hey man, i had the same dilemma a few weeks ago, but neuspeed will substitute race springs for sport springs in you cup kit! im goin home to play with mine tonight...just call em up and specify you want the sports 
-
-
skunk2 springs my buddy has those on his cb7 and all i can say is nice93 accord: F22A swap,T3/T4 turbo, tail wastegate, front mount 27x13x3, hks turbo timer, turbo xs boost controller, msd igintion, 3in downpipe, crane cam 11mm plug wires, denso plugs, no ac or ps,wire tuck, cutted insides, one seat, auto meter boost gauge,oil pressure, a/f,and 5 in tach,act clutch and flywheel.
93 prelude: jdm headlights,OEM carbon fiber hood, tein lowering springs, work racing rims with kumho tires, msd wires and denso plugs,type r shift bootComment
-
I was never a fan of the slammed look on a Honda. It looks retarded and makes your car handle like crap. Plus you have to watch out for what you drive over because you never know what your front bumper will scoop up. I dont know what the fascination with slamming is, but it sure isn't because it makes your car handle better. I get criticized by a lot of people saying my car is not low enough. I'll take that as a compliment and be damn happy that I'm not in that cliche. Leave the slam look to those VIP cars.
The further you lower your car, the worse your handling gets.Comment
-
-
That isn't necessarily true.Originally posted by GSteg
If you maintain travel and geometry, then your handling will get better, due toe the lower center of gravity, and smaller rolling moments.
However, most kids use some crappy suspension setup, or lower it beyond the point where geometry and travel are maintained.Comment
-
im on eibach sporlines with agx shocks and man ill never change them. perfect drop an the ride is just a bit stiffer than stock.Comment
-
Factory height is the best geometry you can get out of the car. Any lower you will further deviate from the ideal geometry and travel. It's part of the engineering process Honda goes through. If a car's suspension was created for comfort (like the accord), any other modification will only hurt geometry. Sadly, some people mistaken stiffness and body roll for handling.
Yes, lowering a bit will not be apparant in degradation, but you're still modifying it. Take a look at the guys on the Supra forum. Many have learned the hard way. Instead of lowering, many guys now keep their stock height, but get stiffer springs to aid body roll. Why? because this setup gave their car better track times.
Last edited by GSteg; 04-18-2007, 11:18 PM.Comment
-
For looks, probably. But for handling? I doubt it. Give me a stock CB7 and a slammed CB7. I guarantee you the stock will beat the slammed cb7 on a track.Originally posted by lowakkord
If you're doing it for pure cosmetics, then sure. But if you're like the OP where slamming the car hurts performance, then I would take stock height over slammed any day.
Comment
-
You may not have like/liked the look of a slammed Honda but I love it. I think my car is perfect with no wheel gap what so ever, I'd rather see a Honda slammed and tuckin tires then a nice FMIC or something sitting behind the bumper, all personal preference again. I am careful with the roads I choose and how I drive, but its all part of the sacrifice I accept for driving my car dumped.Originally posted by GSteg
Comment
-
yes, this may be true for a supra, but that is cause it comes from the factory as a sports car...the cb7 on the other hand was made more for comfort and luxury than for performance...thats why lowering the car would definitely improve how the car handles, especially with good springs and shocks...however, I do agree with the fact that a slammed car does not handle as well because usually people just try to get lowering springs on stock struts and they get owned and scrape when they turn...Originally posted by GStegFactory height is the best geometry you can get out of the car. Any lower you will further deviate from the ideal geometry and travel. It's part of the engineering process Honda goes through. If a car's suspension was created for comfort (like the accord), any other modification will only hurt geometry. Sadly, some people mistaken stiffness and body roll for handling.
Yes, lowering a bit will not be apparant in degradation, but you're still modifying it. Take a look at the guys on the Supra forum. Many have learned the hard way. Instead of lowering, many guys now keep their stock height, but get stiffer springs to aid body roll. Why? because this setup gave their car better track times.Yeah, Preludes
Originally posted by deevergote.Comment
-
If the supra, a grand touring car, gets worse times with lowered height (for sake of comparison) because of the wrong geometry/travel, then how is a lowered accord, a car build for comfort, any different? The supra was made to handle. The accord was made for comfort. Any lowering you do will alter the design, correct?Originally posted by kmart64
The accord doesn't improve just because its made for comfort. You can definitely get a stiffer ride and less body roll, but until the car is taken to the track and timed, handling will be hard to gauge for comparison.
I'm done with this conversation. I knew not many would agree. Lowering is fine for looks. If you need full handling and control, lowering is not the prime reason. Hell, I even lowered my car 1" around, but I did not do it for handling
Comment
-
-
Lol, lowering any car will alter the design the original engineers had in mind. I agree with you that handling can be hard to gauge without being on a track, but people can tell when their car pulls out of turns better (butt-handling i guess hehe) Anyways, improving suspension will in most cases also lower the car. Although the supra might not needed to lowered, there are many cars that had the option of lowering the car, not just for aesthetics but for handling as well. The integra type r had a lower suspension than regular integras. Preludes had an optional suspension kit (not available in the US-just like everything) Honda Access Kit that lowered the car but kept the same ride, as well as the NSX-R GT...not sure how much though. If these cars could be improved and as a result lower the car, the cb7, a family car can definitely take a lesson in being slammed (pardon my pun). Of course, it can't be like ebay springs that droop after a week either...anyways a good coilover/shock combo will allow the user whatever preferences they want whether they be on a track or street...so if they ever want it to look stockish, I guess they could do taht as wellOriginally posted by GStegIf the supra, a grand touring car, gets worse times with lowered height (for sake of comparison) because of the wrong geometry/travel, then how is a lowered accord, a car build for comfort, any different? The supra was made to handle. The accord was made for comfort. Any lowering you do will alter the design, correct? The accord doesn't improve just because its made for comfort. You can definitely get a stiffer ride and less body roll, but until the car is taken to the track and timed, handling will be hard to gauge for comparison.
I'm done with this conversation. I knew not many would agree. Lowering is fine for looks. If you need full handling and control, lowering is not the prime reason. Hell, I even lowered my car 1" around, but I did not do it for handling
Yeah, Preludes
Originally posted by deevergote.Comment
-
I said I wouldn't post anymore, but I'll make this an exception.
The ITR and regular integras do not share the same suspension. They are very similar, but the ITR's suspension doesn't consist of slightly lower/stiffer springs.. If it did, then people would have no problem swapping the whole suspension. The NSX-R GT does not have the same suspension geometry as the ordinary NSX that you buy off the showroom floor. Completely different story.
Optional lowering kit does not mean the car will handle better or get you better times. Honda figured the majority of the car owners wont track their car so they offer those kits. On my car (not a cb7), I have the factory optional springs that lowers the car 1" all around. It feels like I'm going through the corners faster and I have better handling, but my friend with the same car (stock) can turn slightly better times than I can. OEM lowering kits are made for aesthetics, not for seriously handling.
We should leave this thread to die. The original poster posted this a year ago. Some people like the way they're car feels after lowering (like me), but a butt track is as good as a butt dyno. Maybe I have worded my statement wrong. Lowering the car *can* yield better results, but its the combination of springs rate, shock dampening, etc that makes up for the worse geometry. Its not because geometry/travel stayed the same. All I said was lowering the car will yield worse handling, which is true if you just lower. That's my point. Many people have the misconception that lowering alone will make the car perform better.
If you want, I can get you in reach with a real close buddy of mine. He works for Honda Corporate. He was in and out of japan a couple of times to help engineer the suspension for the S2000. I'm sure he is more qualified to talk about suspension than I am
Comment
-
I would like you to site your sources.Originally posted by GStegFactory height is the best geometry you can get out of the car. Any lower you will further deviate from the ideal geometry and travel. It's part of the engineering process Honda goes through. If a car's suspension was created for comfort (like the accord), any other modification will only hurt geometry. Sadly, some people mistaken stiffness and body roll for handling.
Yes, lowering a bit will not be apparant in degradation, but you're still modifying it. Take a look at the guys on the Supra forum. Many have learned the hard way. Instead of lowering, many guys now keep their stock height, but get stiffer springs to aid body roll. Why? because this setup gave their car better track times.
I can guarantee you that you are mistaken. Hondas with modified suspensions can compete exceedingly well on a race track.
In fact, here locally a local road course is OWNED by an RSX. It races against all manner of cars with their suspension setup for "performance."
Namely, Z06's and 911's.
See a couple of the things that you are neglecting:
1) Honda has priorities other than handling. Grandma doesn't want to have to worry about scraping on the speedbump when she crosses it. So the ride height is higher.
If Honda was only designing the car for ride, why did they put double wishbone suspension on it? They could have saved time, money, and space by putting struts at all 4 corners.
But they didn't.
2) One of the nice things about equal length double wishbone suspension is that it doesn't change geometry much as it moves. That is why they use it in Indy, Cart and F1 cars, which are coincidentally the best handling cars on the face of the Earth.
This unique suspension design allows the contact patch of the tire to be maintained almost perfectly through a large range of travel.
The same applies to the use of this suspension on road cars. Which is why Honda put them there.
3) The most common issue with over lowering a car is running out of travel. Since Hondas have so much travel built into their suspension, part of the design and advantage discussed above, they can afford to shed a few inches before they start to run out of travel.
If you use something like a progressive rate spring, such as a Neuspeed, then you blur the compromise even further, because as the suspension runs out of travel, the stiffness of the spring is increasing, which achieves more with less travel. The beauty though, is that over the first bit of travel, the spring is soft, so the car still rides like stock, even though it is 2+ inches lower. Some large bumps are a little more harsh, but not the vast majority of them.
And I have owned my CB7 for 8 years, and it was completely stock when I bought it, so YES I know the difference.
4)Questions:
If is it impossible to improve the handling, then how is it that a completely stock CB7 pulls about .78G on the skidpad with good tires, but with springs, shocks, a larger rear anti-roll bar, and some bushings, that same car pulled about .95G which is about the same as an M3?
How is it possible for BMW to increase the handling over the stock 3 series, by lowering and stiffening it, even though they don't completely redesign the suspension?
Why is the suspension the first thing the engineers attack when they are building a race car?
Why do they lower it first, and then add sticky tires, upgraded shocks, bushings and anti-roll bars?
5) The only real geometry limitation with Honda's design is the way the Toe changes with compression. Once you realign it though, that isn't an issue.
Also, Honda designed the rear to Toe out under acceleration, because it helps to stabilize the rear of the car, but that feature still works with the car lowered, so it is really a moot point.
Other than that 1 engineered feature, the rest of the suspension is designed to maintain geometry all the way to the bumpstops, and it does.
Camber changes slightly, but you can either live with the tire wear and get a little better turn in (race cars do it all the time), or you can put a camber kit in there, and add back the 2-3 degrees and be just like stock.
It is actually also good to a point in that it gets the driveshafts more parallel to the road, which helps eliminate things like torque steer.
6) I have driven my car a lot of places. I live in one of the best places in the US for mountain roads. I have driven them all pretty much, and most of them well more than once.
I can GUARANTEE that my car handles better than it did stock, so please enlighten me to you knowledge, because you are making claims that even a Honda suspension engineer wouldn't.
All the A spec and HFP kits lower the car. All the Honda factory backed programs lower the car. If it truely can't improve anything, why do they do it?
Just because you haven't experienced the capabilities of the chassis, does not mean they are not there.Comment
Comment