Hey guys,

I just received an email from Kuah @ splparts.com of the new prototype arms going onto my car for testing. They look so amazing I couldn’t resist posting about it That’s the new lower (camber) link and the mid link they have been working on. Can’t wait to try this new setup out on the track…

 

nice
OT but is ur front brake caliper red hot in ur SIG pic?

 

looks good, cant wait to see how well they work.

 

hmm that rear arm that holds the spring - what's the advantage with it? does it have better bushings or is the arm lighter?

what's the time frame on this stuff?

 

IS that lower spring perch adjustable? To raise or lower the ride height? If that is, that is a sweet set up. Even easier to adjust. Can't wait to here more about this.

 

good eye, it does appear to be adjustable upon second look.

 

It looks adjustable but it looks VERY heavy. Maybe the under side of the arm is hollowed out to save weight. The stock are is very light. This one is going to be heavier for sure.

 

I love that pic! (He posted about it a few weeks ago)

 

RE: sentry65

The advantage of this arm is that it is a true adjustable toe link, while retaining the stock placement of the spring, so there is no need to convert to a "true" coilover setup. A coilover conversion disadvantage is it introduces greater shock piston friction, so there is a performance loss, and also the chassis and bushings on the spindle are not designed to carry loads in that fashion.

The other advantages are that it eliminates the rubber bushing on the stock arm, and this arm is also stronger than stock. It also allows height adjustment from the bottom which makes it trivial for a shop to corner weight the car.

RE: 350Zteve

This arm is 1lb heavier than the stock arm (5lbs vs. 4lbs). However the spring is lighter (3lbs vs. 5lbs), so there is a net loss of 1lb per side. For extra cost we can get Swift titanium alloy springs that will be even lighter.

BTW, it is almost impossible to make adjustable suspension arms that are lighter than the stock 350Z arms, the steel adjusters and bearings will always make the adjustable arms heavier. For example on our front camber arms, our chromoly tubing frame is lighter than stock, but the adjusters and bearings make it heavier.

This is our first prototype and we are still working out the bugs, we'll post more information as it gets closer to production.

 

sweet.

 

I'm VERY impressed. You guys make some primo stuff. Will you have pricing soon?

 

More pics!!!

 

RE: 350Zteve

Thanks! As for pricing, the lower/camber arm will be very competitively priced. The mid/toe link will honestly be somewhat expensive, there is a lot of CNC machining and billet material, plus the cost of the springs. However this arm will offer alot of tunability for a track car. And guys with "true" coilover conversions can go back to the superior stock configuration and still have full adjustability.

RE: Rickdogg

We have to do some re-design based on the prototype, so these are not the final pieces yet, we'll have more pics when the design is finalized.

 

that looks awsome!

 

Will they be releasing any other arms that eliminate the spring bucket for "true" coilovers? i.e. Stance. I tried to find the battleversion setup but with no avail.

 

That is the purpose of our billet arm, you do not have to eliminate the spring bucket to achieve the adjustability. You just remove the springs from the coilovers, and use this arm to go back to the stock configuration. The stock configuration is superior in every way. By separating the spring from the shock you reduce shock piston friction and improve the shock performance. Also you place the loads where they are designed to be from the factory, and reduce excessive wear and tear on the chassis and spindle bushings.

 

Not to question your suspension expertise because i know for a fact that you know way more than me, but isn't it fact that the closer the spring/coilover mounting is to the wheel without touching will give you both better feedback and efficiency out of the system? I do agree that where these coilovers, esp. Stance, places/mounts to, does increase wear on bushings and such, but why not just replace those with spherical ones? Again im not to challenage your knowledge or doubt your information, but rather get a better understanding and a comparison to what i've been told. Any help and insight is highly appreciated..

 

Looks interesting. Looking forward to updates on this item

 

Here is an example, take a small spring and squeeze it between your fingers, if you don't squeeze it quite right the spring will bow out sideways instead of compressing straight down. This always happens to some degree with springs, even if it is not visible. When this occurs on a coilover, it will put a side load on the shock piston, increasing friction and cause binding on the piston. The shock absorber does not operate ideally, so you lose performance. There are ways to minimize this, but the best way is to separate the springs from the shocks.

Packaging constraints is the main reason for using a coilover setup. There is no improvement in feedback and efficiency in placing the spring closer to the spindle.

You can change out the bushings, but that is only part of the problem, the thickness of the spindle and the sheet metal structure of the chassis, has to bear this load over time without fatiguing. In the stock configuration there is very little load on that part of the chassis and spindle, just the forces the shock absorber put out. With the coilover conversion, these places now have to bear about 800lb of load per side, that is a rather big change in specification. In that context the bushing issue is really not that surprising.

 

i still remember the performance nissan race team visiting the idea of the coilovers in the rear having the spring around the shock and they didn't find any advantage to doing it that way so they kept them seperated