Verell, come on you forgot about the girls !! 1) LouGaudio 2) Perfusion 3) Owens84QV 4) chris03053 5) 308tr6 6) 308Mechanic 7) SalmaHayek 8) ParisHilton Seriously guys, jump in here and commit....we gotta make this happen.
Not to be a skeptic, Birdman, But with the incresed spring rate combined with pre-compressing the spring (albiet slightly) , and the set up being "almost the same length as the Koni". With the spring perch at it's lowest possible setting, is the front of your car not going to sit HIGHER than stock? Or is there something in the equation that I am missing?
That's a good question. I know that Birdman chose springs that were pretty close to what others have used uccessfully with the same QA1s. However, they weren't using the longer eyes. BUT, referring to the OEM spring info earlier in this thread, there's a big difference in the amount of initial spring pre-load between the OEM spring & the QA1 spring: The OEM front springs unloaded lengths are 13.5"(GTB) or 14.5" (GTS). Looking at the side by side pix, when installed on the Konis, the OEM springs are compressed down to about the same length as the QA1 spring, ie: ~9" or so. So while as pictured the QA1 springs have 150-200lbs initial pre-load, the OEM springs would appear to have more like 600-700 lbs pre-load!!! Thus, to achieve the same ride height, that lower QA1 spring perch is going to have to be cranked up several inches from the bottom!!! I haven't run the numbers, but intitively, the longer eye may actually help by bringing the initial pre-load closer to the OEM setup. ie: I'm wondering if the people running 250-300 lb 10" front springs on std QA1 shocks shouldn't have been using springs an inch or so longer, ie: have initial pre-load closer to the OEM springs??? The picture changes again when you're talking about the much stiffer (350-450lb) front springs...
Received eMAIL from 2 more, so we have the necessary 8 spoken for: 1) LouGaudio 2) Perfusion 3) Owens84QV 4) chris03053 5) 308tr6 6) 308Mechanic 7) Tilman 8) rufus
It might. You would have to pre compress the spring without the longer shock eye as the springs are 10" in the front and are just a tad too long for the shocks to be put in without pre-compressing. The eye length doesn't change that. However the stock springs in the Koni shocks have to be REALLY compressed to get them in the shocks. The QA1 springs have barely any tension at all when the arms are at full droop. In the back they have none unless you adjust the perches up a bit. So when the car drops to the ground, they will compress a lot with the weight of the car. Nonetheless, you make a good point. When the snow clears and the car is on the ground again, I'll find out. It may be that I need to put 9" springs on the front instead of 10". In the past everyone has had plenty of adjustment with the stock QA1 and 10" springs. But with my new shocks 1" longer than the QA1s, it might be that I need 9" springs. Verell and I discussed this and I decided to start with 10" springs, especially considering that they settle over the first few months. Springs are cheap if I need to try 9 inchers. (They are like $100 a pair). This is all a learning experience. Birdman
VERY good point. I took a spring off a Koni just to see how they went together and HOLY CRAP do they have a lot of pre-load!! You need to put spring compressors on there and crank the crap out of them to get them compressed enough to get the perches off. Birdman
Here's another concept, The side recess is to clear the a-arm. It's almost 1mm deeper than Birdman made his notches, which I'm hoping will cover the vehicle-vehicle tolerences. Not as sleek as the previous concept, but s/b significantly stronger. What do you think??? Image Unavailable, Please Login
You're the engineer, I just stick parts on cars. Personally, I just want "functional" and "safe" -- "sleek" really isn't a concern, especially for a suspension part.
I'm hoping to find time to finalize the design drawings this weekend & send it out for quotes early next week. Quotes usually take a couple of weeks, so I think we're looking at final pricing about 3 weeks. Mfg time usually runs 3-4 weeks from quotes depending on what the shop has for backlog & how long I keep the group buy open. Hmm, given the interest, maybe I could get the group buy going w/o firm pricing.
I'll do anything to get the process going quickly- I have ordered the shocks and will be putting the suspension back together as soon as possible so pre-payment sounds good to me.
I'm sensitive to the time factor & am putting as much time on this as I can. Hopefully I'll do better than I said in the preceding post. While I'll need a deposit, that won't be what drives the schedule. It's making time to finish the detailed design drawings & make mfg the parts happen. It's getting to be the end of the 'salt season' & everyone'***** me up for parts & column switch repairs they want 'ASAP'. Also, we're out of town for several days starting weekend after next to celebrate my wife's birthday. I'm going to do my best to get the drawings out so I can get quotes back & post prices before we leave, but it's looking tight.
A quick update, I've finished the detailed design drawings & sent them to a couple of machine shops for quotes. Here's a 3D rendering of the design I sent out for quotes. That clearance notch looks pretty big, but it's only 1/4" deep on a 1.2" body, so there's lots of metal left. QA1's std eye extenders only have a 0.85" body OD, so these will have a heck of a lot more metal in the body. Also, the QA1 eyes are mere 6061 Aluminum. Based on smg2's recommendation, I'm specifying that these be made from 361 Stainless Steel: Image Unavailable, Please Login
I'm sorry guys, but the liability implications of selling a suspension component preclude me selling the extended length shock eyes. I couldn't sell the dozen or so sets that we're talking about & get enough money to come close to buying the kind of ongoing liability insurance that selling them would require.
However, I am designing another new Unobtainium product. You might find this new group buy interesting/entertaining: http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?p=136536501
Bummer, but understandable. Any chance you could send me design specs so that I could have a single set machined by my guy here? Or is there liability in that also? Just a thought.
I'm real pleased with the paper weight's acceptance so far, but then again, I remember what a pain it is to keep both the Ferrari WSM, FPC, & Tech Specs/Recalls books open to the correct pages at the same time. Real pita when you've got your hands all greasy & the pages want to flip... ;^) I'm sorry, but my legal expert thinks that would be risky also... Heck of a note on our current society...