US sway bars
01-20-2004, 05:44 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
David,
$5500 + fitting was about what I was first quoted by the dealer last year.
The best quote I had otherwise got was from PerfectRun in Sydney who quoted me $2850 for springs and shocks, and $3850 inc sways.
Brett.
$5500 + fitting was about what I was first quoted by the dealer last year.
The best quote I had otherwise got was from PerfectRun in Sydney who quoted me $2850 for springs and shocks, and $3850 inc sways.
Brett.
01-23-2004, 03:23 AM
#26
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Aus
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by DavidM
Why don't you guys get the stuff (ie. springs and front and back swaybars) from Whiteline? It'll cost you $1000 fitted and more than likely will perform just as well.
Why don't you guys get the stuff (ie. springs and front and back swaybars) from Whiteline? It'll cost you $1000 fitted and more than likely will perform just as well.
01-23-2004, 03:32 AM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have had their products on a previous car and doubt I would go that way again.
Why is that? I have never used any of their stuff before, but I do know that a lot of WRX guys use their products and are very quick on the track (partialy) because of it.
Why is that? I have never used any of their stuff before, but I do know that a lot of WRX guys use their products and are very quick on the track (partialy) because of it.
01-23-2004, 03:42 AM
#28
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Aus
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had it on a GT4 Celica and was never really happy with the amount of understeer correction the set up was supposed to give.
Maybe just a characteristic of the car which couldnt be resolved.
It was a while ago, and each car is different, but I doubt I would use their stuff on my Z.
Maybe just a characteristic of the car which couldnt be resolved.
It was a while ago, and each car is different, but I doubt I would use their stuff on my Z.
01-23-2004, 05:27 PM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NEWCASTLE - NSW - AUS
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do you fellas see the need for sway bars on the Z?.
I think that the suspension is about as tight as you could want it - except for track work - in fact one of the major criticisms of the Z by both motoring writers and some potential owners IS the stiff suspension. Am I missing something that others are experiencing?
I can barely detect any body roll at all - and in fact SOME body roll can assist in cornering adhesion. Whats the go?
FROZTY
I think that the suspension is about as tight as you could want it - except for track work - in fact one of the major criticisms of the Z by both motoring writers and some potential owners IS the stiff suspension. Am I missing something that others are experiencing?
I can barely detect any body roll at all - and in fact SOME body roll can assist in cornering adhesion. Whats the go?
FROZTY
01-23-2004, 07:25 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the z hv too much body roll.... well compare to my previous car at least.
I had a BMW 325ci before the z, I changed the sways, bilstein coilovers and add struct brace.
and after all these mods I'm sure the BMW can run circles around the z in a corner.
I had a BMW 325ci before the z, I changed the sways, bilstein coilovers and add struct brace.
and after all these mods I'm sure the BMW can run circles around the z in a corner.
01-23-2004, 09:42 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't say I had any body roll to worry about when I tracked the Z.
Are there different suspension settings between models or release dates? I had some understeer and tyre traction issues due to the re040s. BUt the body never rolled even when i hit the S bend and the weird turn (seems to have 2 turns in one corner) at Wakefield.
Are there different suspension settings between models or release dates? I had some understeer and tyre traction issues due to the re040s. BUt the body never rolled even when i hit the S bend and the weird turn (seems to have 2 turns in one corner) at Wakefield.
01-23-2004, 10:11 PM
#32
Are there different suspension settings between models or release dates?
18" Wheels + Wider Tyre in the rear (235 vs 245)
Brembo Brakes
VDC
Chin Spolier & Rear Spoiler (reduced drag coefficient 0.29 to 0.28)
In the brochure every other aspect was the same, all extras performance, dimensions etc etc. Weight was different obviously, with that extra stuff on it.
On the body roll, there is some, its much better than many other cars, but think how well it handles now and think how well it will be once you modify it. Its going to be fantastic!
Murray
Last edited by mchapman; 01-23-2004 at 10:15 PM.
01-23-2004, 10:30 PM
#33
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Aus
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by ottonove
I think the z hv too much body roll....
I think the z hv too much body roll....
It all depends on your driving style.
I want more
01-24-2004, 12:10 AM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do you fellas see the need for sway bars on the Z?.
I think that the suspension is about as tight as you could want it - except for track work
Personally, I don't have any real issue with the stifness. If it was too soft then I'd be complaining, but it's about on par with a Boxster S + sports suspension package. S2000 was stiffer, but it was to it's detriment on bumpy roads .... though, I focus more on how it feels on the track, and not on the road (at least not bumpy road) so my car is always track perfomance oriented. I'll have the Zed at DECA in about a month and then a a track about a month later so I'll see if there are any shortcoming from the stiffness (or lack of it).
in fact one of the major criticisms of the Z by both motoring writers and some potential owners IS the stiff suspension.
I normally look for the cars where they complain about the stiffness (ie. too much of it). Those car's unually apeal to me - S2000 and Elise come to mind. One of the 1st things I liked about the Zed was how tight the suspension was.
Am I missing something that others are experiencing?
I would want different swaybars not for the purpose of stiffening the car, but for the purpose of giving the front end a bit more grip (ie. stiffer rear swaybar). That's the reason why I'm looking into them ... I need/want more front grip.
[b]I can barely detect any body roll at all - and in fact SOME body roll can assist in cornering adhesion. Whats the go?[b]
There is very little of in in the 350Z IMHO. And that is comparing it to S2000, Boxster, Boxster S, 911, TVR, Elise and even the HSV R8. Body roll is one thing I'm not complaining about ... but the trackwork will tell me more.
I think that the suspension is about as tight as you could want it - except for track work
Personally, I don't have any real issue with the stifness. If it was too soft then I'd be complaining, but it's about on par with a Boxster S + sports suspension package. S2000 was stiffer, but it was to it's detriment on bumpy roads .... though, I focus more on how it feels on the track, and not on the road (at least not bumpy road) so my car is always track perfomance oriented. I'll have the Zed at DECA in about a month and then a a track about a month later so I'll see if there are any shortcoming from the stiffness (or lack of it).
in fact one of the major criticisms of the Z by both motoring writers and some potential owners IS the stiff suspension.
I normally look for the cars where they complain about the stiffness (ie. too much of it). Those car's unually apeal to me - S2000 and Elise come to mind. One of the 1st things I liked about the Zed was how tight the suspension was.
Am I missing something that others are experiencing?
I would want different swaybars not for the purpose of stiffening the car, but for the purpose of giving the front end a bit more grip (ie. stiffer rear swaybar). That's the reason why I'm looking into them ... I need/want more front grip.
[b]I can barely detect any body roll at all - and in fact SOME body roll can assist in cornering adhesion. Whats the go?[b]
There is very little of in in the 350Z IMHO. And that is comparing it to S2000, Boxster, Boxster S, 911, TVR, Elise and even the HSV R8. Body roll is one thing I'm not complaining about ... but the trackwork will tell me more.
02-01-2004, 12:47 AM
#35
Originally posted by DavidM
Why don't you guys get the stuff (ie. springs and front and back swaybars) from Whiteline? It'll cost you $1000 fitted and more than likely will perform just as well.
Why don't you guys get the stuff (ie. springs and front and back swaybars) from Whiteline? It'll cost you $1000 fitted and more than likely will perform just as well.
Murray
02-01-2004, 01:10 AM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im pretty sure they dont have any height adjustable, damper adjustable, coilover shocks with upper pillowball mounts designed for the Z, do they?
No they don't. They just offer shorter/stiffer springs, but the swaybars are adjustable. My quesion is why would you want all of that? What benefit are you (not you personaly, but anyone)going to get out of it? Personaly, I'm just looking at making the car have more grip at the front, and from the look of it the Whileline solution will provide that as they have already figured what works and what does not. For me, the less money I put into the car, the better as I don't want to spend anymore than I have to.
On the other had if you were a hard-core racer and needed to extract every last 10th out of the car on the track, then having it fully adjustable would be great as you could set it up from track to track. I'm pressuming that you are not planning of adjusting/setting the car for diffrent tracks or conditions ... is that correct? If that is so, then why buy something that is adjustable?I'm not saying don't get that, as I'm sure having it is better than having something non-adjustable. I'm just questioning the expanditure of extra $2000 - $3000 for something that will not produce any better results for someone like me (let alone someone who does not track the car).
No they don't. They just offer shorter/stiffer springs, but the swaybars are adjustable. My quesion is why would you want all of that? What benefit are you (not you personaly, but anyone)going to get out of it? Personaly, I'm just looking at making the car have more grip at the front, and from the look of it the Whileline solution will provide that as they have already figured what works and what does not. For me, the less money I put into the car, the better as I don't want to spend anymore than I have to.
On the other had if you were a hard-core racer and needed to extract every last 10th out of the car on the track, then having it fully adjustable would be great as you could set it up from track to track. I'm pressuming that you are not planning of adjusting/setting the car for diffrent tracks or conditions ... is that correct? If that is so, then why buy something that is adjustable?I'm not saying don't get that, as I'm sure having it is better than having something non-adjustable. I'm just questioning the expanditure of extra $2000 - $3000 for something that will not produce any better results for someone like me (let alone someone who does not track the car).
02-01-2004, 12:58 PM
#37
My quesion is why would you want all of that? What benefit are you (not you personaly, but anyone)going to get out of it? Personaly, I'm just looking at making the car have more grip at the front, and from the look of it the Whileline solution will provide that as they have already figured what works and what does not. For me, the less money I put into the car, the better as I don't want to spend anymore than I have to.
On the other had if you were a hard-core racer and needed to extract every last 10th out of the car on the track, then having it fully adjustable would be great as you could set it up from track to track. I'm pressuming that you are not planning of adjusting/setting the car for diffrent tracks or conditions ... is that correct? If that is so, then why buy something that is adjustable?I'm not saying don't get that, as I'm sure having it is better than having something non-adjustable. I'm just questioning the expanditure of extra $2000 - $3000 for something that will not produce any better results for someone like me (let alone someone who does not track the car).
Hi Dave,
It is important to figure out exactly what you(the owner) want the car to do, then base your choices on that. Which is exactly what you have done by the sounds of it. (I couldnt find the whiteline solution on the site.)
I know you didnt direct it at me specifically but I personally want to be able to go around a corner as fast, level, and controlled as possible, but still retain the day-to-day drivability, and not have the fillings drop out of my head on the way to work. I also want the car to look perfect on my wheels, i.e 1 inche lower.
I want all this and for each part to be working together in harmony, and not out of spec. To achieve this I think a coilover unit is better, and one that is height adjustable to give me the 1" drop. All the other features simply come with the coilover and I dont need them and will only put them on the softest setting and probabally never touch them again unless I go to the track. And Cusco seemed to have the most streetable set-up according to alot of feedback I gathered throughout this forum and from certain vendors around the world (US, Japan, AU).
Only buy something that is right for you
For reference,
Cusco Adjustable - $2200
or Cusco with Pilowball mounts - $2500
No delivery etc
Murray
Last edited by mchapman; 02-01-2004 at 04:12 PM.
02-01-2004, 04:11 PM
#38
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the response mchapman. I was curious to know why people would go for something like that if you are not going to track the car (a lot). You have answered that question and it makes sence.
Oddly enough it looks like we'll end up with a similar solution, even though the purpose/reasoning behind it is different. I'll probbaly also have a 2.5cm drop on my car as I want more front camber (and indirectly lower center of gravity). Also I'll put it a thicker anti-roll bar at the back (go balance the understeer a bit more).
Looks like you will end up with a similar thing, but not exactly the same reasons.
Oddly enough it looks like we'll end up with a similar solution, even though the purpose/reasoning behind it is different. I'll probbaly also have a 2.5cm drop on my car as I want more front camber (and indirectly lower center of gravity). Also I'll put it a thicker anti-roll bar at the back (go balance the understeer a bit more).
Looks like you will end up with a similar thing, but not exactly the same reasons.
02-01-2004, 05:43 PM
#39
Originally posted by DavidM
Thanks for the response mchapman. I was curious to know why people would go for something like that if you are not going to track the car (a lot). You have answered that question and it makes sence.
Oddly enough it looks like we'll end up with a similar solution, even though the purpose/reasoning behind it is different. I'll probbaly also have a 2.5cm drop on my car as I want more front camber (and indirectly lower center of gravity). Also I'll put it a thicker anti-roll bar at the back (go balance the understeer a bit more).
Looks like you will end up with a similar thing, but not exactly the same reasons.
Thanks for the response mchapman. I was curious to know why people would go for something like that if you are not going to track the car (a lot). You have answered that question and it makes sence.
Oddly enough it looks like we'll end up with a similar solution, even though the purpose/reasoning behind it is different. I'll probbaly also have a 2.5cm drop on my car as I want more front camber (and indirectly lower center of gravity). Also I'll put it a thicker anti-roll bar at the back (go balance the understeer a bit more).
Looks like you will end up with a similar thing, but not exactly the same reasons.
Yeah i'll be changing the sways too, Are you leaving the front ones standard? And getting whiteline in the rear?
But the camber produced from lowering it, is that precise enough for your uses? Will you get a camber kit as well? Camber is great, but I want to protect my tyres day to day. Im actually hoping the pillow-mount version will help keep the camber in or close to factory specs, after speaking to dixonbn who has the NISMO setup he was only just able to keep it in spec, and that setup only lowers the car 20mm(actually more like 10mm in real life according to dixonbn). But as the coilover is completly different i dont know if I will have this problem, or if i'll be able to do anything about it. Im not too fussed as some camber in the right direction will only improve my handling even if it does reduce the life of my tyres. If you can shead any light on this please feel free to inform me.
I just found some info that says by just replacing the front camber plate on the z doesnt enable you to adjust the camber, the upper control arm needs to be adjustable, looks like I may need a camber kit after all.
The only areas where our setups would differ is when you change something which either costs money in the future or sacrifices ALOT of comfort / daily drivabilty.
Murray
Last edited by mchapman; 02-01-2004 at 06:20 PM.
02-01-2004, 10:03 PM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the camber produced from lowering it, is that precise enough for your uses? Will you get a camber kit as well?
Originally I was thinking of getting the camber-kit, but as you have probabnly found out, it is pretty complex piece for the Zed and will also cost a fair bit to install. Personaly, I don't want to vary my camber. I just want to set it at one setting and keep it that way. I want somewhere between -1.5 and -2.0deg of camber at the front. The 2.5cm drop is suppesed to give the car extra -1deg of camber and that is close enough for me. Reason why the exact specs for the front camber don't bother me is becuase I need a lot more camber (than OE) to get more grip there and I can then balance the car with the rear camber (and adjustable rear swaybar).
Camber is great, but I want to protect my tyres day to day.
Anything bellow -2deg of camber is pretty street friendly as long as you drive reasonably hard (even on the street). I had the S2000 aligned at -1.4 and -1.8deg front and back. With that I got very even tyre wear even though I was looking at around 20,000km out of the rear tyres. Though, that usually included 3 or so track days. Front ones lasted more like 25,000 - 30,000km with that setting.
Therefore, I'd be expecting around 25,000km out of my tyres ON the Zed as my road-tyres will not see the track. If you don't push the car hard (at least on regualr basis) then you stand a good chance of the inside of the tyre wearing out quicker then the outside. Then again, it should still last the same amount of km as when driven hard ... it'll just be uneven wear.
btw, HSVs for instance come with -2.5deg at the rear from factory. The S2000 came with -1.5deg at the rear. So, -2deg is not super agressive. -2.5 to -3.5 is very agressive and I would say not very street friendly. Something like V8-Sopercars run around -7deg of camber at the front :-)
...But as the coilover is completly different i dont know if I will have this problem, or if i'll be able to do anything about it.
From what I can see of the 305Z suspension, you will always get more camber when you lower the car as the camber is determined purely by the wishbones (ie. A-arms) and the lengths of the spring/shock. I don't see how you could lower the car and retain the camber without changing the A-rms (or at least one of them). Maybe someone else knows something I don't here, but I have not seen/heard otherwise so far.
Im not too fussed as some camber in the right direction will only improve my handling even if it does reduce the life of my tyres.
As I mentioned before, you're looking at roughly extra -1deg of camber with the 2.5mm drop (ie. as me) ... that should out it at around -1.5deg at the front. At the front the Zed can certainly use that and at the back you can re-adjust it anyway you want with the alignment.
I just found some info that says by just replacing the front camber plate on the z doesnt enable you to adjust the camber, the upper control arm needs to be adjustable, looks like I may need a camber kit after all.
Yep, that's what I found out as well. Though, it looks like it'll be around $800 installed.
Originally I was thinking of getting the camber-kit, but as you have probabnly found out, it is pretty complex piece for the Zed and will also cost a fair bit to install. Personaly, I don't want to vary my camber. I just want to set it at one setting and keep it that way. I want somewhere between -1.5 and -2.0deg of camber at the front. The 2.5cm drop is suppesed to give the car extra -1deg of camber and that is close enough for me. Reason why the exact specs for the front camber don't bother me is becuase I need a lot more camber (than OE) to get more grip there and I can then balance the car with the rear camber (and adjustable rear swaybar).
Camber is great, but I want to protect my tyres day to day.
Anything bellow -2deg of camber is pretty street friendly as long as you drive reasonably hard (even on the street). I had the S2000 aligned at -1.4 and -1.8deg front and back. With that I got very even tyre wear even though I was looking at around 20,000km out of the rear tyres. Though, that usually included 3 or so track days. Front ones lasted more like 25,000 - 30,000km with that setting.
Therefore, I'd be expecting around 25,000km out of my tyres ON the Zed as my road-tyres will not see the track. If you don't push the car hard (at least on regualr basis) then you stand a good chance of the inside of the tyre wearing out quicker then the outside. Then again, it should still last the same amount of km as when driven hard ... it'll just be uneven wear.
btw, HSVs for instance come with -2.5deg at the rear from factory. The S2000 came with -1.5deg at the rear. So, -2deg is not super agressive. -2.5 to -3.5 is very agressive and I would say not very street friendly. Something like V8-Sopercars run around -7deg of camber at the front :-)
...But as the coilover is completly different i dont know if I will have this problem, or if i'll be able to do anything about it.
From what I can see of the 305Z suspension, you will always get more camber when you lower the car as the camber is determined purely by the wishbones (ie. A-arms) and the lengths of the spring/shock. I don't see how you could lower the car and retain the camber without changing the A-rms (or at least one of them). Maybe someone else knows something I don't here, but I have not seen/heard otherwise so far.
Im not too fussed as some camber in the right direction will only improve my handling even if it does reduce the life of my tyres.
As I mentioned before, you're looking at roughly extra -1deg of camber with the 2.5mm drop (ie. as me) ... that should out it at around -1.5deg at the front. At the front the Zed can certainly use that and at the back you can re-adjust it anyway you want with the alignment.
I just found some info that says by just replacing the front camber plate on the z doesnt enable you to adjust the camber, the upper control arm needs to be adjustable, looks like I may need a camber kit after all.
Yep, that's what I found out as well. Though, it looks like it'll be around $800 installed.
