Rear suspension "Tuning"
10-16-2004, 01:28 PM
#1
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
Rear suspension "Tuning"
I originally titled this "Tuning a rear anti-sway bar" but then realized this tuning extends beyond just the RSB, since it can also be influenced by the settings on adjustable shocks and by tire pressure, but it's still mainly directed toward the RSB.
I have actually posted similar questions in a couple of threads, so my apologies for being redundant, but I have decided this subject deserves its own thread.
I bolted on my Progress RSB according to the directions it came with, placing the "end links" (bushings) about 1" from the ends of the sway bar, and the bushings along the axle as wide as possible. I was happy with this setup with the stock springs and shocks, but then installed Tokico springs and Illumina struts/shocks, and am now trying to deal with a lack of "compliance" in the back end, which I suspect is related more to the RSB than the springs since it's most noticeable over rough surfaces where one rear wheel is "active" and the other is on a flat surface. In particular, there is a road I drive on every day that is really rough (big bumps) along the centerline and smooth on the outside. Something like railroad tracks are no problem.
I do not want to remove the RSB altogether since I like how flat the car corners, but I would like to "soften" it. Despite references to the Stillen bar being the only one that is adjustable, I do not believe this is precisely correct. I believe the Progress and Addco bars are adjustable too.
I did find one link which mentioned moving the bushings along the axle closer together and away from the bends, and moving the bushings on the trailing arms closer to the ends of the strut bar, and I am going to try this. Nothing too extreme, just move them to 5" or so from the bends, and as far toward the ends as seems prudent.
So, no real "question" here per se, but I am interested in folks input on their experiences with rear anti-sway bar "tuning".
BTW, I have the Illuminas set at 2F/2R, so they are as soft as they can reasonably go in conjunction with the performance springs. My wheels are the OE 16's that came on the 98 SE. I have the OE rear strut mounts, not the "long travel" mounts being sold by a fellow org'er. I can't honestly say whether the rear shocks are hitting the bump stops on the rough surfaces or not, but I don't think so. And finally, I should check my tire pressure, as it may be a little higher in back than it needs to be.
David
I have actually posted similar questions in a couple of threads, so my apologies for being redundant, but I have decided this subject deserves its own thread.
I bolted on my Progress RSB according to the directions it came with, placing the "end links" (bushings) about 1" from the ends of the sway bar, and the bushings along the axle as wide as possible. I was happy with this setup with the stock springs and shocks, but then installed Tokico springs and Illumina struts/shocks, and am now trying to deal with a lack of "compliance" in the back end, which I suspect is related more to the RSB than the springs since it's most noticeable over rough surfaces where one rear wheel is "active" and the other is on a flat surface. In particular, there is a road I drive on every day that is really rough (big bumps) along the centerline and smooth on the outside. Something like railroad tracks are no problem.
I do not want to remove the RSB altogether since I like how flat the car corners, but I would like to "soften" it. Despite references to the Stillen bar being the only one that is adjustable, I do not believe this is precisely correct. I believe the Progress and Addco bars are adjustable too.
I did find one link which mentioned moving the bushings along the axle closer together and away from the bends, and moving the bushings on the trailing arms closer to the ends of the strut bar, and I am going to try this. Nothing too extreme, just move them to 5" or so from the bends, and as far toward the ends as seems prudent.
So, no real "question" here per se, but I am interested in folks input on their experiences with rear anti-sway bar "tuning".
BTW, I have the Illuminas set at 2F/2R, so they are as soft as they can reasonably go in conjunction with the performance springs. My wheels are the OE 16's that came on the 98 SE. I have the OE rear strut mounts, not the "long travel" mounts being sold by a fellow org'er. I can't honestly say whether the rear shocks are hitting the bump stops on the rough surfaces or not, but I don't think so. And finally, I should check my tire pressure, as it may be a little higher in back than it needs to be.
David
10-16-2004, 01:35 PM
#2
Member who somehow became The President of The SE-L Club
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 16,033
The bushings on the axel really don't play a role in the bars adjustability. The trailing arm bushings are the ones that matter. Pulling them back closer to the shock makes the bar less active. I concur with you that these bars are definately adjustable. On lowered, sport suspension setups, the combination of sport springs and a RSB can be just a little to tight for the rear end. I've got my Addco bar set at a mid way point. My rear end doesn't jump around on bumps, yet cornering is still very flat.
Enjoy your new suspension setup and have fun playing with the adjustments.
Enjoy your new suspension setup and have fun playing with the adjustments.
10-16-2004, 01:51 PM
#3
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
Dangit, just about the time I think I have this figured out...
Is the RSB "stiffer" with the bushing placed closer to the end of the bar, or with more of the bar protruding through the bushing? I have heard it both ways and, unfortunately, it's not intuitively obvious to me which would be correct.
If moving the brackets "back", closer to the rear axle, allowing more of the end of the bar to stick through the bushing, makes the RSB "less active," then I think this is what I want, but this is exactly the opposite of what I thought. Perhaps it's just an issue with terminology?
Does "less active" mean "less effective", i.e. "softer"? I need a picture, with arrows labeled "stiffer" and "softer"
Is the RSB "stiffer" with the bushing placed closer to the end of the bar, or with more of the bar protruding through the bushing? I have heard it both ways and, unfortunately, it's not intuitively obvious to me which would be correct.
If moving the brackets "back", closer to the rear axle, allowing more of the end of the bar to stick through the bushing, makes the RSB "less active," then I think this is what I want, but this is exactly the opposite of what I thought. Perhaps it's just an issue with terminology?
Does "less active" mean "less effective", i.e. "softer"? I need a picture, with arrows labeled "stiffer" and "softer"
10-16-2004, 02:11 PM
#4
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
Here is a picture of an adjustable sway bar, but which hole is "stiffer" and which is "softer"? This bar is for a Toyota, but it actually does a good job of illustrating how an anti-sway bar is adjusted.
Link to article where picture was found.
Link to article where picture was found.
10-16-2004, 02:39 PM
#5
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
Here is another adjustable anti-roll bar, this one for an Impreza
This link "broke" 5 minutes after I posted it, so the "link" has been removed to avoid a big empty space.
* http://stefanostadal.homedns.org/ima...sus/arb_04.jpg
Link to article
The accompanying text says:
So, "lengthening" the "moment arm" decreases the stiffness of the bar, so moving the mounting brackets "forward", toward the ends of the bar, should accomplish the same thing.
This link "broke" 5 minutes after I posted it, so the "link" has been removed to avoid a big empty space.
* http://stefanostadal.homedns.org/ima...sus/arb_04.jpg
Link to article
The accompanying text says:
There are basically 3 positions that determine the 'stiffness' of the bar :-
1. The outer holes (closest to the ends of the bar) - minimum settings appearing as a 22mm diameter bar,
2. The middle holes - a good balance in stiffness (similar to a 23mm bar) and should take away much of the Impreza's in-built understeer,
3. The inner holes - stiffest setting (similar to a 24mm bar) and without upgrading the front anti-roll bar would probably induce too much oversteer.
1. The outer holes (closest to the ends of the bar) - minimum settings appearing as a 22mm diameter bar,
2. The middle holes - a good balance in stiffness (similar to a 23mm bar) and should take away much of the Impreza's in-built understeer,
3. The inner holes - stiffest setting (similar to a 24mm bar) and without upgrading the front anti-roll bar would probably induce too much oversteer.
10-16-2004, 02:50 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 408
The closer the bushings are to the end of the bar, the softer it is.
The bar links the two sides of the suspension together and tries to make them go up and down in unison. The bar is forced to bend if one side of the suspension moves more than the other. This is what keeps the vehicle handling 'flat'.
Moving the bushings to the ends of the bar gives the car more leverage in bending it... thus making it softer.
Good Luck!
The bar links the two sides of the suspension together and tries to make them go up and down in unison. The bar is forced to bend if one side of the suspension moves more than the other. This is what keeps the vehicle handling 'flat'.
Moving the bushings to the ends of the bar gives the car more leverage in bending it... thus making it softer.
Good Luck!
10-16-2004, 02:56 PM
#8
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
And finally, a wonderful description of WHY...
Improved Handling with Anti-Sway Bars
by John Comeskey of SPS and James Walker of scR motorsports
Improved Handling with Anti-Sway Bars
by John Comeskey of SPS and James Walker of scR motorsports
There are two primary factors that determine an anti-sway bar’s torsional stiffness: the diameter of the bar and the length of the bar’s "moment arm" (more commonly known as the amount of leverage that the vehicle is able to apply against the twisting motion of the bar.)
Diameter is generally the easiest concept to grasp, as it is somewhat intuitive that a larger diameter bar would have greater torsional rigidity.
Diameter is generally the easiest concept to grasp, as it is somewhat intuitive that a larger diameter bar would have greater torsional rigidity.
However, in addition to the diameter of a bar, there is another very important factor that determines an anti-sway bar’s torsional rigidity. This factor is known as the "length of the moment arm" – or in common terms, the amount of leverage between the vehicle and the bar.
As with anything, an increased amount of leverage makes it easier to do work. This is governed by the "lever law," force x distance = torque. As "distance" - or the length of the lever - increases, the resulting amount of torque also increases. (This is why it was easier to move your big brother on the teeter-totter when he moved into the middle and you stayed out on the end. You enjoyed increased leverage at the end, while he suffered from reduced leverage in the middle.)
Because an anti-sway bar is shaped as a "U," the ends of the bar that lead from the center of the bar to the end-link attachment serve as a lever. As the distance from the straight part of the bar to the attachment at the end link becomes longer, the torque applied against the bar increases – making it easier for a given amount of energy to twist the anti-sway bar. As this distance is reduced, torque is reduced - making it more difficult for a given amount of energy to twist the anti-sway bar.
It is the lever law that is applied during the design of an adjustable anti-sway bar. By using multiple end link locations, the distance from the point of attachment to the straight part of the bar can be altered. Or in engineers’ terms, the length of "the moment arm" can be increased or reduced in order to make more or less torque against the bar. Using a setting further from the center of the bar increases the length of the moment arm, resulting in more torque against the bar, allowing more twisting motion of the bar, creating more body roll. Using a setting closer to the center of the bar reduces the length of the moment arm, resulting in less torque against the bar, allowing less twisting motion of the bar, creating less body roll.
The actual impact upon torque can be compared by dividing the center-to-center distances of the end-link attachment points. For example, the center-to-center distance of the stock rear anti-sway bar is 200mm. We can compare this to the 160mm distance of the firmest setting of the 4-way adjustable 17.5mm bar by simply dividing the distances, 160/200 = .8. In other words, a 160mm center-to-center bar produces only 80% of the torque that would be produced by a 200mm center-to-center bar of the same diameter. Or simpler yet, by using the 160mm end-link attachment points, we increase the stiffness of the anti-sway bar by an extra 20%.
As with anything, an increased amount of leverage makes it easier to do work. This is governed by the "lever law," force x distance = torque. As "distance" - or the length of the lever - increases, the resulting amount of torque also increases. (This is why it was easier to move your big brother on the teeter-totter when he moved into the middle and you stayed out on the end. You enjoyed increased leverage at the end, while he suffered from reduced leverage in the middle.)
Because an anti-sway bar is shaped as a "U," the ends of the bar that lead from the center of the bar to the end-link attachment serve as a lever. As the distance from the straight part of the bar to the attachment at the end link becomes longer, the torque applied against the bar increases – making it easier for a given amount of energy to twist the anti-sway bar. As this distance is reduced, torque is reduced - making it more difficult for a given amount of energy to twist the anti-sway bar.
It is the lever law that is applied during the design of an adjustable anti-sway bar. By using multiple end link locations, the distance from the point of attachment to the straight part of the bar can be altered. Or in engineers’ terms, the length of "the moment arm" can be increased or reduced in order to make more or less torque against the bar. Using a setting further from the center of the bar increases the length of the moment arm, resulting in more torque against the bar, allowing more twisting motion of the bar, creating more body roll. Using a setting closer to the center of the bar reduces the length of the moment arm, resulting in less torque against the bar, allowing less twisting motion of the bar, creating less body roll.
The actual impact upon torque can be compared by dividing the center-to-center distances of the end-link attachment points. For example, the center-to-center distance of the stock rear anti-sway bar is 200mm. We can compare this to the 160mm distance of the firmest setting of the 4-way adjustable 17.5mm bar by simply dividing the distances, 160/200 = .8. In other words, a 160mm center-to-center bar produces only 80% of the torque that would be produced by a 200mm center-to-center bar of the same diameter. Or simpler yet, by using the 160mm end-link attachment points, we increase the stiffness of the anti-sway bar by an extra 20%.
10-16-2004, 03:01 PM
#9
the rear will occillate like its nobodys buisness. the RSB makes the rear wheels move together, this means when the outer wheel is moved up the inner wheel will move up too. the rear axle design is not really ment for handling, it was for cost, weight, and size. Nissan cut corners if you will. (no pun intended).
i thought the farther you move the trailing arm bushings from the bend, the softer the ride. i guess im clueless on the adjustment. But from the above pix it looks as if im correct. I have my Progress 1" from the end of the bar.
i thought the farther you move the trailing arm bushings from the bend, the softer the ride. i guess im clueless on the adjustment. But from the above pix it looks as if im correct. I have my Progress 1" from the end of the bar.
10-16-2004, 03:41 PM
#11
Member who somehow became The President of The SE-L Club
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 16,033
Originally Posted by n2oMike
Moving the bushings to the ends of the bar gives the car more leverage in bending it... thus making it softer.
Good Luck!
Good Luck!
The rear axel in our cars have anti sway properties by deisgn. The addition of an anti-sway bar basically makes the axel more ridgid, thus reducing sway even more. Placing the bushing at the end of the sway bar, further back on the car's trailing arm will brace it and make the whole axel assembly more ridgid.
10-16-2004, 05:20 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 408
Originally Posted by njmaxseltd
You've got that backwards. Bushings at the end make it firmer. Think of it as leverage, the further out and longer you are, the more leverage you have.
One part of the bar runs along, and is attached to the axle. It's ends then curve around and attach to the control arms. The further out those bends you go, the easier it is to bend (or twist) the bar. The easier the bar bends, the less of an effect it has. It feels softer.
I have an Addco bar, and have played with the bushing placement. It definitely gets softer as the bushing is moved toward the end. I had it WAY too stiff originally (originally installed with the stock suspension) and the rear of the car stayed very flat, while the front suspension seemed to sway like crazy. After moving the bushings around an inch or less from the end, it felt WAY better. The front and rear of the car were much better balanced.
10-16-2004, 06:19 PM
#13
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
njmaxseltd,
The more leverage you have, the easier it is for the bar to twist, making the sway bar SOFTER.
The trailing arm is actually in FRONT of the rear axle (or at least it is on my 98 SE), so moving the bushings "further back on the car's trailing arm" will move them AWAY from the ends and closer to the bends, reducing the length of the moment arm, and therefore making the bar effectively stiffer.
Is that what you meant to say?
The more leverage you have, the easier it is for the bar to twist, making the sway bar SOFTER.
The trailing arm is actually in FRONT of the rear axle (or at least it is on my 98 SE), so moving the bushings "further back on the car's trailing arm" will move them AWAY from the ends and closer to the bends, reducing the length of the moment arm, and therefore making the bar effectively stiffer.
Is that what you meant to say?
10-16-2004, 06:54 PM
#14
Not DAVEB the parts guy
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,555
1) The stock beam has 1" sway bar in it
2) The Maxima beam axle setup will actually outhandle a Maxima IRS setup on flat or mostly flat surfaces because the beam keeps perfect camber regardless of lean or suspension compression/extenison.
3) The aftermarket swaybars introduce a bit suspension bind
4) Aftermarket swaybars hurt ride quality because you're adding about 15lbs of unsprung weight to the beam which only weighs 45lbs (over a 30% increase in mass!!).
5) Motor Trend tested a Stillen SC Maxima years ago with and without the aftermarket swaybar. The Maxima without the aftermarket actually handled better though MT did like the reduced lean of the swaybar.
6) I use to have a Addco swaybar and I'm far happier without it. The suspension feels more controlled even though the car does lean a little more. If you have lowering springs, an aftermarket swaybar will do you little good.
7) I've always been under the impression that pushing the endlink points to the tip of the swaybar makes the bar more loose because the car has more leverage on the bar.
2) The Maxima beam axle setup will actually outhandle a Maxima IRS setup on flat or mostly flat surfaces because the beam keeps perfect camber regardless of lean or suspension compression/extenison.
3) The aftermarket swaybars introduce a bit suspension bind
4) Aftermarket swaybars hurt ride quality because you're adding about 15lbs of unsprung weight to the beam which only weighs 45lbs (over a 30% increase in mass!!).
5) Motor Trend tested a Stillen SC Maxima years ago with and without the aftermarket swaybar. The Maxima without the aftermarket actually handled better though MT did like the reduced lean of the swaybar.
6) I use to have a Addco swaybar and I'm far happier without it. The suspension feels more controlled even though the car does lean a little more. If you have lowering springs, an aftermarket swaybar will do you little good.
7) I've always been under the impression that pushing the endlink points to the tip of the swaybar makes the bar more loose because the car has more leverage on the bar.
10-16-2004, 07:04 PM
#15
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
Well, it looks like I might need to remove or otherwise "disable" the bar and judge for myself. I was always under the impression that a rear anti-sway bar was a no-brainer, but I'm not so sure anymore, especially since adding the Tokico struts and springs.
"Everyone says" the bars do not effect ride, but I am not convinced that this is true, especially on irregular surfaces. Alas, I'm not going to really know until I remove it and see if the ride over said surfaces improves.
The RSB is on the car my 16 year old son drives, and the stories of oversteer have frankly got me a little bit concerned, especially with wet and slippery weather approaching.
Question: How risky would it be to remove the bracket/bushing from ONE side, temporarily, for the purposes of checking out my theory that the RSB effects ride quality? This would effectively "disable" the bar, although the weight would still be there. I wonder if it would bang around a lot? OTOH, removing it completely would not be that difficult, and would entail less "risk". Ideally though, I'd be able to enable it and disable it repeatedly, and removing just one side would certainly expedite this. Either way, I'm glad I invested in a garage jack and a good lug wrench.
"Everyone says" the bars do not effect ride, but I am not convinced that this is true, especially on irregular surfaces. Alas, I'm not going to really know until I remove it and see if the ride over said surfaces improves.
The RSB is on the car my 16 year old son drives, and the stories of oversteer have frankly got me a little bit concerned, especially with wet and slippery weather approaching.
Question: How risky would it be to remove the bracket/bushing from ONE side, temporarily, for the purposes of checking out my theory that the RSB effects ride quality? This would effectively "disable" the bar, although the weight would still be there. I wonder if it would bang around a lot? OTOH, removing it completely would not be that difficult, and would entail less "risk". Ideally though, I'd be able to enable it and disable it repeatedly, and removing just one side would certainly expedite this. Either way, I'm glad I invested in a garage jack and a good lug wrench.
10-17-2004, 05:57 AM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 408
Originally Posted by Dave B
1) The stock beam has 1" sway bar in it
2) The Maxima beam axle setup will actually outhandle a Maxima IRS setup on flat or mostly flat surfaces because the beam keeps perfect camber regardless of lean or suspension compression/extenison.
3) The aftermarket swaybars introduce a bit suspension bind
4) Aftermarket swaybars hurt ride quality because you're adding about 15lbs of unsprung weight to the beam which only weighs 45lbs (over a 30% increase in mass!!).
5) Motor Trend tested a Stillen SC Maxima years ago with and without the aftermarket swaybar. The Maxima without the aftermarket actually handled better though MT did like the reduced lean of the swaybar.
6) I use to have a Addco swaybar and I'm far happier without it. The suspension feels more controlled even though the car does lean a little more. If you have lowering springs, an aftermarket swaybar will do you little good.
7) I've always been under the impression that pushing the endlink points to the tip of the swaybar makes the bar more loose because the car has more leverage on the bar.
2) The Maxima beam axle setup will actually outhandle a Maxima IRS setup on flat or mostly flat surfaces because the beam keeps perfect camber regardless of lean or suspension compression/extenison.
3) The aftermarket swaybars introduce a bit suspension bind
4) Aftermarket swaybars hurt ride quality because you're adding about 15lbs of unsprung weight to the beam which only weighs 45lbs (over a 30% increase in mass!!).
5) Motor Trend tested a Stillen SC Maxima years ago with and without the aftermarket swaybar. The Maxima without the aftermarket actually handled better though MT did like the reduced lean of the swaybar.
6) I use to have a Addco swaybar and I'm far happier without it. The suspension feels more controlled even though the car does lean a little more. If you have lowering springs, an aftermarket swaybar will do you little good.
7) I've always been under the impression that pushing the endlink points to the tip of the swaybar makes the bar more loose because the car has more leverage on the bar.
2. Straight beam axles do NOT outhandle properly set up independent suspensions. With independent suspensions, the camber curve can be adjusted to increase negative camber as the body rolls and the suspension compresses. This keeps the tread in more square contact with the road.
3. Suspension bind... Well they are designed to link both sides of the suspension together to make it handle flatter. Of course, this CAN be overdone, but that their point.
4. I have not noticed any significant degradaton of ride quality. You can't just compare the 10-15lbs the sway bar weighs to the axle itself. The weight of the wheels, tires, etc also has to be taken into account. It's not really that significant.
5. So according to this article, the car feels much more controlled with the bar, but it didn't really help it on the skid pad. Sounds like a 'wash' to me.
6. You are free to leave it on or off. Personally, I like mine. To each his own.
7. correct. My Addco bar felt way too stiff until the bushings were moved within an inch of the end of the bar.
10-17-2004, 01:52 PM
#17
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
Mine appears to be set up properly, i.e. bushings about 1" from the end of the bar, so it doesn't look like there is anything I can do to reduce the stiffness of the bar further, short of removing it of course. I may still perform the experiment of disconnecting one side, but I got lazy last night and didn't feel like doing it. I'm probably obsessing over nothing anyway.
10-17-2004, 03:06 PM
#18
Not DAVEB the parts guy
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,555
Originally Posted by n2oMike
1. That is NOT a sway bar. It does not function as a sway bar at all.
2. Straight beam axles do NOT outhandle properly set up independent suspensions. With independent suspensions, the camber curve can be adjusted to increase negative camber as the body rolls and the suspension compresses. This keeps the tread in more square contact with the road.
You can read more about it here: http://www.autoweb.com.au/cms/A_51888/newsarticle.html
3. Suspension bind... Well they are designed to link both sides of the suspension together to make it handle flatter. Of course, this CAN be overdone, but that their point.
4. I have not noticed any significant degradaton of ride quality. You can't just compare the 10-15lbs the sway bar weighs to the axle itself. The weight of the wheels, tires, etc also has to be taken into account. It's not really that significant.
6. You are free to leave it on or off. Personally, I like mine. To each his own.
I'm not trying to convince people to remove thier bars, but people should understand the side effects and that the multi-link beam is actually a swaybar itself.
10-17-2004, 03:42 PM
#19
Dave is correct.
But if you auto cross and really know how to drive a car at its limits, then the RSB helps. it adds oversteer to let you get around the corner faster.
I myself hate the ride from a RSB and the not knowing when the rear is going to break out, but I do like the flat cornering. Its a trade off...... i have it installed b/c i bought it and dont need it sitting around collecting dust. if it came off in seconds I'd try it without it but for now its on. Maybe I will take it off for the winter.
this kind of a which intake is better topic. It will never be answered because everyone is different.
10-17-2004, 06:38 PM
#20
Originally Posted by Dave B
I'm not trying to convince people to remove thier bars, but people should understand the side effects and that the multi-link beam is actually a swaybar itself.
Well, Dave you convinced me to give it a shot. I have come to learn that you are one of the people on this forum with a good amount of knowledge on our cars. I noticed the same thing that people here have as well. I had my bar in about a year before I lowered the car, at that time is was great. When I lowered it though, I was like whoa. Pretty tight in the back now. I want to try to make the back end more comfortable (can't wait to put in Ben's rear shock mounts too).
10-17-2004, 07:52 PM
#21
Originally Posted by haysdb
I can't honestly say whether the rear shocks are hitting the bump stops on the rough surfaces or not, but I don't think so. And finally, I should check my tire pressure, as it may be a little higher in back than it needs to be.
David
David
David, as for your strut travel - you can tie a twist tie around one of the shock shafts towards the bottom.
Tight enough that it doesn't slip down on it's own. Drive around a few days over the bumps. See how far it rises up towards the top. See how close or if it's right next to the bumpstop. Somebody watched me take a sweeper corner and said the car leaned to a certain point then abruptly stopped leaning. Turned out it was the front struts bottoming out.
10-17-2004, 11:01 PM
#22
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
The rear sway bar has been removed. The car leans more in turns, but the rear suspension seems to be far more compliant now over rough surfaces, and it doesn't really lean all THAT much. By removing the RSB, I was able to dial up the rear Illumina's to 3 and the ride is still better than it was at 2 with the RSB.
I did NOT realize there was an anti-sway bar inside the rear beam, but there most certainly is, and it's a big sucker, 1.25" in diameter.
Anyone need a Progress anti-sway bar, barely used?
I did NOT realize there was an anti-sway bar inside the rear beam, but there most certainly is, and it's a big sucker, 1.25" in diameter.
Anyone need a Progress anti-sway bar, barely used?
10-18-2004, 01:22 PM
#23
Originally Posted by 1996blackmax
Well, Dave you convinced me to give it a shot. I have come to learn that you are one of the people on this forum with a good amount of knowledge on our cars. I noticed the same thing that people here have as well. I had my bar in about a year before I lowered the car, at that time is was great. When I lowered it though, I was like whoa. Pretty tight in the back now. I want to try to make the back end more comfortable (can't wait to put in Ben's rear shock mounts too).
he may know his stuff but he still cant get us parts
once you get the rear mounts in you with think the car is stock. No bottoming out, its really nice.
You know I have only ran once lowered without a RSB. It was with stock struts, Intrax, (on the 96) and the ride was soo sloppy. I thought the RSB was the shizznit. Now that I have AGX and Eibachs, I should try it with out the RSB. The AGX firm up the suspension at the twist of a ****. It may be one of those mods that doesnt need to be there daily, and can easily be installed for Auto X.
10-18-2004, 03:16 PM
#24
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
My 16 year old son commented tonight that the ride is a lot better without the RSB. He said he can
drive over the rough patches now without the back end of the car bouncing around, even though the
rear shocks have been dialed up from 2 to 3.
I'm curious, is the anti-sway bar that is integrated into the rear beam the same size on all 4th Gen
Maxima's? As mentioned above, the one in my 98 SE is 1.25" in diameter. Could someone with a
non-SE check to see if yours is the same diameter?
As for "Ben's" rear shock mounts, I have them in the back of my mind, and will order a set if I suspect
the rear suspension is bottoming out.
drive over the rough patches now without the back end of the car bouncing around, even though the
rear shocks have been dialed up from 2 to 3.
I'm curious, is the anti-sway bar that is integrated into the rear beam the same size on all 4th Gen
Maxima's? As mentioned above, the one in my 98 SE is 1.25" in diameter. Could someone with a
non-SE check to see if yours is the same diameter?
As for "Ben's" rear shock mounts, I have them in the back of my mind, and will order a set if I suspect
the rear suspension is bottoming out.
10-18-2004, 03:40 PM
#25
Not DAVEB the parts guy
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,555
Originally Posted by haysdb
I'm curious, is the anti-sway bar that is integrated into the rear beam the same size on all 4th Gen
Maxima's? As mentioned above, the one in my 98 SE is 1.25" in diameter. Could someone with a
non-SE check to see if yours is the same diameter?
Maxima's? As mentioned above, the one in my 98 SE is 1.25" in diameter. Could someone with a
non-SE check to see if yours is the same diameter?
You know I have only ran once lowered without a RSB. It was with stock struts, Intrax, (on the 96) and the ride was soo sloppy. I thought the RSB was the shizznit. Now that I have AGX and Eibachs, I should try it with out the RSB. The AGX firm up the suspension at the twist of a ****.
10-23-2004, 10:04 AM
#26
Addco vs Stillen
After 5 years running with the Addco at a medium/stiff setting I hacked it off and put a Stillen in it's place. Installed on the stiffest setting I could manage using the 5th gen mounting holes towards the rear of the trailing arms, and the brackets forwards as possible (bar is about 2" fore of the beam).
First impressions say it's softer than the Addco but offers better streetability. By not clamping to the beamaxle it seems to take bumps and roadruts better overall. Car seemed to have LESS oversteer though on dry. Late last night I had to make a 20min run to the ER with my daughter. Damps conditions and the rear really didn't feel as loose as before.
Stillen hasn't answered my question about their bar's wall thickness so the above is IMO right now. I'll put it under race stress next weekend and get a good feel.
First impressions say it's softer than the Addco but offers better streetability. By not clamping to the beamaxle it seems to take bumps and roadruts better overall. Car seemed to have LESS oversteer though on dry. Late last night I had to make a 20min run to the ER with my daughter. Damps conditions and the rear really didn't feel as loose as before.
Stillen hasn't answered my question about their bar's wall thickness so the above is IMO right now. I'll put it under race stress next weekend and get a good feel.
10-23-2004, 06:57 PM
#27
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 238
If I were to do it over again, I think I might go with the Stillen. It's a more "elegant" design
and it appears to me that it is more tunable than the Addco/Progress.
Off Topic: I installed a new front anti-sway bar on a Ford E-150 Econoline van last night.
Man, talk about a MF big bar. It's 1.25 inches in diameter (1/4" more than the OE bar) and the
END LINK bolts were 7/8" in diameter! Fitment was a MAJOR PITA as the bar was "short" about
2" of reaching the second end link. I had to use a jack between the bar and the frame to bend
it far enough to attach to the end link. I just thought it was interesting how big the bar
had to be for a 7500 pound vehicle! I figured for sure that this would be WAY too much of
a good thing, but in fact it doesn't seem to be.
and it appears to me that it is more tunable than the Addco/Progress.
Off Topic: I installed a new front anti-sway bar on a Ford E-150 Econoline van last night.
Man, talk about a MF big bar. It's 1.25 inches in diameter (1/4" more than the OE bar) and the
END LINK bolts were 7/8" in diameter! Fitment was a MAJOR PITA as the bar was "short" about
2" of reaching the second end link. I had to use a jack between the bar and the frame to bend
it far enough to attach to the end link. I just thought it was interesting how big the bar
had to be for a 7500 pound vehicle! I figured for sure that this would be WAY too much of
a good thing, but in fact it doesn't seem to be.
10-31-2004, 01:49 PM
#28
I just got back from a drive without the Progress RSB (took it off this morning). The back end of the car feels better, not as rough over uneven surfaces (we have alot of these here in San Diego). I drove around the areas where I usually drive that way I have something to compare it to, especially the ones with pretty rough streets. I took the car on the freeway on some sharp on and off ramps (same ones I usually drive on as well), and it handled nicely. Not as flat as with the bar, but still very acceptable. I am going to dial up the AGX's in the back one notch. I installed Ben's rear shock mounts last week and this helped alot in how that car absorbed bumps on the road. I especially like how that annoying little bunny hop bounce is gone on the freeway, thanks to the mounts. For me the addition of Ben's mounts and taking off the RSB on my lowered car helped out alot in how the car is able to absorb bumps and uneven sufaces on the roads, the car overall is alot smoother.
11-07-2004, 07:57 PM
#29
My setup is AGX with Eibachs and bens rear mounts. I just removed my RSB for the winter and what a difference. Yes more lean, but for daily driving who cares? Really the only noticable sway is on the highway, its really there now, and I dont mind the trade off. No more funny jerky feelings, no more wondering when the rear is going to break loose. When I go around a sweeping corner the tires acctually talk to me. Before they never made a sound. I feel much more confident through large turns now. Who knows how long it will be off, but one thing is certin. This mod makes for one harsh ride. Whats good for some may not be for others.
08-15-2005, 01:01 PM
#33
does anyone have FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE with this; meaning they have tried Progress RSB, with different positions?
Once closer to the wheels and AWAY from center, and one CLOSER to center of the car.
can somebody with that has tried this in person, on their own car, please clarify this once and for all: does moving the brackets AWAY from the center make the ride stiffer and better handling?
Once closer to the wheels and AWAY from center, and one CLOSER to center of the car.
can somebody with that has tried this in person, on their own car, please clarify this once and for all: does moving the brackets AWAY from the center make the ride stiffer and better handling?
08-15-2005, 01:11 PM
#34
Originally Posted by JSutter
definetly a good read for anyone with or without a RSB.
I still have mine sitting in the garage.
I still have mine sitting in the garage.
selling by any chance????? understeer for auto-x blows my ballz....
can i make 1 comment about the RSB.....some people say i hate not knowing when the rear end is gonna come around......take ur car to an AUTO-X once and then u will know exactly when i will come around......and then u will realized that when ur on the thru way taking corners kwikly that the rear isnt going to come around on u when ur on the street or highway....yes it adds oversteer but not to the exent where if u go around a turn at 80 ur gona fishtail cause ur not its just gonna go through the turn easier.....people are just not used to it and they think they are gonna lose control...when actuality u made a great improvement on ur cars cornering and its more stable and easier to turn
08-15-2005, 01:24 PM
#35
Originally Posted by chr0nos
does anyone have FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE with this; meaning they have tried Progress RSB, with different positions?
Once closer to the wheels and AWAY from center, and one CLOSER to center of the car.
can somebody with that has tried this in person, on their own car, please clarify this once and for all: does moving the brackets AWAY from the center make the ride stiffer and better handling?
Once closer to the wheels and AWAY from center, and one CLOSER to center of the car.
can somebody with that has tried this in person, on their own car, please clarify this once and for all: does moving the brackets AWAY from the center make the ride stiffer and better handling?
It is the trailing arm bushings you are after. They do not have a lot of adjustment room, but closer to the front of the car will slightly lessen the effects of the bar. Closer to the back will increase the effects.
08-15-2005, 01:58 PM
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by MaximaSE96
selling by any chance????? understeer for auto-x blows my ballz....
can i make 1 comment about the RSB.....some people say i hate not knowing when the rear end is gonna come around......take ur car to an AUTO-X once and then u will know exactly when i will come around......and then u will realized that when ur on the thru way taking corners kwikly that the rear isnt going to come around on u when ur on the street or highway....yes it adds oversteer but not to the exent where if u go around a turn at 80 ur gona fishtail cause ur not its just gonna go through the turn easier.....people are just not used to it and they think they are gonna lose control...when actuality u made a great improvement on ur cars cornering and its more stable and easier to turn
can i make 1 comment about the RSB.....some people say i hate not knowing when the rear end is gonna come around......take ur car to an AUTO-X once and then u will know exactly when i will come around......and then u will realized that when ur on the thru way taking corners kwikly that the rear isnt going to come around on u when ur on the street or highway....yes it adds oversteer but not to the exent where if u go around a turn at 80 ur gona fishtail cause ur not its just gonna go through the turn easier.....people are just not used to it and they think they are gonna lose control...when actuality u made a great improvement on ur cars cornering and its more stable and easier to turn
08-15-2005, 05:56 PM
#37
Originally Posted by 1996blackmax
It is the trailing arm bushings you are after. They do not have a lot of adjustment room, but closer to the front of the car will slightly lessen the effects of the bar. Closer to the back will increase the effects.
08-15-2005, 06:20 PM
#38
I actually called Progress regarding this and they told me that the u-bolts need to be placed as wide as possible, and that the bushings on the traling arms could be moved some.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
doctorpullit
8th Generation Maxima (2016-)
11
09-10-2015 06:33 PM
ef9
4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999)
5
09-05-2015 11:18 PM