Ride Height (VX 2.0) Trackday

[ECR]

I appear to have misplaced my ride height records during computer upgrades (they'll surface eventually). Anyone care to offer their settings ?

[k.russell]

would also be interested in any figures. Roger, in the past i have just set up to have front lower wishbones parallel to the floor and the added 15mm of rake to the car with the rear higher,. with me in the car. i have used some setting for approximate corner weight set up given by Simon Rogers, not sure if these are still on his website. all very vague, i'm sorry, hopefully someone can help.

[ECR]

And I was relying on you .....

😬

[Pendennis]

Doubt the engine has any significance for the front ride height Roger, but the rake would.

 

How about 110mm - 115mm at front with driver seated, measured ground to underside of chassis rail roughly at back of wheel. With a VX sited as CC spec I be surprised if your need much rake, maybe 10mm for a starter, that is measured ground to underside chassis rail adjacent to A frame bushes. Don't forget to release all rubber bushes and ARB's before making any adjustments, when complete tighten them back up but with driver still seated in car Adjust rear ARB to suit. Releasing all rubber bush tension (inc trail arms, watts linkage, A Frame, bellcrank etc.) is very important which should make a noticeable difference, remember to torque them back up again though

[ECR]

Thanks for that, If my memory serves that's quite a bit lower than I was running (but until I find my file .....). Do you know what the clearance is under the sump with these sort of figures ?

I know that I was running a lot more than 15m rake (nearer to 20mm)

[Pendennis]

I'd of thought 80mm clearance is okay, so whatever that equates to = front ride height. The VX is a bit heavier than the common K, also if it's installed ala CC fitment like the ones I have seen, it would be well forward which means the centre of gravity is forward, that normally means less rake, but there is no rule. Whatever you set your no doubt change when at the track

[Lee Fowler]

I think mine is 70mm.

 

Lee

[ECR]

As mine is currently set I have approx 130mm at a point between the engine mount at the front and 85mm under the lowest part of the bellhousing.

Dropping the front by 15mm will give me about 70mm under the bellhousing which is what you have Lee. As a double check, do you know what your front ride height (at the engine mounts ) is ?

I've heard of K's running with 60mm under the bellhousing .....

[captain chaos]

Hi Roger,

 

I'm at 75mm under lowest part of sump with 15mm of rake...not sure of chassis height dims as car is in storage at moment.

 

gary

[ECR]

Cheers Gary

We seem to be narrowing things down. I'd still welcome more info though ....

[Lee Fowler]

I will try and pop up today and take a look.

 

Lee

[ECR]

Thanks Lee

[Lee Fowler]

Ok I have front ride height of 130mm with a 15mm rake.

 

Lee

[ECR]

Many thanks for that Lee

I'm still playing around with mine, I'll post my final figures when I have them.

[Barry]

Quoting ECR: 

Many thanks for that Lee

I'm still playing around with mine, I'll post my final figures when I have them.

Hi Roger,

it's often been said that the lower front wishones should be parallel to the ground, is this no longer the case (was it ever)?

[ECR]

Hi Barry

 

As the tracking is set at rest, and if the wishbones are parallel then as you say, bump steer is minimised (both ways, in droop and compression). I'm happy to suffer (negligible) bump steer by having the wishbones in droop at rest in order to get a reasonably low ride hieght.

 

Hi to Jack ....

[Lee Fowler]

You can get shims to raise the rack.

 

Lee

[ECR]

Yep, got the shims (and Arnies cunning trackrod end adjusment), but as I say the bumpsteer is so minimal that it doesn't bother me

 

Edited by - ECR on 1 Apr 2013 08:53:40

[F355GTS]

Hi Roger

 

IIRC I used to run approx 65mm under the sump. My car was definitely much more balanced and grippy with negligible rake.

 

I'd started off with 15mm but at a day at Abbeville I had to fit front wheels to the rear) we were running out of tyres and had a day at Spa to come. This gave us a resultant drop of around 10mm at the rear and despite the smaller contact patch the car was significantly quicker.......perhaps not quite what we were aiming for at Abbeville

[Jason Plato]

I find rake is in conjunction with spring rates and tyres.

 

if I were running big slicks and 200lb rear springs then the rake would be very differnt to 150 lb springs and R888's

 

to be honest roger I don't see how any comparisons can be made against others - I would start with the minimum sump clearance you are willing to run and work up the handling from there on track .

[ECR]

Quite agree Dave

Even though Mark finds no rake best, I have historicaly run with 20mm plus. It loosens up the back end with my tyres and springs. I'm really after ball park starting figures which the other contributors have kindly furnished.

Happy Easter

[ECR]

Ok, I've settled on the following as a start point

Front (between engine mount bolts) 120mm

Rear (at front edge of wheel arch) 140mm

This gives me 70mm under the gearbox bellhousing joint.

 

This does mean that I'm having to fit wider rear arches as the wheels I use have a back spacing of 115mm and are very close to the edge of standard wings

 

I'll start with this and lower as appropriate (ie without ripping the bottom of the car off over every rumble strip). Apparently 50mm is possible under the sump if the potential for curb damage is accepted !

 

Thanks all for your input

[Lee Fowler]

I too used the fancy track rods but once fitted with no shims in we still had to raise the rack about 9mm!

 

Lee