CRONER Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 There still isnt anyone who has broken their strut towers with coilover conversion. That's it, that's the reason i'll do it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93CutlassSupreme Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 People convert to coilovers for the same reason people swap in L67's. IMO our monoleaf setup is a better suspension, but it isn't "cool" like a coilover swap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 People convert to coilovers for the same reason people swap in L67's. to gain substaintal horsepower relatively cheap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSI_MuNkY Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 IMO our monoleaf setup is a better suspension I'd like to see proof for that... I swapped from one to the other and I put the car through its paces every chance I get... coil overs in combination with the rest of the stuff I have, are far superior to the monoleaf. Have you tried driving a coil over equipped w-body? Jamie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93CutlassSupreme Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 IMO our monoleaf setup is a better suspension I'd like to see proof for that... I swapped from one to the other and I put the car through its paces every chance I get... coil overs in combination with the rest of the stuff I have, are far superior to the monoleaf. Have you tried driving a coil over equipped w-body? Jamie I'll rephrase myself. Please explain how our monoleaf suspension is worse than coilovers. Have you ever driven a stock FE3 suspension? Night and day compared to the FE1 package. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ismellrealbad Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 People convert to coilovers for the same reason people swap in L67's. Cuz they wanna mod their car? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Have you ever driven a stock FE3 suspension? Night and day between the FE1 package. a stock FE3 suspension is nothing to get excited about, granted it is better the the FE1 but still far from great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93CutlassSupreme Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Have you ever driven a stock FE3 suspension? Night and day between the FE1 package. a stock FE3 suspension is nothing to get excited about, granted it is better the the FE1 but still far from great Did I say a stock FE3 suspension was excellent? I was just using that as an example. With the right parts stock monoleaf suspensions can be greatly improved. IMO it's a better idea to keep the stock suspension on the car and improve it while using the advantages a monoleaf provides, instead of swapping to a suspension type that 1st gen w-bodies weren't even safely designed for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3.1cutlass Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 People convert to coilovers for the same reason people swap in L67's. Cuz they don't know any better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Have you ever driven a stock FE3 suspension? Night and day between the FE1 package. a stock FE3 suspension is nothing to get excited about, granted it is better the the FE1 but still far from great Did I say a stock FE3 suspension was excellent? what you said was that it was night and day difference from a FE1 setup... ....and a coilover setup is a night and day difference over a FE3.....I don't know why people should be content with a sloppy factory suspension by comparison to the upgrade options that are available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93CutlassSupreme Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 People convert to coilovers for the same reason people swap in L67's. Cuz they don't know any better? They're both easy solutions to a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93CutlassSupreme Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Have you ever driven a stock FE3 suspension? Night and day between the FE1 package. a stock FE3 suspension is nothing to get excited about, granted it is better the the FE1 but still far from great Did I say a stock FE3 suspension was excellent? what you said was that it was night and day difference from a FE1 setup... FE3 IS night and day over FE1. I've owned cars with both suspensions. ....and a coilover setup is a night and day difference over a FE3..... If you say so, it must be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 If you say so, it must be true. Have you tried driving a coil over equipped w-body? Jamie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWeb80 Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 If you say so, it must be true. Have you tried driving a coil over equipped w-body? Jamie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSI_MuNkY Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Have you ever driven a stock FE3 suspension? Night and day between the FE1 package. a stock FE3 suspension is nothing to get excited about, granted it is better the the FE1 but still far from great Did I say a stock FE3 suspension was excellent? what you said was that it was night and day difference from a FE1 setup... ....and a coilover setup is a night and day difference over a FE3..... x2 I have a 95 GTP that had FE3 stock, I've also driven a stock FE1... and I can say this without a doubt Coil Overs > FE3 > FE1 I said it before and I will say it again... have you ever driven a w-body with coil overs on all 4 corners? or even just the rears? instead of swapping to a suspension type that 1st gen w-bodies weren't even safely designed for. prove that, just because they were not designed with it means sweet dick all... its been said several times, no one has ever posted an experience where coil overs did any damage to a 1st gen w-body. And rear coil overs aren't a new thing by any means. Yeah so they beefed them up for 1.5 gens... 1.5 gens also weigh more. Do a cut away of the front strut towers and guess what you find, the same steel, if that steel is fine up front to hold the weight of an LQ1, why is it not ok to hold the weight of an empty trunk? Just because it was not designed for coil overs means nothing, by no means does it mean they can't handle them. Jamie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhrarhG Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 The fact of the metal breaking around the strut towers... heres the problem. The Tensile strength of the steel used is roughly 40KSI ( assuming I have the right metal ) That means there would have to be a force of about 40,000PSI pushing up on the towers. You tell me a bump that you will go over that wil exert a force of 40KSI on the strut towers. If the metal rusts, thats one thing, but if your towers have no rust, you wont break them. Your right, average carbon steel has a tensile strength of 40ksi. Yeild strength is ~33ish , and the fatigue limit for steel is about 1/2 tensile strength. So you can safely cyclicly load to 20ksi for ever, and the steel will not fail. More than 20ksi, and it will fail eventually. It's only a matter of time. Second, you could easily put 40,000 psi on a piece of metal if it was 1/8" by 1/8". Since 1/8 x 1/8 is 0.015625 in^2, it would take only about 600 lbs to exert 40,000 psi on the metal. Stress=Force/Area. It's all about cross-sectional area. Thin metal does not have much cross section, so it takes little force to exert 40ksi. Thin strut towers don't have much cross section, ie why they beefed them up. Third, I have a flex-a-form leaf, with about 2 years of driving on it, although it only sees summer driving. It has held up pretty well so far, knock on wood. I know i just guaranteed that it will break by saying that. I like it, it's light, keeps weight low, and handles pretty well. I'd like to ride in a coil-over car someday to compare. I have a 34mm sway up front, addco rear, f/r stbs intrax up front too, w 245/50's on x-laces. I think it handles pretty damn well. I'd like see how drastically different the coil over cars are. Last, coil overs in combination with the rest of the stuff I have, are far superior to the monoleaf for Coil overs>FE3>FE1, you're comparing coil overs + everything else vs stock. Seems like an apples to genetically engineered oranges comparison. I'm not saying my car is better or worse, I'm just like to see how far superior your coil overs are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19Cutlass94 Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Well heres the thing with handling as well, normally when you have coilovers you will lower the car, and with it being lower, there is a lower center of gravity. That has ALOT to do with it. Bakc when my car was FE1 it SUCKED to drive and take corners. Even worse with the blown struts. I went from that to lowered with 34mm front, addco bar and all poly bushings and it made a HUGE difference. Just because monoleafs work on a corvettee doesnt mean that they will work on a W. Completely different car, completely difference reactions with the steering, different forces etc etc etc. But I guess "handling" is subjective to the driver The fact of the metal breaking around the strut towers... heres the problem. The Tensile strength of the steel used is roughly 40KSI ( assuming I have the right metal ) That means there would have to be a force of about 40,000PSI pushing up on the towers. You tell me a bump that you will go over that wil exert a force of 40KSI on the strut towers. If the metal rusts, thats one thing, but if your towers have no rust, you wont break them. Your right, average carbon steel has a tensile strength of 40ksi. Yeild strength is ~33ish , and the fatigue limit for steel is about 1/2 tensile strength. So you can safely cyclicly load to 20ksi for ever, and the steel will not fail. More than 20ksi, and it will fail eventually. It's only a matter of time. Second, you could easily put 40,000 psi on a piece of metal if it was 1/8" by 1/8". Since 1/8 x 1/8 is 0.015625 in^2, it would take only about 600 lbs to exert 40,000 psi on the metal. Stress=Force/Area. It's all about cross-sectional area. Thin metal does not have much cross section, so it takes little force to exert 40ksi. Thin strut towers don't have much cross section, ie why they beefed them up. Third, I have a flex-a-form leaf, with about 2 years of driving on it, although it only sees summer driving. It has held up pretty well so far, knock on wood. I know i just guaranteed that it will break by saying that. I like it, it's light, keeps weight low, and handles pretty well. I'd like to ride in a coil-over car someday to compare. I have a 34mm sway up front, addco rear, f/r stbs intrax up front too, w 245/50's on x-laces. I think it handles pretty damn well. I'd like see how drastically different the coil over cars are. Last, coil overs in combination with the rest of the stuff I have, are far superior to the monoleaf for Coil overs>FE3>FE1, you're comparing coil overs + everything else vs stock. Seems like an apples to genetically engineered oranges comparison. I'm not saying my car is better or worse, I'm just like to see how far superior your coil overs are. True. However because of the shape of the towers and the area thats there, Im willing to bet it would take much more than 600lbs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhrarhG Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Yeah, i know, i just pulled a that dimension out of my ass. That would be for a thin square bar or something, i was just saying if the metal is thin enough, it is possible to stress it with a big pot hole and a heavy trunk. I've also heard a lot of people saying that it wasn't designed for it and everything, I have yet to see 1 picture proving failure, and i've been on this board for 4 years. I'm not saying it will fail, I'm not saying it won't either. I'm just saying, if it is thin, there is a possibility despite the strength of steel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonteCarloDude Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 Just because monoleafs work on a corvettee doesnt mean that they will work on a W. Completely different car, completely difference reactions with the steering, different forces etc etc etc. QFT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ismellrealbad Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 FWIW the FAF lowers the rear as well. Well heres the thing with handling as well, normally when you have coilovers you will lower the car, and with it being lower, there is a lower center of gravity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtremerevolution Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 FWIW the FAF lowers the rear as well. Well heres the thing with handling as well, normally when you have coilovers you will lower the car, and with it being lower, there is a lower center of gravity. x2 I've said it once and I'll say it again. Everyone here seems to be on the "coilovers rule" bandwagon, and while a FAF leaf has been acknowledged as an alternative, I don't find anyone here who has used one save for one person; myself! Everyone here seems to claim the Superiority of the Coilovers and recommends them above all else, referencing FE3 and FE1 suspension. In addition, I hear valid claims that the rear leaf assists in reducing body roll, countered by the same old "just add an ADDCO bar and that solves that problem." Before you all start to bash on leaf springs, why don't you consider this as an argument against coilovers. Using a FAF lowered leaf spring (2" drop), you get your lowered center of gravity and you get a lighter rear suspension setup as opposed to using coilovers. However, the key here is that in addition to all this, if you were to install an FAF lowered leaf in addition to a 7/8" ADDCO bar (which is the setup I use in the regal), you have less overall rear body roll than when using coilovers and a 7/8" ADDCO bar. So to summarize the benefits of using a FAF rear lowered leaf spring, you get a lighter suspension setup, and you get less rear body roll. FAF also sends you a new leaf free of charge if you're for any reason not pleased with the one they send you. As far as price, I'm not 100% sure how much coilovers are, but the leaf is $350 shipped. I seem to be the only advocate for keeping the leaf spring system on these cars, being quite possibly the only one here with a FAF spring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ismellrealbad Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 In addition to handling, how well can an aftermarket spring hold up to load? When I have 4- 5 people in my car, I'm constantly rubbing my tires in the fenderwell over bumps. It forced me to go buy the leaf spring helpers from moog. Problem solved, but now my car is like an inch higher and the rear does not give for anything whatsoever. I'm not so sure with the drop of a monoleaf if it could handle weight as well. The thing did look like half the size of a stick one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtremerevolution Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 In addition to handling, how well can an aftermarket spring hold up to load? When I have 4- 5 people in my car, I'm constantly rubbing my tires in the fenderwell over bumps. It forced me to go buy the leaf spring helpers from moog. Problem solved, but now my car is like an inch higher and the rear does not give for anything whatsoever. I'm not so sure with the drop of a monoleaf if it could handle weight as well. The thing did look like half the size of a stick one. That's one thing I liked about the FAF leaf. Its lowered, but its also stiffer. The spring itself has less of an arc as the stock spring does, but it also doesn't give out as easily under weight. Not sure if you can get the same combination with coilovers, unless you can get thicker coils with a higher load rating that are the same size. I wouldn't know, since I've never personally worked with aftermarket coilovers. The tires I have in the back are 235/60/15's, with 3/8" spacers on the rims just to give it a more aggressive stance, and with two 180lb people in the back of my car, plus the 12" sub and 3 amps on a piece of plywood, I don't rub on the fenderwells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93CutlassSupreme Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 That's one thing I liked about the FAF leaf. Its lowered, but its also stiffer. The spring itself has less of an arc as the stock spring does, but it also doesn't give out as easily under weight. I'm not a fan of lowering most cars, but this is correct. Just because a spring lowers the car doesn't mean it is a softer spring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRONER Posted March 27, 2008 Report Share Posted March 27, 2008 the only way to say that one is better than the other is to test them on the track/street and say for sure which performs better under stress of hard cornering, and which can take more g's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.