I still say stiffen the springs but maybe not too much then. Ian on here also uses higher poundage springs. I thinks you may have to experiment on that one. Try a few sets out. I will have a word with a few peeps and see if they have any other info for you.
Hi folks, yeah i use 350lbs fronts and 400lbs rears, but it's worth noting thou' that when i went up to this weight of spring i had to start using solid ali front top mounts as the standard rubber ones can't cope with the weight of the springs, so the rubber just kept pushing up and gave way before the spring even started to compress. I'd assume that solid top mounts won't be allowed, so be careful how stiff you go. What spring weights are you currently running?? Are you not allowed to replace the front windows with plastic too?? You only mention replacing the rears. Changing all the windows on mine made a big difference to performance. I keep the rubbers on mine but if you're allowed then i'd get rid of them as they weight a few kilos too. Now i know you should be using rubber bushing, but were you aware that poly bushes are also available in black for the classic look! Rear ARBS are more important than the fronts so if you can interchange to a stiffer rear then defo do so. Edited by: I V - mk1 16v
Infinity is still using standard front top mounts with similar springs to you Ian and they havn't collapsed in over a year so far.
Thats surprising, as soon as i lowered the car down onto the ground after fitting the new springs, i used new top mounts and one side pushed up and through there and then and the other a couple of days later. I took them back and swapped them over for another set, but they did the same thing. They were GSF ones rather than VAG, but they were still febi ones, which i though were exactly the same.
Scirocco 16v Has a larger diameter rear anti roll bar that may be worth looking at. Also H+R sell race springs to fit the std type struts. It says you must keep the std bumpstops, as a cheep fix you could mabe add a choped up bumpstop to mean the car can't roll so far before it hits the bumpstops.
Spring rates are about 230F 170R and Aurok modified the damper valving to cope with kerb hoping. We don't wish to up the spring rates any further as the car only weighs 765kg with Keith in it. We can't replace door windows, they must also retain winder mech. The 750 MC are well aware of the black poly bushes and would disqualify if we used them. We did explore that one a while ago. You are right about the rear ARB, how much do you recon that will effect the roll if we do nothing to the front?
Well, ok its up to you. I think that your rear spring rate is way too low. Thats only my opinion. Infinity's car weighs 670kgs with a full tank of fuel and his spring rates are much higher. Far as I can see from the regs, the antiroll bars have to remian stock for the model of car used. That would mean you'd probably get picked up on the thicker antiroll bar. All the good handling mk1's I have encountered have higher poundage springs on the back, well thats my experience anyway.
You are not the first to say this, and we had this discussion with Aurok a while ago. They are adamant that the spring rates fitted are right. They also made the comment to me that many people often make the mistake of overdoing the spring rates. They feel a stiffer spring would result in more over steer because of the rear wheels having less contact. Now don't get me wrong,I'm not saying you're wrong, but they do know what they aredoing. I am not an expert, hence this thread, but what else can I do but accept what they tell me. It is what they do for a living... I can see it must further reduce roll by having stiffer springs but what other benefit would they give?<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /> You are right about the ARB diameter, but I think that is one little indiscretion we could get away with. They are unlikely to know what diameter a Golf RARB is, unless we get a scrutineer who knows them from ownership or professionally. Fortunately there are no other Golfs in the championship to compare it with.
Rear wouldn't be noticable unless you got the vernia out. think std is 18mm and scirocco 16v is 21.5mm IIRC As far as the spring rates go for a car on road tyres they sound reasonable. My understanding is to run the lowest springrates you can get away with and use bigger anti roll bars to reduce the roll and aid grip in the corners.
Well I see how you could get away with the thicker ARB. It will be VW stamped too so they probably wont notice. If you think you may get away with it then go for it. I use a 28mm rear bar but you wouldn't get away with that, its obviously bigger. Get the cars corner weights measured. It will give you an indication to what the cars current weight balance is with your cars current spring setup. By changing the spring rates and the ratio between the front to back, you can alter the cars balance and induce more oversteer. The mk1 inherently understeers as it is. The reason for the high rear spring rate is purely to rectify this inherent problem. But I guess the people you are using either alreay have experience with mk1 golfs or have already corner weighted the car. Stiffer springs will induce more oversteer and make the ride more bouncy. It will also make the car snap out harder on the limit. Generally found that on a golf, stiffer rear and softer front for dry conditions and softer rear for wetter conditions. People do like to go for bigger ARBs 1st as it maintains ride quality better than stiffer springs.
I know someone who races a xr2, and he's adamant that ridiculously stiff on the back is way to go. he was quoting 1000 -1100 lb spring rates. As suggested before try a varation of rates until you get some good/better and consistent times!! The rules regarding suspension are confusing me slightly... for example.. 1)it says that the original suspension type can be used 2)coilover dampers (i.e combined dampers and coil springs)may only be used if standard fitment. our set-ups are combined dampers and coil springs, so does that mean you can convert a standard shock to a coilover type or Have i gone down a dead end??
Thanks all you guys. It seem 2 schools of thought are developing here. The realy stiff springingor the higher rated but not over the top springs but stiffer ARB. It is the latter which Aurok are favouring with a bit more neg camber on the front (to combat something else). The corner weights have been done and the current springs were selected based on that data.I think we will go with the stiffer roll barfor the moment, test it and go from there. To answer some other points.. Wheels must be standard size and type. Hopefully we can reach a chassis setup good for wet or dry, using tyre pressure changes to compensate. We have found small pressure changes make quite a big difference to handling. Mods to suspension are permitted regading height, spring rates, ajustable dampers. Springs must be same dia, and all mounting points standard. I think that covers all the queries, thanks for your help everyone.
I thought you'd be running at least 2deg neg camber and at least 20mins toe out for track already. It will give you much a better tyre contact patch round bends and a much better turn in too. Well good luck with the car anyway, let us know how you get on.
with regard to negative camber.. on the mk1 (and mk2 for that matter) the macpherson strut suspension means that as the wheel moves up relative to the body (outside wheel on a turn) the wheel tends towards more positive camber - there are two ways to deal with this, increasing roll stiffness decreases the wheel travel in a given corner so there is less camber change. The second way is to give more static camber, meaning that as the camber changes it will get pushed more towards the ideal setting. Unfortunately the second method is flawed - in that it will only be right at a given amount of body roll, less roll will give too much negative camber, and more roll with cause too little neg. So while increasing the static negative camber will help address the effect, it doesn't deal with the cause. Once everything possible has been done to limit the front roll (within the regs, and within the compromises of spring rates etc) then the cause has been addressed - then neg at the front can be increased to help limit the effect.
Just to chip in about spring rates, I was at the Nurburgring once and a UK reg mk2 16v was there all caged up etc, got chatting to the guys and it had been used in the VW cup at some point, it had 800 lb rear springs and stock roll bars I've seen 375 front and 250ish? used on mk1 track cars to good effect too. Edited by: GVK
The Carvells don't go massive of spring rates, but they do use big bars and the VW cup runs stickier rubber and cruically an LSD is allowed.
