Stiffest Front Bar
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: SE PA
Stiffest Front Bar
Who makes the stiffest front anti-roll bar that will fit an '03 Evo? I'd really like to get actual measured stiffness and not marketing speak from the manufacturers, but I will take marketing-speak too. Has anyone compiled this info anywhere? If not, I'd be willing to volunteer to compile it and contribute the data to "the end all brake and suspension thread."
The biggest one I have available to me is the Whiteline 26mm front.
This is what I run on my evo. It was not fun to install but the front end of the car is incredibly flat. I think if it were any stiffer it would be counter productive.
Ben
This is what I run on my evo. It was not fun to install but the front end of the car is incredibly flat. I think if it were any stiffer it would be counter productive.
Ben
Ralliart makes a 29mm front anti-roll bar for competition.
You can get them from http://www.ralliart.it/, but they retail for around $1K.
You can get them from http://www.ralliart.it/, but they retail for around $1K.
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: SE PA
We want the stiffest front bar we can find for two reasons.
1. To keep the front suspension out of the bad parts of the camber curve
2. To get the rear tire closer to, or on, the ground in corners.
The car is run in SCCA Solo, in the A Stock class, so the front bar is our only swappable device for tuning, beyond dampers. We are lifting the rear tire over 6 inches in corners with stock suspension and sticky Kumhos. When the tire comes off the ground, handling becomes non-linear and somewhat unpredictable.
The rear tire in the air also kills our ability to put power down as we pass the apex. We can't really apply full throttle until the tire touches back down; we get a lot of power-induced understeer if we try too early. So putting in more steady state understeer doesn't necessarily scare us if we can get the benefits of being able to apply a lot more power earlier, and have more predictable handling overall. We think we can tune some of that understeer out with an aggressive, autocross-type alignment and tire pressures too.
We think the car can be killer in A Stock (at least locally) if we can get enough front bar to use all the power. If anyone would like to share any experiences about running the early cars in A Stock, we'd love to hear 'em.
1. To keep the front suspension out of the bad parts of the camber curve
2. To get the rear tire closer to, or on, the ground in corners.
The car is run in SCCA Solo, in the A Stock class, so the front bar is our only swappable device for tuning, beyond dampers. We are lifting the rear tire over 6 inches in corners with stock suspension and sticky Kumhos. When the tire comes off the ground, handling becomes non-linear and somewhat unpredictable.
The rear tire in the air also kills our ability to put power down as we pass the apex. We can't really apply full throttle until the tire touches back down; we get a lot of power-induced understeer if we try too early. So putting in more steady state understeer doesn't necessarily scare us if we can get the benefits of being able to apply a lot more power earlier, and have more predictable handling overall. We think we can tune some of that understeer out with an aggressive, autocross-type alignment and tire pressures too.
We think the car can be killer in A Stock (at least locally) if we can get enough front bar to use all the power. If anyone would like to share any experiences about running the early cars in A Stock, we'd love to hear 'em.
Last edited by BigEvoAS; Sep 29, 2006 at 09:24 PM.
You mentioned that in A-stock the dampers are allowed to be modified correct? Why don't you change them! Stiffer shocks will help ALOT more than a front sway bar when it comes to body roll. Hey, might as well try both! Good luck in your autocross adventures!
Trending Topics
Evolved Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 642
Likes: 1
From: IL, USA
Originally Posted by sonicnofadz
You mentioned that in A-stock the dampers are allowed to be modified correct? Why don't you change them! Stiffer shocks will help ALOT more than a front sway bar when it comes to body roll. Hey, might as well try both! Good luck in your autocross adventures!
Evolving Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
From: Kent, WA
Originally Posted by Noob4life
Shocks only control the rate of roll, not the amount. In which case the proper alternative would be stiffer spring rates, not shocks.
Evolving Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
From: New York
You might get the type of response you're looking for in the Motorsports forum:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/motor-sports-15/
Theres even a thread about stock class setups:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=57489
PS what were the setups like for the A stock EVO's at Nationals this past week?
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/motor-sports-15/
Theres even a thread about stock class setups:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...ad.php?t=57489
PS what were the setups like for the A stock EVO's at Nationals this past week?
If you are allowed to compete with better shocks, you should get them. Yes you will still have body roll with stiffer shocks but the transition into the turn will be smoother instead of getting instant full body roll.
Originally Posted by BigEvoAS
We want the stiffest front bar we can find for two reasons.
1. To keep the front suspension out of the bad parts of the camber curve
2. To get the rear tire closer to, or on, the ground in corners.
The car is run in SCCA Solo, in the A Stock class, so the front bar is our only swappable device for tuning, beyond dampers. We are lifting the rear tire over 6 inches in corners with stock suspension and sticky Kumhos. When the tire comes off the ground, handling becomes non-linear and somewhat unpredictable.
The rear tire in the air also kills our ability to put power down as we pass the apex. We can't really apply full throttle until the tire touches back down; we get a lot of power-induced understeer if we try too early. So putting in more steady state understeer doesn't necessarily scare us if we can get the benefits of being able to apply a lot more power earlier, and have more predictable handling overall. We think we can tune some of that understeer out with an aggressive, autocross-type alignment and tire pressures too.
We think the car can be killer in A Stock (at least locally) if we can get enough front bar to use all the power. If anyone would like to share any experiences about running the early cars in A Stock, we'd love to hear 'em.
1. To keep the front suspension out of the bad parts of the camber curve
2. To get the rear tire closer to, or on, the ground in corners.
The car is run in SCCA Solo, in the A Stock class, so the front bar is our only swappable device for tuning, beyond dampers. We are lifting the rear tire over 6 inches in corners with stock suspension and sticky Kumhos. When the tire comes off the ground, handling becomes non-linear and somewhat unpredictable.
The rear tire in the air also kills our ability to put power down as we pass the apex. We can't really apply full throttle until the tire touches back down; we get a lot of power-induced understeer if we try too early. So putting in more steady state understeer doesn't necessarily scare us if we can get the benefits of being able to apply a lot more power earlier, and have more predictable handling overall. We think we can tune some of that understeer out with an aggressive, autocross-type alignment and tire pressures too.
We think the car can be killer in A Stock (at least locally) if we can get enough front bar to use all the power. If anyone would like to share any experiences about running the early cars in A Stock, we'd love to hear 'em.
If you are doing the front sway bar you may want to get the whiteline steering precision kit at the same time since you will already be in there. I was very surprised at the amount of slop that came out of the already tight evo steering rack.
Originally Posted by Noob4life
Shocks only control the rate of roll, not the amount. In which case the proper alternative would be stiffer spring rates, not shocks.
Maybe true, but illegal in the OP's class. Shocks are free (to a certain degree), but springs are definitely not. Nor are rear sways, etc.
Originally Posted by Mr Chef
PS what were the setups like for the A stock EVO's at Nationals this past week?
http://www.scca.com/Event/Result.asp?Ref2=338
Unless I can't read worth a damn, I don't see any Evo's in AS. Only STi's.