Ohlins Camaro

[Abdi]

Originally Posted by L99CAMA2011

What spring rates do you guys have?

400lbs front and 628lbs rear for me.

[Burt]

Originally Posted by cross-bones

Because I had to install my stock suspension before I brought my Camaro to Ohlins I took a measurement of the height. I had a H&R coilover suspension installed for the last 45.000km but for the beginning of their TUV-Approval it had to be stock for the inspection.

The lowering with the recommended setup of the Ohlins is -20mm in the front and -15mm in the rear. Just like advertised and I verified it when I picked up the car. So it is not for someone that buys a coilover for the look of a really lowered car. I knew that and after 4 years with the H&R I wanted performance and ride quality instead of lowrider look. I don't say the H&R was bad, otherwise I would have changed it earlier, but priorities change sometimes.

The Camaro is currently on the stock wheels with Winter tires. I will try to make a Picture and post it here.

Just curious, where did you get the 20mm front/15mm rear recommended drops from? I'm going to be setting my car up and corner balancing it in a couple weeks, and this is the first time I've heard of rake, even 5mm worth get brought up in an informed fashion.

[cross-bones]

With the recommended spring rates and preload the car will be 20mm lower at the front and 15mm lower at the rear compared to a completely stock Camaro. You can't adjust the ride height. It is set just by the spring rate and preload. This Information is also advertised by Ohlins on their European Website.

[Fondue Wormhole]

Originally Posted by cross-bones

With the recommended spring rates and preload the car will be 20mm lower at the front and 15mm lower at the rear compared to a completely stock Camaro. You can't adjust the ride height. It is set just by the spring rate and preload. This Information is also advertised by Ohlins on their European Website.

The ride height is adjustable; that's what the threaded collars are for. I haven't seen the install instructions for them, but what they're probably doing is giving you a minimum preload value so the spring will be under 'some' compression at full droop (no free-play at full droop).

With those rates, and that design, you can only go so low without free-play, which appears to be ~20mm. You may be able to go lower by incorporating a helper spring; you'd just have to look at the numbers...

In other-words, you aren't locked into a preload value, you just don't want to have less than their minimum value. You can always add preload to any corner, which is what you would do when corner balancing (assuming you're at minimum preload).

The design of the rear is nice in that it allows you to run that much rear rate; something that's a little more difficult the way the Penske & JRI dampers are designed (adjustment on top Vs the bottom).

I really like those dampers; I wish they came out with them sooner... Enjoy!!!

[Abdi]

Finally home after a long month away. Today I got a chance to assemble the rears. Need to adjust the preload on the springs tomorrow and go for the install.

[bkevind]

Should label that picture NSFW!

Good stuff.

[cdb95z28]

Originally Posted by bkevind

Should label that picture NSFW!

Good stuff.

[Abdi]

Originally Posted by bkevind

Should label that picture NSFW!

Good stuff.

I apologize the picture is stupid big, then again these things are pretty sexy. So far the assembly is straight forward with hand tools. I still plan to put these on a shock dyno at AMF to get some data and make comparisons but I needed an excuse to spend a couple hours in the garage today. I'll post some more pics later today.

I'm really hating winter right now, after spending a month in Destin, FL coming back to Mass sucks.

[cdb95z28]

Better big than to small, you can really see the details.
Yes, very sexy!

[Burt]

Thanks for the info guys. I see where the argument of pre-load and ride height is coming from, on my Pedders coilovers you can adjust ride height independently of pre-load, whereas with these you'd need helper springs to lower the ride height and keep your pre-load.

I think I'm going to try some rake this year, I did pretty well with neutral rake last year, but from what I've learned front engine cars like a bit of rake.

[Fondue Wormhole]

Originally Posted by Burt

I think I'm going to try some rake this year, I did pretty well with neutral rake last year, but from what I've learned front engine cars like a bit of rake.

JOOC, what have you read in regards to rake and front engine cars?

I wouldn't be too concerned with rake, other than to be sure the front isn't higher than the rear, especially for road course duty.

Rake is more important for aero-cars that generate a significant amount of underbody downforce (look at how much rake F1 cars have), but those cars are designed to take advantage it, and can be very sensitive to it (a couple mm can make a big difference).

If you’re car is working well, tweak the knowns to adjust the handling, not the unknowns. You can end up chasing your tail changing things you can’t quantify, and can have unknown/unrealized cascading effects…

[cross-bones]

I would not recommend to modify the Ohlins system with helper springs. The damper setup would not work like it was constructed for, because you would change the available space for piston travel.

If you want to go lower, then use another type of suspension. My second choice would have been the KW V3. It is 3-way adjustable (ride height, compression damping and rebound damping).

[Burt]

Originally Posted by Fondue Wormhole

JOOC, what have you read in regards to rake and front engine cars?

I wouldn't be too concerned with rake, other than to be sure the front isn't higher than the rear, especially for road course duty.

Rake is more important for aero-cars that generate a significant amount of underbody downforce (look at how much rake F1 cars have), but those cars are designed to take advantage it, and can be very sensitive to it (a couple mm can make a big difference).

If you’re car is working well, tweak the knowns to adjust the handling, not the unknowns. You can end up chasing your tail changing things you can’t quantify, and can have unknown/unrealized cascading effects…

I haven't found any "rules of thumb" on rake, other than that more rake encourages turn-in, up to the point where it makes the car unstable. I have a friend who has a lot of track experience (110+ track days, talks directly to manufacturers to make adjustments) and on everything from his Miata to his Viper ACRs, rake encourages response. In a sense, you're statically loading the car in the same way as when you trail brake, and lessening the roll moment in comparison to the front.

[Abdi]

Originally Posted by cross-bones

I would not recommend to modify the Ohlins system with helper springs. The damper setup would not work like it was constructed for, because you would change the available space for piston travel.

If you want to go lower, then use another type of suspension. My second choice would have been the KW V3. It is 3-way adjustable (ride height, compression damping and rebound damping).

I highly agree with this. A couple of reasons...

These are as the name implies a "Road and track" style damper and strut. These no doubt will be a significant improvement over the stock 1LE or standard SS shock. I bought these knowing not for the "lowering" aspect of the spring. I bought these because of the adjustable shock valving, 44.5MM sized piston, DVF technology, 2 year warranty, rebuildable option, high quality manufacturing, custom order springs. There is a nominal drop of 20MM on the front and 15MM rear using the base preload setting. There is some height adjustability by changing the preload on the springs as you move the lower perches but it is really just enough to make some cross corner balancing adjustments without a dramatic change in suspension geometry.

Put the rears in today, I'm definitely happy with these right now but going back to the track in April is the only way to know how good or bad these are.