rear.
Correct, its only fault was a tendency to plow, but behavior on bumpy roads etc. was excellent
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMFWallace View Post

Flunt delivers!
woodenpudden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2019, 02:56 PM   #37
towerymt
the real Towery
 
towerymt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: VA, USA
Default

I wouldn't commit to a ratio front:rear, but I think I'd settle on about 3:1 as my favorite.

For example, I could like 300lb front /150lb rear, but I would never do 2:1 ratio with 800lb front springs.

I've used as high as 325lb rear springs. Went back down to 250lb on the autocross car. Have used lowering springs or cut overload springs on the rear as well. Soft rear springs seem to work fine for handling.

Daily driver: 300 fr / 125? rear (IPD lowering springs in rear, stock bar)
Lemons: 475 fr / 150? rear (cut wagon overload springs in rear, no bar)
Autocross: 550-700 fr / 250 rear (no rear bar)

I've also tried Jamex front lowering springs (they were soft), and 200lb rear springs (a LONG time ago). Car would rotate! Great for street tires and not a lot of camber. Didn't rely on a ton of front grip to make the car turn in. Toe-out and rear spring rate can make a 240 turn as well...but it's not as easy to drive. That was an early autocross setup.
towerymt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 01:58 PM   #38
mikep
The MP
 
mikep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 38° 27' N 75° 29' W
Default

^those 200# stock car springs were what I used after you figured out to use the top cones on the bottom of a 240 rear set-up.

For anyone comparing my post about front-rear balance, remember that RWD Volvos have a 1.5:1 motion ratio (squared) in back, and a strut car loses a bit of rate from the SAI. (5%)

200# in back becomes 300# in vert.
350# in front becomes 333#.
mikep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 08:16 PM   #39
Marvelous3
Who engineered this?
 
Marvelous3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Atlanta
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikep View Post
Good question.

Most cars have more weight up front, so you need more rate in front for a similar frequency as the rear.
Even with a 50:50 balance, most o.e. engineers go a little higher in front so it doesn't "pitch" over expansion joints or small bumps in smooth roads.
For performance, it really depends on the suspension type, your driving style, surfaces, etc.
A solid rear axle has an odd motion ratio in roll, so to avoid a huge rear bar, some people go higher in rear. Some anti-roll bars (like ours) have a huge motion ratio as well. In front, it's half as effective on the control arms, compared to on the strut. The rear is even worse, since the effective arm length is the length of the control arm it is bolted to.

300 front and 200 rear gets you roughly equal, which is a good starting point. The wagon with 350 front and 275 rear handled great with mild sways, but was bad to ride in on a bridge. The sedan we put together with 350 front and 225 read was very good. I think it had a 25mm ipd front, 19mm rear.
What shocks and struts were you using? Off the shelf koni yellows or something custom?
Marvelous3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 10:09 PM   #40
mikep
The MP
 
mikep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 38° 27' N 75° 29' W
Default

Koni single adjust worked ok, chris had those in the wagon and sedan.
I like the r-sports and bilstein inverted struts a lot. If you ever need numbers to get them revalved, John V can steer you straight.
I just welded volvo tops on 260z struts to use bilsteins.
mikep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 10:14 PM   #41
John V, outside agitator
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sleezattle, WA, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikep View Post
^those 200# stock car springs were what I used after you figured out to use the top cones on the bottom of a 240 rear set-up.

For anyone comparing my post about front-rear balance, remember that RWD Volvos have a 1.5:1 motion ratio (squared) in back, and a strut car loses a bit of rate from the SAI. (5%)

200# in back becomes 300# in vert.
350# in front becomes 333#.
Skip the motion ratio talk for a second..Whatchoo sayin, mang? The spring is behind the spindle....


shock is in front roughly what..How many INCHES from front pivot to axle center? How many inches from middle of the axle to the shock?
John V, outside agitator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2019, 11:53 AM   #42
mikep
The MP
 
mikep's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 38° 27' N 75° 29' W
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John V, outside agitator View Post
Skip the motion ratio talk for a second..Whatchoo sayin, mang? The spring is behind the spindle....


shock is in front roughly what..How many INCHES from front pivot to axle center? How many inches from middle of the axle to the shock?
On a mid-80s 244,
front pivot to:
Axle 568mm
Spring 692mm
Shock 424mm
mikep is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.