Notices
Racing & Drivers Education Forum
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Stiffer up front or softer out back?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-06-2009 | 11:42 PM
  #31  
mglobe's Avatar
mglobe
The Penguin King
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 9,838
Likes: 119
From: Houston
Default

Originally Posted by trackjunky
Boy, that makes me think that Larry may have hit it on the head with going full soft on the shocks and seeing what happens. If I remember correctly, that's the advise I first gave you. Funny how I don't listen to my own advise.

I'm going to check canister pressure to see what's in there. Larry, any suggestions?
Yup that approach worked pretty well. I ended up with it being fairly stiff, but started soft, and added more damping between each session until it felt right.
Old 05-07-2009 | 12:24 AM
  #32  
Larry Herman's Avatar
Larry Herman
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,432
Likes: 2
From: Columbus, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by Veloce Raptor
If it's below 150 front, 175 rear, add N now. Ideally, with your springs, maybe 175 front & 225 rear? Larry may disagree.....
I don't know how the Ohlins compares to Motons. I also am not sure how many people honestly understand the total effect of rasing the canister pressures. I know that I ran mine with a 50 lb stagger 140F/190R because that was what was in there. When I reset them to the suggested 190F/240R I felt that it made the car too choppy and I couldn't re-adjust the shocks to get rid of that, so I put them back down.

Somewhere in the mid 100s to low 200s sounds right, but like I said, you do not know what the overall effect will be until you try it. One thing though, canister pressures will have a greater effect on a more softly sprung car, because they do affect spring rates.
__________________
Larry Herman
2016 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
2018 Tesla Model 3 - Electricity can be fun!
Retired Club Racer & National PCA Instructor
Past Flames:
1994 RS America Club Racer
2004 GT3 Track Car
1984 911 Carrera Club Racer
1974 914/4 2.0 Track Car

CLICK HERE to see some of my ancient racing videos.

Old 05-07-2009 | 01:02 AM
  #33  
onefastviking's Avatar
onefastviking
Race Car
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,549
Likes: 2
From: Texas
Default

I'll help at the track if you are serious about getting it resolved, I've got a pretty good idea what the 996's need to go fast. From what you have explained on yours I have a few clues already.

What kind of lap times were you turning at TWS this last weekend ?
Old 05-07-2009 | 01:05 AM
  #34  
onefastviking's Avatar
onefastviking
Race Car
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,549
Likes: 2
From: Texas
Default

Originally Posted by trackjunky
Boy, that makes me think that Larry may have hit it on the head with going full soft on the shocks and seeing what happens. If I remember correctly, that's the advise I first gave you. Funny how I don't listen to my own advise.

I'm going to check canister pressure to see what's in there. Larry, any suggestions?

BTW, keep in mind when you check the pressures you will lose pressure.
Old 05-07-2009 | 09:30 AM
  #35  
Veloce Raptor's Avatar
Veloce Raptor
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 41,906
Likes: 1,752
From: All Ate Up With Motor
Default

Originally Posted by onefastviking
BTW, keep in mind when you check the pressures you will lose pressure.


Yup, rul of thumb I was told, FWIW, is to put in 5psi more than you need if you use one of the tiny gagues, and 10psi more with one of the longer hose gagues, to account for losses + the N in the hose.

Larry, you're right, Ohlins may be different. You and I are opn the same page, however. I have been playing a bit with N pressures in my canisters to sense the effects. It's fun to play, but in the end I ended up back at 150/175 for best results!







Professional Racing and Driving Coach
Old 05-07-2009 | 09:49 AM
  #36  
Larry Herman's Avatar
Larry Herman
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,432
Likes: 2
From: Columbus, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by Veloce Raptor
Larry, you're right, Ohlins may be different. You and I are on the same page, however.
Oh NO! Not again!
Old 05-07-2009 | 09:51 AM
  #37  
Veloce Raptor's Avatar
Veloce Raptor
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 41,906
Likes: 1,752
From: All Ate Up With Motor
Default

Originally Posted by Larry Herman
Oh NO! Not again!
I know that makes your ulcers & rrhoids act up, but it is what it is.







Professional Racing and Driving Coach
Old 05-07-2009 | 10:18 AM
  #38  
Seth Thomas's Avatar
Seth Thomas
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,264
Likes: 250
From: Cumming, Ga
Default

Originally Posted by Veloce Raptor
Larry, you're right, Ohlins may be different. You and I are opn the same page, however. I have been playing a bit with N pressures in my canisters to sense the effects. It's fun to play, but in the end I ended up back at 150/175 for best results!


Professional Racing and Driving Coach

Correct about the difference in Ohlins vs Motons. I have a little bit of experience with Ohlins. From what I have seen they run similar can pressures as Motons but it effects them ever so slightly different. The best solution is to check the pressures and play with them. The 996 will need more rear pressure than the front, probably 40 to 50 psi higher.

And I think that Larry is going to be correct on playing with the rebound on the car. It sounds like some of your issues may be too much rebound in the rear of the car. Experiment with that and let us know
Old 05-07-2009 | 11:10 AM
  #39  
onefastviking's Avatar
onefastviking
Race Car
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,549
Likes: 2
From: Texas
Default

Originally Posted by Veloce Raptor
Yup, rul of thumb I was told, FWIW, is to put in 5psi more than you need if you use one of the tiny gagues, and 10psi more with one of the longer hose gagues, to account for losses + the N in the hose.

Larry, you're right, Ohlins may be different. You and I are opn the same page, however. I have been playing a bit with N pressures in my canisters to sense the effects. It's fun to play, but in the end I ended up back at 150/175 for best results!







Professional Racing and Driving Coach
My old Penske guage lost 5 or so lbs, the one I use now, a Longacre with a long hose (I like the long hose for ease of use) loses more like 20-25 lbs. I have played with this a few times to see exactly how much it does lose so I can determine if I "was" close when checking.
FYI - I have no experience with the Ohlins so I can't comment specifically on them. For TWS I use a lower can pressure than on ECR or either MSR.
Old 05-07-2009 | 11:22 AM
  #40  
onefastviking's Avatar
onefastviking
Race Car
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,549
Likes: 2
From: Texas
Default

Since I'm not that familiar with the Ohlins, what size piston rod do they use ?
Old 05-07-2009 | 01:27 PM
  #41  
trackjunky's Avatar
trackjunky
Thread Starter
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,445
Likes: 1
From: The right side of Leftville
Default

All great advise. Good thing I keep a log book, as I am writing plans down for the next track day.

Viking, in answer to your question is was running 2:04's. I can tell you that I was maybe driving the car 6/10's at best as the loose condition was totally in my head. I was just waiting for that thing to come around.

Don't get me wrong, I adjusted things better in the afternoon on Sunday, but it is nowhere near where I expect it to be. After I rode in Norwood's car, it dawned on me how much I changed my braking zones to accomodate the cars handling issues. I should be sub 2:00 going CW at TWS easily.

My data through 15-14, 12, 7 and 1-2 is just embarrasing.
Old 05-07-2009 | 01:39 PM
  #42  
Veloce Raptor's Avatar
Veloce Raptor
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 41,906
Likes: 1,752
From: All Ate Up With Motor
Default

Originally Posted by trackjunky
All great advise. Good thing I keep a log book, as I am writing plans down for the next track day.

Viking, in answer to your question is was running 2:04's. I can tell you that I was maybe driving the car 6/10's at best as the loose condition was totally in my head. I was just waiting for that thing to come around.

Don't get me wrong, I adjusted things better in the afternoon on Sunday, but it is nowhere near where I expect it to be. After I rode in Norwood's car, it dawned on me how much I changed my braking zones to accomodate the cars handling issues. I should be sub 2:00 going CW at TWS easily.

My data through 15-14, 12, 7 and 1-2 is just embarrasing.
Damn, dude. Hike up your skirt and DRIVE! Or get me in your right seat sometime!







Professional Racing and Driving Coach
Old 05-07-2009 | 01:48 PM
  #43  
Larry Herman's Avatar
Larry Herman
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,432
Likes: 2
From: Columbus, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by trackjunky
After I rode in Norwood's car, it dawned on me how much I changed my braking zones to accomodate the cars handling issues.
And that was with Paul driving!
Old 05-07-2009 | 02:06 PM
  #44  
onefastviking's Avatar
onefastviking
Race Car
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,549
Likes: 2
From: Texas
Default

Originally Posted by trackjunky
Viking, in answer to your question is was running 2:04's. I can tell you that I was maybe driving the car 6/10's at best as the loose condition was totally in my head. I was just waiting for that thing to come around.
Any chance your lack of confidence in pushing the car is causing some of the problems you are feeling ?
FYI - I did a 2:00.4 in Globes with traffic and still not pushing it 10/10's , then we made some adjustments and had it handling even better. I'm thinking you guys should be turning around 1:55's, maybe a little less once everything is right.
The GTS3 car did a 1:51.x a few weeks ago and it was a green track on old tires so there is a better time still in it.
Old 05-08-2009 | 12:22 AM
  #45  
trackjunky's Avatar
trackjunky
Thread Starter
Rennlist Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,445
Likes: 1
From: The right side of Leftville
Default

Viking, my lack of confidence is easily eating up 4 seconds/lap. I'm not carrying anywhere near top speed through any of the corners listed in the previous post. The data from my F-stock 944T is so much faster.(1:59's)

The car got better in the afternoon, but I took a passenger (yellow student) and didn't really push it. Still 2:04's but the car felt better. My point is that with the bars at such an extreme, I have zero adjustment left. So......is it time to look at spring rates?

BTW, I think that 1:55's with a well set up 996 is very doable. With sphericals and 9"fronts and 11" rears it might even be in the 1:54's

VR, no sense putting you in the right seat until I sort out the car. You'd be going code brown all over the place with the rear stepping out like it was. The car was really dialed in for a Drifting event.


Quick Reply: Stiffer up front or softer out back?



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 10:37 PM.