My Proposed Track Day Suspension Setup

[VisaGTi16v 1]

I quite like a bit of toe out on the Visa as it turns in better, doesnt seem to wander either, thats with a 3.2 turn pas rack with no ram

 

Info in this thread about using the Xsara rack

[Stu 18]

Hmm.. now im tempted.. I dont find my car to be *that* heavy on the steering front, but then im running an alloy block MI, so it might be worth persuing.

 

Anymore for anymore?

Edited August 27, 2008 by Stu

[VisaGTi16v 1]

I have (shamed to admit it) quite weak arms but have never had a problem with mine using a 3.2 turn rack, also run an alloy 16v. Ok its a bit stiff at parking speeds but comination of new/decent top mounts and the wheel being closer to me due to an extended boss means its lighter than standard Visa's and the 205 I owned. Weights up nicely in the corners. If anything I would like it a bit quicker for the tight sprint tracks (which may then need pas) but its fine for all race tracks ive been on.

[Stu 18]

So the 3.2 turn rack is 205 PAS but without the ram yes?

[Anthony 1,000]

So the 3.2 turn rack is 205 PAS but without the ram yes?

Yes 205/309 PAS rack, which is what I run as well (with the ram removed) and am very happy with.

 

Once you've got used to that setup, it feels very odd going back to a normal 3.9(?) turn non-PAS rack!

[Stu 18]

Coolio, i *think* ive got a 309 pas rack knocking about somewhere so ill dig it out and see how good it is..

 

Guess i need a PAS U/J now then if its any good..

[James_R 3]

Just to build on what Ant says the normal rack feels very lazy and the turn in rate on the car just feels dull after you've been driving a De-Pas car.

 

 

[Rich_p 23]

200lb front springs and standard 19mm torsion bars is the problem - front spring rate is far too hard relative to the rear (which would have to be in the order of 22mm bars to balance out with the front springs I'd say) and trying to mask that with a thicker anti-roll bar isn't really the solution.

 

Even normal 205 lowering springs (which I'd guess are in the order of about 160lb) coupled with a standard 205 GTi beam (19mm bars) makes the car too understeer-prone on the limit for my tastes, although they seem to complement the slightly stiffer 309 GTi beam (20mm bars) quite nicely.

 

I have been looking at stiffening up the front of the 309, it currently has after market springs on but standard 309 gti rear bars. It is completely stripped though so quite light at the back.

 

Will going to say 200lb springs ruin the balance, even with the 20mm bars it has on the back?

 

I was going to go lower ,I'm guessing they are -30mm springs at the mo but its raised a little since I removed all the weight but judging by this thread that can have a negative effect.

 

Strange though as the stock hatch boys run their 205's very low?

[James_R 3]

From what I've heard of the stock hatches they basically use the bump stops to stiffed the rear sus, of like the Gaz's fit bump stops on the dampers to increase the "spring rate" but effectively go for a solid tail :|

[Rich_p 23]

cheers James.

 

So If i'm doing most of my running on bumpy airfields going that low probably isn't advised then as it would be handy to still have some suspenion travel I guess!

 

What are you thoughts on me changing to slightly stiffer (200lb) front springs while keeping the standard 309 tb and arb now the car has been completely stripped and is a lot lighter at the back?

 

(Sorry to thread hjack by the way but it's all fairly relevant to the topic)

[James_R 3]

I'd go with suck it and see really, think it would certainly be worth getting a 24mm ARB for the set up, helps even on std front springs.

 

Again as Ant has said, unless you're changing the rear rate significatnly std fronts springs should follow too

 

Thin Ant has said ARB knocking about in his garage