Double wishbone adder

G

GKR_17

New member
Is there an adder for double wishbone front suspension? I had thought it was standard, much like the -100 for FWD.

Grafton
 
I believe that it is a 50# adder for Double Wishbone... also, I thought FWD was 50# in the slower classes and only 100# in ITS and ITR. Not 100% on these figures but it's what I recall from previous conversations.
 
The reason I ask is about 1/3 of the ITR cars are double wishbone front, but none appear to have this adder. Was that intentional, and will it continue as new cars are added?
 
I have noticed this as well

Here are some examples I can see

[FONT=&quot]Honda S2000 = 240*1.15*11.25=3105-100 (no torque)=3005 (does not appear to have double wishbone adder) [/FONT]

 [FONT=&quot]Acura RSX-S = 200*1.25*11.25=2812.5-100(fwd)-50(bad suspension) = 2662.5 (round up 2665) (interesting since it appears to get a deduct for bad suspension)[/FONT]

 [FONT=&quot]Honda Prelude = (97-01) 195*1.25*11.25= 2742.2-100 (fwd) = 2642.2 (round down 2640) (does not appear to have a double wishbone adder)[/FONT]

 [FONT=&quot]Honda Prelude = (93-96) 190*1.25*11.25= 2671.8-100 (fwd) = 2571.8 (round down 2570) (does not appear to have a double wishbone adder)[/FONT]

 [FONT=&quot]Nissan 300zx = 222*1.30*11.25=3246 (round up 3250) (does not appear to have a double wishbone adder)[/FONT]

 [FONT=&quot]BMW 325i (92-95) = 189*1.30*11.25= 2765 (Does not appear to get a deduct for struts)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]My guess would be this has something to do with ITR as a class since Double wishbone suspension appears to be the norm in the class maybe the ITAC figured there was no point in using a adder for it.[/FONT]
 
But it's not the norm. About 2/3 of the cars in ITR don't have double wishbone. I don't believe there's any deduction for struts or "bad suspension" like you say for the RSX. I won't fight it if this is the new process, but we need to be consistent, it's not like it's any less beneficial on a faster heavier car.
 
Last edited:
I believe the 300ZX has struts, maybe Jeff Young could chime in here. A few others that you missed were: Acura Integra Type R, Acura Legend, Lexus SC300, Toyota Supras, and the Rx-8.

Andy said the recently classed ITA 914/6 got an extra 50 lbs for mid engine, I don't think the ITR Boxter did.

If we're going to have a process we need to follow it, otherwise it's no better than the old mystery closed door system.
 
GKR_17 said:
I believe the 300ZX has struts, maybe Jeff Young could chime in here. A few others that you missed were: Acura Integra Type R, Acura Legend, Lexus SC300, Toyota Supras, and the Rx-8.

Andy said the recently classed ITA 914/6 got an extra 50 lbs for mid engine, I don't think the ITR Boxter did.

If we're going to have a process we need to follow it, otherwise it's no better than the old mystery closed door system.
Click to expand...

I did not miss those other cars just did not feel like doing every one of them.:)

I don't think the RSX got a deduct for struts I think it got a deduct for having crappy suspension.

Also it is my understanding that every car in ITR did go through the exact same process and currently is the only class that has.
 
300zx has upper and lower control arms, front and rear. Please no more weight on the car though! lol........

Seriously, I don't know why some R cars didn't get the adder. I agree with Grafton we need to be consistent.
 
Is it a case of most cars in ITR having DW or good strut designs so no adjustment is needed? Only a deducter for very poor designs like the RSX?
 
Actually the 300zx front suspension is problematic. It is an upper control arm set up, but nowhere as good as a doublewishbone. There is NO camber adjustment available either. It's set by it's design/factory. I think I should get a 100lb break just because of that! Wink Wink.

Oh, and Happy New Year Everyone.
 
Xian said:
Is it a case of most cars in ITR having DW or good strut designs so no adjustment is needed? Only a deducter for very poor designs like the RSX?
Click to expand...


What? Are you guys dissing my new/future ride? Did I make a mistake in not getting my wife a Solstice instead?

hoop
 
I don't remember any adders fora double wishbone layout. It does appear to be an oversight in the ITR classing process. Either you have an adder for having DW, or you have a subtractor for the cars that don't enjoy the DW layout.

I completely agree that we need to be consistent and maybe the ITR class needs to be re-evaluated since it is in a relative state of infancy. While we're at it maybe we can make a move on that year old Pony car proposal for ITR. I'm sure if we'd gotten those cars in for the 2009 GCR Grafton and Rickey might have a bit more competition this Spring.

Ron
 
I've not put it on the rack... or looked at the shop manual since I got the car. By the comments, I'm guessing it must be notorious for bump steer?

I'm not too worried. By the time I regain possesion of the car from my wife, the rules for ITR will be more than matured! :D
 
Yeah, you ought to get in touch with Lee Grimes from Koni (not sure if he's on this board). He'll have some more detailed info on ideas for a baseline setup on the car and what the "problem areas" are on it. I've got Zero first hand experience with one and I think it'd be a hoot to drive but it's not going to corner like most other Honda's. From what I remember, the spring rates you'll be running are beyond crazy... do some research and try posting any suspension questions over on www.roadraceautox.com. Lee's over there along with a couple others who may be able to help.

Christian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top