1.2G lateral... air-ride claims valid?? [Archive]

View Full Version : 1.2G lateral... air-ride claims valid??

deuce_454

11-29-2007, 06:16 AM

here is a quote from air rides homepage where thet state the folowing:

"Never has a heavy intermediate GM car been able to corner at over 1.2G...until NOW! This Street Challenge package is an unbelievable combination of comfortable ride quality, SERIOUS cornering power and bolt-on installation. "

http://www.ridetech.com/productinfo/streetchallengesystems.asp

Are these claims valid, or quoted BS and bench racing??
it sounds just alittle too good to be true.. (and havent we discussed this 1.2 G claim before??)

if airride chimes in here with some unbiased documentation ill gladly shut up and buy a setup.. but untill then i dare to question the validity if the claim.. other than that it is, as stated in the quote.. "unbelievable" indeed

DDY RCKT

11-29-2007, 06:19 AM

If it's true, I could sure adapt that to the Beemer Killer. I think 1.2G would allow me to out corner the M3 for sure. :D

syborg tt

11-29-2007, 06:38 AM

i keep looking at this kit - over and over

really on the fence - starting to like it more every day

DDY RCKT

11-29-2007, 06:39 AM

Actually, looking at the detials, I can almost believe the claim. What you've got is essentially a really good replacement suspension. Tubular control arms, big sway bars, 4-link in the rear, etc. with hyper adjustable "coilovers" in the form of air bags. With the ability to change the pressure in an almost unlimited number of ways, you could concievably tune a very high lateral g load into the suspension. Of course, you are tire limited at that point, but what else is new?

I won't believe it until I experience it myself, obviously, but the price is pretty good for a front and rear setup, and if the claims are real, it's work very well for my car.

Blown353

11-29-2007, 06:57 AM

I believe this was discussed before either here or on P-T but I can't find the thread now.

Besides proper suspension geometry and a good surface, a big portion of that number lies in the tires.

1.2G isn't all that impressive if slicks are involved, but it still is somewhat impressive given the platform the number was achieved on.

Member KAA pulled 1.17 G with his '70 Elky, which wasn't on Air-Ride, and also on Sumitomo HTR street tires, and had a honkin' big block in the nose. That's with a bolt-on front suspension setup and stock geometry C4L in the rear, most of the parts pieced together quite inexpensively from various circle-track vendors.

http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146629

Steve1968LS2

11-29-2007, 07:14 AM

The fastest lap time at the RTH2 track day was Bret's Buick..

The fastest car on street tires at the RTH3 was Bret's Chevelle.. second place was his other chevelle.

Bret's Mustang on track tires was almost as fast as a fully track prepped C5 Vette at that same event.

ART doesn't have to make stuff up, they've proven that it works.

-------------------

However, there are two ways to measure cornering g-force; sustained and average.

When we test we run the skidpad in two directions. Add the two best times and divide by two. This gives the average g. I could be that they used a device (Racepak, g-tech, etc) and got a peak reading of 1.2 g. and so long as it wasn't in a slide (ie, the car was still under control) then saying it handled a peak of 1.2 g is perfectly valid.

A 1.2 reading for "average" is very hard.. I've never seen it done. The ART Vette managed 1.03 g on the skid pad and that car weighs nothing and has a very low COG.

Anyways, I know Bret and he doesn't make empty claims. :yes:

Steve1968LS2

11-29-2007, 07:16 AM

Member KAA pulled 1.17 G with his '70 Elky, which wasn't on Air-Ride, and also on Sumitomo HTR street tires, and had a honkin' big block in the nose. That's with a bolt-on front suspension setup and stock geometry C4L in the rear, most of the parts pieced together quite inexpensively from various circle-track vendors.

http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146629

Again, peak and average are two totally different things. This is why it's important to know how date is gathered and put together when a claim is made.

DDY RCKT

11-29-2007, 07:25 AM

DDY RCKT

11-29-2007, 07:31 AM

I'm going to be talking with these guys at PRI next week for sure. Anyone has anything they want to know, and don't just want to call them, let me know. I always have my notebook with me.

Steve1968LS2

11-29-2007, 07:42 AM

Even so, pulling 1.2 peak on, it seems, street tires is a pretty lofty goal, and a nice number. Kudos if it's true, which it seems it may be.

Just so I know, is Bret one of the Air Ride guys? It's nice to have people with personal knowledge of vendors on board.

Bret is the owner of ART.. He's a stand up guy and he litterally beats the crap out of his cars.

I don't know what tires that was on.. could have been DOT R-compound tires.. but thier stuff has won enough auto-x events to have me convinced.

CRCRFT78

11-29-2007, 07:47 AM

They need a G-body setup.

DDY RCKT

11-29-2007, 07:53 AM

Bret is the owner of ART.. He's a stand up guy and he litterally beats the crap out of his cars.

I don't know what tires that was on.. could have been DOT R-compound tires.. but thier stuff has won enough auto-x events to have me convinced.

Cool, thanks! Just wanted to make sure. He should be out at PRI, then, right?

DDY RCKT

11-29-2007, 07:59 AM

Steve, you're tech-ed at PHR!? That's sweet, man!

Steve1968LS2

11-29-2007, 08:14 AM

Steve, you're tech-ed at PHR!? That's sweet, man!

Yep, but on here I'm just another knucklehead that spends way too much cash on this hobby. lol

I would imagine Bret would be at PRI. They are also sponsors on this board and will eventually see this thread and respond :)

ProdigyCustoms

11-29-2007, 08:44 AM

The 1.2 number was achieved in the 66 Chevelle that placed 2nd at Run Through the Hills 3. Here is the track data link. And if you down load it you can follow it around the track

http://ridetech.com/streetchallenge/trackdata.asp

With every trick suspension set up available to us, we selected the Street Challenge set up for Project EmptyNest. Period.

ProdigyCustoms

11-29-2007, 08:44 AM

Bret will be here for PRI, along with a half dozen other of the Air Ride crew.

DDY RCKT

11-29-2007, 09:16 AM

Yep, but on here I'm just another knucklehead that spends way too much cash on this hobby. lol

I would imagine Bret would be at PRI. They are also sponsors on this board and will eventually see this thread and respond :)

Well, true, but it's still cool.

If they do see this thread, maybe they'll walk on over to my thread and see what they think about beating the M3. :unibrow:

DDY RCKT

11-29-2007, 09:20 AM

Bret will be here for PRI, along with a half dozen other of the Air Ride crew.

Fantastic! I look forward to meeting you and the Air Ride crew!

Blown353

11-29-2007, 09:28 AM

Again, peak and average are two totally different things. This is why it's important to know how date is gathered and put together when a claim is made.

I know. I believe Keith's 1.17 was sustained, the logging was done on a Racepak G2X and at Brainerd. Hopefully he will see this and chime in.

Not knocking Bret's setups at all, they certainly do produce results. A good driver and well sorted out chassis helps a lot too.

Stuart Adams

11-29-2007, 11:46 AM

I guess I'm an idiot, someone chime in and set me straight. With the car on air ride, when you lower the car it removes air that to me would seem to ride more sloshy and not handle as well as with more air and higher. Is it more the other suspension setup pieces that contributes to the handling numbers or is it the air.

ProdigyCustoms

11-29-2007, 11:51 AM

There are nominal air pressures, and lowering the car by lowering air pressure DOES NOT (necessarily) improve handling

Stuart Adams

11-29-2007, 12:13 PM

So is what your saying the amount of air, higher or lower, does not usually contribute to the improvement or non improvement in the handling.

Payton King

11-29-2007, 12:37 PM

expert on the subject. You select an air spring that will give you pounds of compression you are looking for at the ride height you want. By nature an air spring is progressive, more compression the higher the rate. What makes the air spring so cool is when you are not thrashing around the track or street you can air them down and get the cool low look, air them back up and drive off. You do not drive it to the track then lower it 3 inches to drive fast...

There is also benefit in a little tunning at the track. Adding or subtracting air to dial in the handling characteristics...kind of like putting wedge in a Cup car on the fly. When ART had Boris Said drive one of their cars he bumped up the pressure in the rear to get the car better suited to his driving style.

Blown353

11-29-2007, 12:43 PM

You can also vary the damping rate and spring rate of just the bladder by changing material thickness/composition, geometry/folds, etc. The spring rate of an air spring is NOT just a simple function of air pressure. It is one variable in the equation but it is far from the only one. There is a lot more going on in an air spring than most people think, and to really sort one out you have to have a good working relationship with the bladder manufacturers, know what you want and what you want it to do, and then go do some data gathering & testing.

There is a "nominal" height & pressure range for each given air spring configuration, so given the corner weight of the vehicle and desired ride height you have to choose the proper spring for the application such that when at its intended operating pressure range it is at the right overall length for the intended ride height in that vehicle.

Payton King

11-29-2007, 12:54 PM

I for one and liking the idea of the air spring

Stuart Adams

11-29-2007, 01:03 PM

Makes more sense. I knew there had t be alot more to it than the air. Cool stuff.

marolf101x

11-29-2007, 02:27 PM

So I'm sitting in the office at 5:30pm, cruising Lateral-g and I run across this thread. I can't wait to dig into this one, and let all the guys here at ART know we are once again being challenged. This is not a negative thing. It actually drives us to develop even better suspensions just to take it to the track and prove to everyone an air spring can be used for performance.

I don't have a lot of time right now, but I'll jump back on tonight when I get to my shop and explain how we got those numbers, what tires we used, and how we get our suspensions to work (ok, I can't tell you everything, or I might not have a job when I come in tomorrow. But I can explain general theories.)

talk at you all after a bit.

-Britt-

Ummgawa

11-29-2007, 03:31 PM

So is what your saying the amount of air, higher or lower, does not usually contribute to the improvement or non improvement in the handling.

Other than lowering the COG which usually helps to some serious degree.

I know that when I am lower to the ground I handle better (in a UPS truck kinda way)

marolf101x

11-29-2007, 03:36 PM

Ok, the 1.2G: This number was achieved in our 1966 Chevelle (http://www.ridetech.com/companyprojects/66chevelle.asp)
-430HP 383 stroker
-Bowler 700R4 auto
-225/45/17 front BFG KD street tires, Billet Specialties Outlaw wheels
-275/40/17 rear BFG KD street tires, Billet Specialties Outlaw wheels
-StrongArm tubular upper and lower control arms front
-StrongArm tubular upper and lower control arms rear
-Shockwave 1000 v3 front; double adjustable dampers
-CoolRide 9100 air springs rear; double adjustable dampers
-MuscleBar sway bars front and rear
-Fatman Fabrications G-Max Spindles
-RidePro e2 compressor control system
-Bear brakes all around
-Boris Said driving
-recorded on Racepak G2X
-at Putnam Park Road Course

The racepak data shows a 1.1G average over the graph, with multiple readings in excess of 1.2G, and a peak of 1.32G. I forget who was there, but the Racepak was installed by the Racepak crew (if you guys are on this thread, please chime in). We also had multiple media members there to drive our cars and record the session. We also invited a bunch of our customers to come out and "beat" their cars on the track with us. Great fun!!!

All suspension was "off the shelf" parts. No special weave air springs, no Penske or Ohlin dampers. Just stuff anyone can buy on our website.

Ummgawa

11-29-2007, 03:45 PM

I am hunting a 66 chevelle right now. That car is beyond wicked. Thanks a million for all the info and not hiding behind computer generated "what it ought to do" scenarios.

Real world stuff. Dig it.

marolf101x

11-29-2007, 04:04 PM

Our success can be attributed to a complete, engineered package. Simply dropping in air springs will not net the numbers achieved by our Chevelle.

Control Arms:
We base our StrongArms off the factory arms, but we alter areas that need addressed; camber, caster, ball joint angles, etc. They also lower unsprung weight, and the overall weight of the vehicle (on the PHR G28 project, they saved 80lbs when replacing the stock suspension with our entire package)

Spindles:
The Fatman GMax spindles are a "taller" design, meaning they locate the upper ball joint higher than the stock unit. This increases negative camber gain under compression.

Sway Bars:
Our Muscle bars (and now PosiLink sway bar links) aid the suspension in limiting body roll, but are not so stiff as to induce negative handling.

Control System:
By utilizing a 4-way compressor control system we can eliminate air passing from one bag to another. It also allows us the ability to change spring rates in each air spring. A change of 5psi can provide the needed extra spring rate while maintaining the same ride height.

Air Springs:
By design air springs have a very progressive spring rate. The more the spring is compressed, the higher the spring rate. By choosing the proper air spring for the application, and setting them at the proper height, we lower the car (lowering COG), and gain the progressive spring rate when we need it. Instead of the suspension hitting the bump stops, the air spring will increase its rate, providing a solid, predictable vehicle in the corners.

Variable Dampers:
We use double adjustable shocks in all the vehicles we run on a road course or Auto-X. The damper is simply a timing device. It controls when, and for how long, the tires are in contact with the tarmac. It also allows us to control how quickly our spring rate is increased or decreased. The more compression damping I throw at the Chevelle, the slower the spring rate increases. The same is true for extension; the more extension damping I dial in, the slower the spring rate decreases.

When all these areas are engineered together you can achieve a very well mannered car during track use. But you also have the advantage of a comfortable street cruiser.

I stated this in another post, but I feel it's worth mentioning again: Our cars are set up by our staff, not a trained, professional driver. I grew up in a family that raced Dirt Late Models (http://www.latemodelracer.com/) so I understand vehicle dynamics. However, I have a degree in Classic English Literature; I'm not a trained engineer. A little common sense goes a long way (and growing up under 880HP 430cid small blocks in a 2100lb car sliding around a slick dirt track didn't hurt. Maybe I should see if Bret will let me try drifting?)!

V8TV

11-29-2007, 07:30 PM

I posted that clip of the blue Chevelle on an autocross track... it handles dead flat in the turns. With the right tires, I bet 1 g would be easily possible.

http://www.v8tvshow.com/forum/index.php?topic=157.msg465#msg465

Steve1968LS2

11-29-2007, 07:52 PM

I know. I believe Keith's 1.17 was sustained, the logging was done on a Racepak G2X and at Brainerd. Hopefully he will see this and chime in.

Not knocking Bret's setups at all, they certainly do produce results. A good driver and well sorted out chassis helps a lot too.

Sustained is still not the same as the bi-directional averaged score we do in testing. :)

Yea, the ART cars are VERY well sorted out.. they do lots and lots of driving events and that certainly helps.

Blown353

11-29-2007, 08:02 PM

Sustained is still not the same as the bi-directional averaged score we do in testing. :)

Yea, the ART cars are VERY well sorted out.. they do lots and lots of driving events and that certainly helps.

That 1.2G claim seems to come from the RTH autocross, and the log shows the 1.2G area to be a rather large constant radius left hander (or right, I'm not sure of the direction of travel.) Not sure if it's banked or unbanked. Hopefully they'll chime in.

Look at the G2X log here.
http://www.ridetech.com/streetchallenge/trackdata.asp

I know we're not talking bidirectional skidpad data, and steady state skidpad data is only one datapoint in the overall performance of a vehicle anyways.

The fact that the airride setups are complete packages are most certainly a huge part of the reason they do so well. A poorly thought out piece-mealed together suspension, even if all good individual components, can turn poor numbers if the combo isn't matched or tuned.

Steve1968LS2

11-29-2007, 08:07 PM

I know we're not talking bidirectional skidpad data, and steady state skidpad data is only one datapoint in the overall performance of a vehicle anyways.

Very true.. I just want people to know there's difference in how we test g-force and it's VERY hard to get a g the way we do it.

I think my next build will have an ART system, they sure have confidence in the stuff and arn't afraid to throw down against anyone.

marolf101x

11-30-2007, 06:00 AM

Steve1968LS2

11-30-2007, 06:49 AM

The G2X data was gathered in 2006 at our (then annual) Street Challenge event held at Putnam Park Road Course (http://www.putnampark.com/).

Steve, I know our data and the way you acquire yours are different and I DO NOT want to claim our data was acquired "Car and Driver" style. Ours was acquired on a road course, with a pro driver, on street tires (225 front!) At that time we hadn't done much data acquisition, and we were astonished with the numbers, so on the web they went.

Sometime in the near future I'd like to perform the average two-way test on some of our stuff and post those numbers. We just have to find the time, and the location.

You're date is just as valid as ours.. I just want people to alway consider how data is gathered. That way when they see one car the did 1.2g and one that did .99g they will ask "what was the scientific methodology used to get that number?" That way they can make a valid comparison between the two cars.

Using out method nobody could do even 1g on street tires (non r-compound).

I think the most impressive point about ART stuff is how well it does in the various auto-x and road track events. I think kicking butt in that really quiets down the doubters.

Blown353

11-30-2007, 09:31 AM

Using out method nobody could do even 1g on street tires (non r-compound).

Might want to try a stock Lotus Elise. It will get VERY VERY close and might even break it. Large magazine 200' skidpad numbers for the Elise seem to range from .99 to 1.06 G and that's on the stock Yokohama Advan Neova tires, which are not R-compounds. Then again, it's a sub-2K pound rollerskate. I will say they are a total hoot to drive. :bow:

CRCRFT78

11-30-2007, 10:29 AM

So will there be a G-body kit coming soon? If you need a test vehicle I've got one. :unibrow:

marolf101x

11-30-2007, 01:07 PM

G Body is already done:
http://ridetech.com/wizard/results.asp?year=1985&make=Chevrolet&model=Monte+Carlo

deuce_454

12-01-2007, 05:15 AM

Might want to try a stock Lotus Elise. It will get VERY VERY close and might even break it. Large magazine 200' skidpad numbers for the Elise seem to range from .99 to 1.06 G and that's on the stock Yokohama Advan Neova tires, which are not R-compounds. Then again, it's a sub-2K pound rollerskate. I will say they are a total hoot to drive. :bow:

yokohama advans are r compound tires... or as close to it as you come... they are only OEM mounted on the elise!

bret

12-02-2007, 07:47 AM

I would donate a testicle to see one of the magazines do a suspension shootout similar to the Motortrend or Road and Track style vehicle shootouts.

trapin

12-03-2007, 11:53 AM

Bret tossed me the keys to the '66 down in Tennessee and I got to put the old girl through her paces. All I can say is...I'm convinced. That thing handled like it was on rails and stayed dead flat in the corners. I came away a believer and the next car I do will definitely have Air Ride underneath it.

DDY RCKT

12-10-2007, 02:09 PM

I talked with these guys at length on Saturday at PRI. I felt a little bad because I kept them talking way past the end of the show! :lol:

I can say that they didn't mind a bit, and were as helpful as anyone I'd talked to all weekend, or ever. Great bunch of guys.

The system is, truthfully, amazing to look at! The quality is near perfect. I believe the claims, and if I can get them on a good day with a discount, This is the system I'll use. If the budget build works out that I can fit it in, I'll go this route. It'll make for a mean track machine with manageable street behavior.

switchblade327

01-24-2008, 05:01 PM

I'm just getting back to working on my '66 2 door post and even with PST and hotchkis front end, I remembered it could use some work to really handle. This kit is very, very interesting. I'm glad I let this project sit so long; there is way cooler stuff for these cars now then there was 9 years ago :D

A couple questions though: was the frame on that '66 modified in any way? Additional bracing or is it all stock crossmembers? And is there a roll cage or anything else stiffening the chassis or are these numbers purely from suspension alone?

marolf101x

01-24-2008, 05:55 PM

The 66 Chevelle uses a completely stock subframe (minus our tubular arms, Shockwaves, MaxG spindles, Musclebars, and Posi Links), and there's no cage. When we're not beating the hell out of this thing (we drove it so hard it literally ripped the frame attachment points from the body) we drive it to lunch (when there isn't snow on the ground!)

It runs Cerullo seats (http://www.cerullo.com/), a Bowler 700R4 (http://www.bowlertransmissions.com/), a RideProE2 control system, a Jasper Engines 383 stroker that makes 430 at the flywheel (http://www.jasperengines.com/), Baer Eradispeed brakes (http://www.baer.com/; and PBR stuff, not 6 pots!!! )and a stock rear with a posi and 411 gears. It uses BFG KD tires (225/45/17's front, 275/40/17's out back) with Billet Specialty wheels (http://www.billetspecialties.com/)

I can tell you, there is nothing special about this car. We didn't use special air springs, no crazy shock absorbers, or any kind of active suspension "trickery". It is what it is. If you want to inspect it for yourselves show up at a Goodguys event as it'll probably be running around the Auto-X (and if we're out West you'll see it at an In-n-Out Burger joint).

rwhite692

01-25-2008, 07:07 AM

....we drove it so hard it literally ripped the frame attachment points from the body...

Now that's pulling some G's! :thumbsup:

switchblade327

02-27-2008, 09:42 AM