Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
ADM PERFORMANCE
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Specific Models / Packages > Camaro 1LE Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-23-2013, 09:16 AM   #15
t&t moyer
It's all hers.
 
t&t moyer's Avatar
 
Drives: 2015 ZL1
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Djibouti - Horn of Africa / Wellsville NY
Posts: 717
I'm in to see the results too like several others.

I have a set of BMR springs setting new in the box waiting to be installed but I was just on the fence if I was going to really "gain" what I was looking for with them. First a Pedders rear sway bar is going in before installing the springs to see how things are effected.
__________________
#846
t&t moyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2013, 12:20 PM   #16
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dropspeed View Post
I did talk to a couple of springs companies this week and I do appreciate their honesty and most had the same response that "most customers are more concerned with ride height / looks"

If the numbers I found online are correct the SS comes with:

165FR and 370RR (lbs/in) spring combo.

Most aftermarket companies are increasing the front to:

210-220 lbs/in or about a 30% increase. (BMR 220, Pfadt 210, Eibach 143-222,)

The rear spring rates vary from 395-485 or 21% to 34.5% increase (Pfadt 210, BMR 460, Eibach 143-222).

The closest I can find to a (close to) equal increase is with the Eibach (34.5% FR / 31% rear increase) but I wanted to stay away from a progressive rate springs (Eibach, Pfadt, SLP) and use a linear spring. Now Progressive rate are much nicer for the street, but that is not my focus.

BMR and Pedders offer linear rate springs. Pedders does not publish springs rates so they can not be considered unless I can find/see those.

I spoke with Kyle at BMR and they offer a 220/460 combo for the V8 and a 200/430 combo for the V6. The V6 is lighter, but I asked if I could order a V6 front spring 200 lbs/in and a V8 rear 460 lbs/in and I can. That would increase the front rate 21% and the rear 24%. It sounds great in theory, but my concern then turns to ride height as I fear the front V6 Springs will sit lower than the rear V8 Springs. the only way to find out would be to try it....So what now? I'm not sure....
Seems that people even in this thread are skipping right past that red-bolded item . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ↑↑↑ . . .

Re-tuning the ride rates without affecting the handling balance is more complicated than increasing the front and rear springs by the same x%, unless you're also considering adjustable-rate sta-bars. Even then, you may want to consider maintaining the flat-ride pitch characteristics if you'll be driving it on the street much (think front to back head toss), and there is an approach for this as well. This is a front spring rate, rear spring rate, shock/spring damping, wheelbase, and range of speeds anticipated thing, not just springs.

At some point, the amount of damping that the OE shocks and struts can provide will start to matter. Best grip is attained with two to three times as much
"% critical damping" as you want for best ride, and % critical damping is tied to spring rate and corner weight. So with the general assumption that OE damping falls somewhere between best ride and best grip, keeping the same shocks and struts and stiffening the springs moves the % critical damping slightly away from performance toward ride quality. This can be felt, if you have some idea what to be "feeling".

Roughly, as spring rates increase, you need more rebound damping to keep their extension under control. For a more reasonable street ride, a little less bump damping, though going too far with stiffer rebound/softer bump damping can result in the shocks and struts jacking the car down.

The impression I always get is that a lower CG is given more credit for performance than it deserves. When you start to go through the numbers, a 1.5" lowering only reduces the lateral load transfer by about 7%, which does not buy you the full 7% more grip. And there are some geometric consequences - strut roll centers drop faster than you lower the ride height being one (so some of the extra rate of new lowering springs gets eaten up holding roll per lateral g where it was to begin with). And the camber curve changes, with poorer camber recovery being a characteristic of lowering a strut suspension.

I'm not trying to discourage lowering here, just pointing out that there is a good bit more involved if you want it to be technically right as a priority. Fortunately, the adverse effects can be addressed, or at least they can if you aren't running under a rule set that prohibits doing so (such as SCCA's Solo regs for any autocross class with the words 'Stock' or 'Street' in it).


Norm

Last edited by Norm Peterson; 06-23-2013 at 12:35 PM.
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2013, 12:37 PM   #17
dgreenberg
 
dgreenberg's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Z/28 #352 2013 SS 1LE (SOLD)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Idaho Falls, ID
Posts: 342
Pfadt is probably your best bet. I believe those are linear springs. I got LG G5 lowering springs and I'm not too happy with them. Initially they feel softer since they are progressive.
dgreenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2013, 12:41 PM   #18
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgizzle View Post
In my opinion you gain lower cg on a heavy car and lots more camber in front and rear ( we both bottomed out at 0.8-0.9 negative on rear including another local guy).
While you do gain in terms of your static camber, you lose on a strut suspension in terms of how fast it recovers camber in roll against the chassis roll trying to make the cambers go + on the outer tire. On a strut front / most any IRS or stick axle rear suspended car with a halfway sane camber setting for at least occasional street driving, this implies heavier understeer.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2013, 01:12 PM   #19
Mgizzle

 
Mgizzle's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Camaro 1LE 1SS
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Detroit
Posts: 948
Ur camber curve depends on ur linkage, so lowering it will follow same curve as not lowering it, gains could be different depending on where u start on curve. However, increasing static camber while lowering cg and having highere wheel rates, results in less roll. Hence you could have better camber at full lat gs due to this vs stock. Tires dont lie, and my tires at -1.4 are worn on the outside.

Get the basic mechanical grip first, which is camber etc. And then you can worry about transient tools like dampers. Transients are for polishing lap times, ur lucky to get even half a second gain with perfectly set up dampers per lap vs. What comes onthe car.

U can argue suspension geometry and theory for years but basics like a solid alignment get u there 90% of the way.
Mgizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2013, 03:40 PM   #20
jcieutat
 
Drives: 2013 SS 1LE
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Southeast Louisiana
Posts: 85
I am putting a set of Eibach Pro Kit progressive springs (#38144.140) on my car within the next few weeks. They are sitting in a box in my garage. I will never track my car, it is mainly just to piddle around town and go to the gym. I am expecting a little rougher ride vs an already rough riding car! I am lowering it to get rid of the 4x4 stance. These car companies put so much money into design and then leave a huge gap between the fender and wheels. I guess they are in the bed with the aftermarket companies!
__________________
2013 Camaro 1SS 1LE Inferno Orange
jcieutat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2013, 05:23 PM   #21
1leNPP
 
Drives: 1LE , 1SS , NPP
Join Date: May 2013
Location: calif.
Posts: 262
Dropspeed

Look with the parts that are out there wright now the only way to do it right is to put a set of coilovers on the car. No one making a shock and struts that have adjustable damping so you can have a chance to set up a set of lower springs so they work right . The spring you can pick from suck it not like were working with your old EVO (I had a EVO-8 ) where you had just a ton of stuff to pick from.

So in the short term till we get more stuff to pick from that spring even out the ride high , give you the most travel your going to get in the back of the car (only lowers it 1/2 inch) and the stock shock dose a good job with it. The cost is low if you don't like how it work change back .

My last car being a Mustang we had the same problem for some time now with the back end of the car and right now there a group of guys with Boss 302 that are running a liner rate spring in the front and a progressive spring in the back and tracking there car with out the world coming to a end. The only thing that most of them wanted was adjustable sway bars so they could set there under and oversteer to there liking for there tire set-up.

Now its it the best no, but it dose not mean it can not work even out on the track. ( noting trying to be a dick or rude I just think your over think it for what we got to work with)
1leNPP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2013, 07:28 PM   #22
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 10 Legacy 2.5GT, ...
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 3,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mgizzle View Post
Ur camber curve depends on ur linkage, so lowering it will follow same curve as not lowering it, gains could be different depending on where u start on curve. However, increasing static camber while lowering cg and having highere wheel rates, results in less roll.
I'm not exactly arguing with that, only that the gains in terms of reduced roll are less than what either the increase in spring rates or the lowered ride height would suggest. IOW, 20% - 35% stiffer springs as in OP's situation will not reduce roll by that much, nor would a 5% lower CG (about a 1" 'drop') result in a 5% reduction in roll if you held the spring rates constant.


Quote:
Hence you could have better camber at full lat gs due to this vs stock. Tires dont lie, and my tires at -1.4 are worn on the outside.
That certainly suggests that you're better off then you would be with OE springs, OE preferred camber, and OE ride height, even when I don't know what you've changed away from OE other than camber.

What that also tells me is that -1.4° isn't far enough negative for however enthusiastic your cornering is (hopefully there isn't a toe issue clouding the picture), while certainly not being too far negative for however much hard braking you do. But I'm not entirely surprised at your observation - I'm getting virtually dead-even wear across the treads of both my summer and winter tire sets with front cambers (also a strut suspension) set at -1.8°. Mostly enthusiastic street driving, so let's call that about 5/10ths, maybe 6/10ths on occasion.

A lowered car absolutely should be faster and drive better once you retune your static camber setting and all the other little things to work better at the lower ride height, instead of simply whacking an inch or so off the ride height, letting them fall wherever they may, and hoping for the best.


Quote:
Get the basic mechanical grip first, which is camber etc. And then you can worry about transient tools like dampers. Transients are for polishing lap times, ur lucky to get even half a second gain with perfectly set up dampers per lap vs. What comes onthe car.
I'll suggest that a lot of the 1LE's goodness comes from these refinements, and that transient behavior and "feel" are more what's noticed in the street part of one's driving.

Quarter turn adjustments with Koni single adjustables can make for noticeable improvements in overall composure, and slightly coarser adjustments are enough for me to note differences specifically in tire grip (making no other adjustments) . . . and I'm strictly an amateur at this sort of test-driver evaluation.


Norm
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 12:39 PM   #23
Dropspeed
2013 Camaro SS1LECTSVZ28
 
Dropspeed's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 AGM 1SS/1LE
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Suburbs of Detroit, MI
Posts: 2,379
Thank you for all of the responses and information.

I find it interesting that none of the forums suspension sponsors have chimed in.

-Matt
__________________
Dropspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 01:08 PM   #24
newb

 
newb's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1LE
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: DMV
Posts: 1,524
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dropspeed View Post
Thank you for all of the responses and information.

I find it interesting that none of the forums suspension sponsors have chimed in.

-Matt
I was thinking the same thing. Almost disappointing that they have not at least said his concerns are unnecessary. At a minimum I expected a "for what you are looking for your only real option is coilovers" response. Instead they have all remained silent. I know they are busy but it's disappointing nonetheless.

Almost seems to add credibility to the argument that they are needed but not offered since most people just want the look. Why reengineer the right part if the one on the shelf is already selling. I hope one of them comes along soon to help clear things up.
__________________
It's a Dingledarm. It's there to dampen side fumbling. If your marzelvanes fumble too much they can cause total protonic reversal. It gets ugly from there. This is really the biggest problem with the new Camaro. That and the tri-pronged blivot.

Delivered 21 Jan 2013

newb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 01:44 PM   #25
gajagfan


 
gajagfan's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 1SS 1LE Black - Std Exhaust
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Brunswick, GA
Posts: 3,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by newb View Post
I was thinking the same thing. Almost disappointing that they have not at least said his concerns are unnecessary. At a minimum I expected a "for what you are looking for your only real option is coilovers" response. Instead they have all remained silent. I know they are busy but it's disappointing nonetheless.

Almost seems to add credibility to the argument that they are needed but not offered since most people just want the look. Why reengineer the right part if the one on the shelf is already selling. I hope one of them comes along soon to help clear things up.
I know the production numbers are not in, but possibly the volume of 1LE's produced does not warrant the engineering cost to develop the product?
gajagfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 04:28 PM   #26
Big C CamaroSS

 
Drives: Black Camaro 2SS/RS 1LE
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belleville, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,146
So we are out of luck with regards to lowering springs for our 1LE's? And I have a set of Pedders 1" lowering springs just sitting in the downstairs bedroom
Big C CamaroSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 05:19 PM   #27
toehead93


 
Drives: 2014 2SS/1LE
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: wpb fl
Posts: 3,104
Post this in the suspension forum and I bet those vendors will see this and speak up.
__________________
Used Racing Brake 2 Peice Rotors for sale:
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=344754

Summit White 2014 2SS 1LE
Recaros, NPP exhaust, Nav
2010 2SS A6 - sold.
toehead93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 07:11 PM   #28
dgreenberg
 
dgreenberg's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Z/28 #352 2013 SS 1LE (SOLD)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Idaho Falls, ID
Posts: 342
Do you guys think your lowering springs won't fit? Lol

I have a 1le and got a set of lowering springs. LG G5 Super Springs. they are advertised for 2010+ Camaro. They fit with no issues.

Just make sure after you install to retime the bushings and then align the car. Makes a huge difference over just slapping on the springs and not doing anything else.
dgreenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.