Affordable Track Focused Coilovers Concerns?

[MeisterR 34]

We at MeisterR are always listening to customers feedback and working on new ideas.
A very common request we get are Affordable "Track Focused" Suspension.

These will be suspension are are design for track performance and generally use sticky compound / semi-slick tyres.
The springs rate are on the high side and road compliancy will be compromised for better weight transfer control during track use.

Our aim will be have a setup under £1,000.  That is where we want to set our bar.

Of course, some setup will be cheaper and other a bit more expensive depending on what is required to make the best setup possible.
Some setup will need helper springs in order to achieve enough droop travel due to high springs rate, etc.

I want to know what are some concerns potential customers will have?
What are some questions you may have?

Let me know and I want to hear opinion of current track car drivers and concerns of potential future customers.

Jerrick

[Church 209]

Imho that will be much harder to design at stated budget.

Street coilover needs might be simpler.

- should be more comfortable then stock, should look bling :), allow lowering, be at least slightly capable for rare trackdays. Probably with limited adjustability options to not make it too easy to dial in wrong settings and to not compromise quality for many-ways adjusting to fit within reasonably low budget.

"Track focused" there are several problems that will make it much more difficult to design given stated purpose/limitations.

- it is made for narrower niche, thus harder to save on larger volumes made. That niche is VERY narrow in numbers vs common drivers, yet VERY wide in variations, including some that want "racecar parts, yo", some that simply track more but on not very modified car with very varied tire choice from reasonable width semi-slicks to real slicks, some that build track-only car brought on trailer, some that have very heavy aero. To each different spring/damping rates fit best, thus further splitting in many already narrow niche. Some are also ready for more expensive setups to gain any advantage they can. Some, while wanting more track performance, still driving it daily and having some minimum acceptable comfort requirements. Imho nothing to fit all, or even majority.

At very least track focused imho should:

1) no need for lot of lowering, just some, maybe range can be even less then street ones, after all, it's for handling/grip improvement, for which suspension actually needs travel to be able to .. well .. actually work to soak up road imperfections/kerbs hit in middle of high speed curve and so on :), instead of low-rider showroom hardpark thing to which looks (/questionable max lowering/drop/no wheel gap) matter more then handling

2) camber adjustment and extra range. for track one needs more camber (-2 to -3.5 front, maybe upto -4/-5 for drift setups), for better contact patch for extra grip and more even tire wear on heavy side-loaded tire. So are needed means to get that, in way of camberplates (will make it harder to keep quality yet fit in stated budget) and/or slotted lower mount holes. BTW, if slotted holes are used, i suggest designing in also some mount hole inserts to reduce chance of bolts slipping, for example like used on many rally coilovers. Something looking like these inserts (for rally coilovers i've seen even sets of such of different offsets), should make safer using camber bolts for fine-adjustment with such inserts, unlike if with slotted hole. If for saving budget camplates are made optional, then design coilovers to be able to used with some popular aftermarket camplates with upper spring perches of some of popular coilover types/their top bolt/spring diameters.

3) in general stiffer springs due on average higher loads, to lessen roll, to be used with stickier tires, maybe with more aero downforce. But by how much best/for most? No clue on actual numbers. Maybe sell few spring sets separately to choose right ones at purchase? Won't help much if dampening needs to well fit spring rates though, so i guess adjustment range needs to fit optimal some middle set.

4) as imho track focused owners might be willing to more to customize to find best setup for specific track/weather, to shave as possible laptimes, extra ways adjustment, that is actually working and is consistent might help on track focused coilovers more, also external oil reservoirs. But both will up price, but you already stated budget limits. Imho it would be simpler to fit them at twice or triple the budget. And if going for higher budget, imho also shock dynos included should be nice addition. But at higher budget range .. it will be harder to convince how they might be better choice as well known top tier manufacturer offerings. And as i mentioned, possible buyer niche already might be narrow. So maybe something of analogue of RCE Tarmac Zero with minimum of bells & whistles, more on quality/performance? If no adjustment, i'd go for default drop within inch. Eg. -15mm.

5) if there is adjustment, provide some initial suggested settings to start from, from testing data on tracks.

6) i'd go for lower diameter spring used, to have more clearance for potentially wider tires/wheels at extra camber. Will make it harder though to be used with stock top mount/spring perch, if thought of for budget savings ..

[MeisterR 34]

Interesting, quite a few point to look at.

I am looking at stiffer springs rate, and most importantly is giving that rear end the compression travel it need.

I do like that mount hole insert.

For me it is about getting the right springs rate in and the right damper valving so you have compression force to "work" those sticky tyres.

The only thing I cannot do is the front springs HAVE to use some type of barrel / mini block springs due to space available.  Otherwise you will either run out of ride height adjustment, or have to reduce compression travel by a huge amount in order to avoid spring coil binding.

All great suggestion, thanks for chiming in.

 

Jerrick

[Church 209]

BTW, extra camber might be for saving costs be simple round holes, just that predrilled at different offset/position then stock struts. So that normal camberbolts can be used, but range would be not from eg. 0 to -1.5, but eg. -1.7 to -3.2. Yes, it won't be able to replicate stock alignment, but i find it hard to imagine that someone more set on track use not running more static camber. Those inserts were mentioned more like reliable way to get adjustable camber and be able to use stronger non eccentric stock bolts. But on track it might matter less then on rally.

But for "right spring rate" - tire choice used at track may differ a lot. One thing is eg. 215 MPSS, another wider RE71 cheater tires. And then there are something like Hoosier slicks. I guess, no coilover would fit them all best unless adjustable with wide enough range. And then there is potential extra grip/load from aero (in maxed out set something like this: Citing "No physical numbers to share yet, but our Ohlins had to go after aero v1.0 (10K/12K springs) because they were at full compression on the straights. The custom CSG/SRC Tiens have held up better but we still need to up the valving and spring rate.").

Though i guess probably most hardcore setups will be probably accompanied by higher budget suspension (possibly custom) aswell.

[MeisterR 34]

It will depends of course alot on what the driver want as well as how much they want to spend.  
I am looking at a basic "track focused" setup, and that mean wheel frequency around the 2.5Hz as that will work well with semi-slick type tyre compound.

 

For those that are much deeper into the performance range, then they will not want an "affordable" solution but the correct solution.

That mean proper vehicle dynamic calculation base on the car corner weight, as well as tyre compound, driver experience, etc.

In certain cases you can run a single rate, but more likely to run a dual progressive rate tender springs setup depending on what sort of springs rate are required to achieve the wheel frequency desired.  On car like that you will want to have one rate at static motion and a much higher rate at 1G load.  It is a completely different ball game for cars that are more serious and running aero.

 

Jerrick