Notices
RX-8 Racing Want to discuss autocrossing, road-racing and drag racing the RX-8? Bring it here. This is NOT a kills/street racing forum.
View Poll Results: Should the Track Springs by Progress Go into Production with spring rates discussed?
Yes! Pull the Trigger I am ready to buy!
32
74.42%
Not interested.
11
25.58%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

Progress Technology Springs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 03-25-2009 | 11:38 AM
  #1  
Race Roots's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (64)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,364
Likes: 0
From: Florida
Progress Technology Springs

R&D has completed and the AutoX springs are soon to be available.


AutoX Springs: MSRP $350

GB going on now: https://www.rx8club.com/series-i-wheels-tires-brakes-suspension-55/exclusive-progress-autox-springs-group-buy-183663/

Front: 425 Lbs./In
Rear: 280 Lbs./In

Front Drop: -1.2 inches
Rear Drop: -0.8 inches

These are finalized numbers.

Last edited by Race Roots; 10-15-2009 at 11:26 AM.
Old 03-25-2009 | 12:10 PM
  #2  
chiketkd's Avatar
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
From: Charlottesville, VA
Thanks for organizing this!

Would I be correct in assuming these springs would work with any stock style shock? e.g. konis. I think someone like TeamRX8 could give great feedback on this subject.

Personally, I'd like to see a 1" drop front & rear with a front spring rate around 420-450lbs/in, and a rear spring rate around 275-300lbs/in.

I'm sure more will chime in...
Old 03-25-2009 | 02:23 PM
  #3  
Winning 8's Avatar
Hot Pit
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
From: Castro Valley, CA
I like 1"drop ront, 1/2" drop on rear, 400lb front, 275lb back
Old 03-25-2009 | 02:26 PM
  #4  
MilesJ's Avatar
Registered
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 104
Likes: 1
From: South Bend, IN
I'd like to see some direct replacement springs with spring rates similar to what is found on the popular coilover kits (450-400 lbs/in Front, 300-250 lbs/in rear) with a very small drop, 0.75-1.0" or so.

Revalved Konis + stiff springs should work well for STX.

In the mean time I'm figuring out how to mount Bilstein ASN shocks, inverted, at all 4 corners.

Last edited by MilesJ; 03-25-2009 at 02:33 PM.
Old 03-25-2009 | 02:28 PM
  #5  
shinronin's Avatar
Registered
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
From: Oreland, PA
450/275. 1" drop F & R.
Old 03-25-2009 | 02:44 PM
  #6  
chiketkd's Avatar
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
From: Charlottesville, VA
Originally Posted by shinronin
450/275. 1" drop F & R.
Glad to see you chime in Doug. You were the other person that I was interested in hearing input from.
Old 03-25-2009 | 03:46 PM
  #7  
Race Roots's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (64)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,364
Likes: 0
From: Florida
Thanks guys Keep it coming.
Old 03-25-2009 | 10:37 PM
  #8  
GeorgeH's Avatar
Registered
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 3
From: Portland OR
I agree with the above sentiments. No current aftermarket spring, near as I can tell, would be a good choice for STX. The rates above are the current consensus, and they seem reasonable. As for the drop, about 1" is good, and give a front/rear drop bias that will achieve roughly neutral handling for the spring rates choosen. I don't care about looks.

Also, please let us know what bump stops were used in the development of the spring (i.e., stock, untrimmed, or trimmed, etc), as this can influence handling balance as well.
Old 03-25-2009 | 11:15 PM
  #9  
chiketkd's Avatar
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
From: Charlottesville, VA
Originally Posted by GeorgeH
Also, please let us know what bump stops were used in the development of the spring (i.e., stock, untrimmed, or trimmed, etc), as this can influence handling balance as well.
Very good point!
Old 03-26-2009 | 12:51 AM
  #10  
AustinMini's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
From: Plano, TX
I will be very interested, currently running mazdaspeed springs and dspecs for STX/Track. Would love to go stiffer, 450/275 1" drop sounds great to me!
Old 03-26-2009 | 04:12 AM
  #11  
swoope's Avatar
Zoom-Freakin'-Zoom
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,602
Likes: 36
From: orlando, fl
Originally Posted by GeorgeH
I agree with the above sentiments. No current aftermarket spring, near as I can tell, would be a good choice for STX. The rates above are the current consensus, and they seem reasonable. As for the drop, about 1" is good, and give a front/rear drop bias that will achieve roughly neutral handling for the spring rates choosen. I don't care about looks.

Also, please let us know what bump stops were used in the development of the spring (i.e., stock, untrimmed, or trimmed, etc), as this can influence handling balance as well.
ding, ding.

nice to see you around george!

beers
Old 03-26-2009 | 07:53 AM
  #12  
bingo's Avatar
Playing in parking lots
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
I'm interested in seeing how this works out, looking at STX for 2010.
Old 03-26-2009 | 01:42 PM
  #13  
StrokerAce's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
I'd prefer a little less than 1" drop. With the 1/2+- from the Koni's a full inch would be a little more than needed. IMO. The rates sound about right. If anything I would like to err on the side of stiffening up the rears. I'd like the option to remove the rear sway bar and balance with a stiffer front bar to improve traction.
Old 03-26-2009 | 01:49 PM
  #14  
GeorgeH's Avatar
Registered
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 3
From: Portland OR
Originally Posted by swoope
ding, ding.

nice to see you around george!

beers

Thanks swoope.

I was about to suggest that they set the springs up to work well with both the OEM and Progress sway bars (if that were possible) but StrokerAce brings up a good point. I know this approach (no rear sway) is common in the Miata community.

Anybody else have comments on that?
Old 03-26-2009 | 02:00 PM
  #15  
chiketkd's Avatar
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
From: Charlottesville, VA
Originally Posted by StrokerAce
I'd prefer a little less than 1" drop. With the 1/2+- from the Koni's a full inch would be a little more than needed. IMO. The rates sound about right. If anything I would like to err on the side of stiffening up the rears. I'd like the option to remove the rear sway bar and balance with a stiffer front bar to improve traction.
Agreed on the drop. I'd like to be at a 1" total drop when on koni yellows (which seem to be the most common/popular performance shock in the RX-8 community).

With regards to rear stiffness, one other option is for Progress to make multiple spring rates available for the fronts & rears. e.g.

Front: 450, 425, 400
Rear: 300, 275, 250

If this were the case, serious autocrossers would probably want to purchase multiple sets of front and rear springs as they figure out the right spring rate balance for asphalt & concrete.
Old 03-26-2009 | 02:26 PM
  #16  
Race Roots's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (64)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,364
Likes: 0
From: Florida
Originally Posted by chiketkd
Agreed on the drop. I'd like to be at a 1" total drop when on koni yellows (which seem to be the most common/popular performance shock in the RX-8 community).

With regards to rear stiffness, one other option is for Progress to make multiple spring rates available for the fronts & rears. e.g.

Front: 450, 425, 400
Rear: 300, 275, 250

If this were the case, serious autocrossers would probably want to purchase multiple sets of front and rear springs as they figure out the right spring rate balance for asphalt & concrete.

And on that note there are now going to be 2 Springs being offered and Manufactured and designed by Progress at our Request.

There will be a Track Spring 450/260 Maybe 270, but the rear is reaching the limits of coils on the spring, If I remember correctly from our conversation today.

Then there will be a Street Spring with lower rates in the 230/180 Range.

The Track spring will be exclusively available through Fluid Motorsports and will hopefully have 2 prototypes to get some field testing *cough* need a volunteer. *Cough* Not Just yet of course

The Challenge in Front of me is 40-50 spring sets will be needed to make the project remotely affordable, if the demand is there for the majority of that I have no issues pushing this through.

Thank you to everyone for their input and please continue to watch this, please feel free to post up to express interest.

The more interest I see, the more this project will see production.
Old 03-26-2009 | 02:45 PM
  #17  
chiketkd's Avatar
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
From: Charlottesville, VA
^Any idea on what the targeted ride height drop will be for the Track Springs?
Old 03-26-2009 | 03:40 PM
  #18  
Race Roots's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (64)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,364
Likes: 0
From: Florida
Originally Posted by chiketkd
^Any idea on what the targeted ride height drop will be for the Track Springs?
We are going higher initially and once we get Field testing feedback we will go from there.

Range is 1.2-0.8
Old 03-26-2009 | 03:42 PM
  #19  
chiketkd's Avatar
Row faster, I hear banjos
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,217
Likes: 0
From: Charlottesville, VA
Originally Posted by Fluid Motorsports
We are going higher initially and once we get Field testing feedback we will go from there.

Range is 1.2-0.8
Sounds good. Thanks!
Old 03-26-2009 | 06:45 PM
  #20  
Winning 8's Avatar
Hot Pit
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
From: Castro Valley, CA
I favor the 0.8 better..
Old 03-26-2009 | 07:21 PM
  #21  
GeorgeH's Avatar
Registered
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 3
From: Portland OR
Originally Posted by Winning 8
I favor the 0.8 better..
Why is that?
Old 03-26-2009 | 08:13 PM
  #22  
PhotoMunkey's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
the RX-8 has a fairly low roll center already. Going too low changes the angles of the control arms and drops the roll center too far, giving it greater leverage on the springs. You have to increase the spring rate to compensate for the increase in leverage. Keeping the car just above a 1" drop, like .8" places it within it's sweet spot. Look at the championship-winning Speedsource cars. They avoided dropping their cars very far at all. What does Speedsource know about the RX-8 chassis? Think they've extensively modeled the motion of the control arms to see what happens?

Boy you must really an an "in" with Jeff at Progress Technology because I asked them two years ago to do RX-8 springs! All I heard was "blah, blah, blah... not enough of a market..." :D
Old 03-26-2009 | 09:22 PM
  #23  
GeorgeH's Avatar
Registered
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 3
From: Portland OR
Originally Posted by PhotoMunkey
the RX-8 has a fairly low roll center already. Going too low changes the angles of the control arms and drops the roll center too far, giving it greater leverage on the springs. You have to increase the spring rate to compensate for the increase in leverage. Keeping the car just above a 1" drop, like .8" places it within it's sweet spot. Look at the championship-winning Speedsource cars. They avoided dropping their cars very far at all. What does Speedsource know about the RX-8 chassis? Think they've extensively modeled the motion of the control arms to see what happens?
Yes, I'm familiar with all this.

I'm just wondering if somebody has something specific as to why .8" would be better than 1."

Looking at the Speedsource cars, I'll agree they don't look slammed, but I sure can't tell if they have lowered the cars .8, 1" 1.2" etc. by looking at the pictures. Besides, wouldn't they use custom control arms & links to correct the geometry?

Not trying to be a PIA, just wondering if somebody has something specific.
Old 03-26-2009 | 11:08 PM
  #24  
Race Roots's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (64)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,364
Likes: 0
From: Florida
Originally Posted by PhotoMunkey
the RX-8 has a fairly low roll center already. Going too low changes the angles of the control arms and drops the roll center too far, giving it greater leverage on the springs. You have to increase the spring rate to compensate for the increase in leverage. Keeping the car just above a 1" drop, like .8" places it within it's sweet spot. Look at the championship-winning Speedsource cars. They avoided dropping their cars very far at all. What does Speedsource know about the RX-8 chassis? Think they've extensively modeled the motion of the control arms to see what happens?

Boy you must really an an "in" with Jeff at Progress Technology because I asked them two years ago to do RX-8 springs! All I heard was "blah, blah, blah... not enough of a market..." :D
Jeff is a great guy and they were looking to expand the market. Not sure if they really had to many distributors that carried the RX-8 line then.

Originally Posted by GeorgeH
Yes, I'm familiar with all this.

I'm just wondering if somebody has something specific as to why .8" would be better than 1."

Looking at the Speedsource cars, I'll agree they don't look slammed, but I sure can't tell if they have lowered the cars .8, 1" 1.2" etc. by looking at the pictures. Besides, wouldn't they use custom control arms & links to correct the geometry?

Not trying to be a PIA, just wondering if somebody has something specific.

0.8 is best becasue going to low you start getting negative camber, among others issues.

Swift went with that number as well, he favored 1.2 and .8 the most Front to rear.

Talking to him today, he is extremely intelligent and has been doing this for a long time I am confident in his decisions and hope to see this project through.
Old 03-26-2009 | 11:20 PM
  #25  
GeorgeH's Avatar
Registered
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 3
From: Portland OR
Originally Posted by Fluid Motorsports
0.8 is best becasue going to low you start getting negative camber, among others issues.

Swift went with that number as well, he favored 1.2 and .8 the most Front to rear.

Talking to him today, he is extremely intelligent and has been doing this for a long time I am confident in his decisions and hope to see this project through.
Sounds good, I look foraward to seeing these on the market!


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: Progress Technology Springs



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:25 AM.