Who is a mathematical, physics guru - there has to be a formula for it. The guys that I usually see with aftermarket sways have 14-16k in the rear.

Hopefully we can run some AX's this summer together.

 

Get rid of the front sway for good? 850 lbs/in or more on street tires. Remember, the OE front anti-roll bar isn't small.

Everybody else concerned: This conversation should probably be taken to the class specific discussions. for 2006, 2007, and 2008. Have detailed threads for SM, STU, and BSP. I just started a 2009 STU thread. The first thing you have to do is choose a tire and surface you want to optimize for. THAT will dictate your springrate.

d

 

I did not mean remove the FSB altogether, just is an aftermarket one worth it with the SmikeEvo setup?

 

Yes, you'll want bigger bars with any setup involving stock struts. You'll need spring rates only achievable on coilovers (with dampers to match) to alleviate the need for stiffer sways.

 

Ok, so even Bilstein HD struts with Swift Spec R springs should need some sway bars. Rear and probably front.

 

I agree with GTLocke13. I was running the Sport springs last season with the sway bars. Now on the Spec R's.

 

Hmm so coilovers = no need for a FSB. Classes where coilovers not allowed = FSB useful?

 

See post below by griceiv.

- Andrew

 

I think it's slightly more complicated than that.

 

kinda depends on your philosophy on how to make a car handle..I've heard both schools. One- Put on heavier springs Two- use swaybars. *shrugs*

 

So Marshall, what kind of spring rates and swaybars are you running?

 

*crickets crickets*

 

IMO, it should not be anyone's goal to run spring rates so high so as to make swaybars "unnecessary". Firstly, because swaybars are great tuning devices to get the balance you want without reducing the independent wheels' abilities to maintain contact patch with the road surface, but mainly because coil springs do not (and should not) take the place of swaybars in the overall suspension system.

Reducing tire load variation should be on everyone's minds during set up, and more spring = more damping necessary to reduce tire load variation - dampers are crucial, and given what I've seen *some* teams/drivers running in the damper department, I would not be so quick to recommend 850+lbs/in spring rates in an effort to reduce roll. The answer: swaybars, and not super huge swaybars, but having one is IMO better than not having one.

In fact, in the more "unlimited prep" types of racing classes where tires, aero and damper adjustments are free, I'd be leaning more towards the stiff bar / soft spring setup - specifically, big(ger) front bar and low(er) front spring rates, and a rear spring rate bias.

 

I'm not sure how you argue that. Anti-roll bars do make two side less independent. They transfer load to the other side and if there's enough bar, lift a wheel.

EDIT: I don't think anybody is arguing that bars are unnecessary.

d

 

The discussion is going in that direction, and obviously there are posters in this thread who believe that there may be cases where the function of a swaybar can be performed by springs instead.

Lifting a wheel takes some special circumstances, none of which should be built into the setup itself - insufficient droop, too much rebound damping, or simply a bar that is too stiff. When talking about reducing the "independent-ness" of a pair of wheels, you should really be asking whether or not a lifted wheel is caused by the bar itself (in which case, why such a stiff bar?) or because there's not enough droop (why not have more travel?) or too much rebound (why are you running so much rebound - are you spring rates too high?).

That being said, a properly chosen swaybar provides smoother load transfer between the tires than having no swaybar at all. And because it acts to increase spring rate only cornering conditions (when you truly want to limit roll) and does not function under straight-line conditions (when you want the tires to maintain their contact patch with the road), you can run get that much closer to having the best of both worlds, spring rate-wise.