Honda CRX Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Sup guys,

Just finished refinishing seom of my suspension parts, figured youd enjoy some pics. My new brakes are here too, Ill add some pics later.

We sandblasted, painted, bushingd, and chased all the threads on all the reusable parts. mmm. its gonna be bling bling :)

Let the pictures begin:






now to install all this stuff :)

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
154 Posts
mattminerDOTcom said:
Sup guys,

Just finished refinishing seom of my suspension parts, figured youd enjoy some pics. My new brakes are here too, Ill add some pics later.

We sandblasted, painted, bushingd, and chased all the threads on all the reusable parts. mmm. its gonna be bling bling :)

Let the pictures begin:



now to install all this stuff :)

[email protected]
I didn't know they had bongs installed in our suspension! ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
why not? ive had them on my cars since the summer of 99 with no obvious ill effect.

you know somehting you are not telling haha

regardless im sure there better then the ones now with the rubber disintegrated and the sleeves falling out.

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
haha stealth editing bastard! that WASNT there before

thats a pretty blanket statement saying that ES bushings are inferior to OEM ones. there are some very obvious ways in which they are better.

where do you think its oging to bind? the inner mount should pivot up and down fine, and the shock bushing is obviously going to work fine.

you think that the poly will get 'caught up' on the frame mount maybe?

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,058 Posts
the control arm moves in more than one axis.

the design of the ES bushings makes it that it forces the control arm to move in one axis.

the two simply dont match up.

they are NOT better. you cannot compare them to old, deteriorated OEM bushings. they are the equivalent to cross drilled rotors to me. in the end, worse for your car and youre better off with simply stock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
what other axis does it move in? ill call up and down for sure ( i hope haha).....it certainly shouldnt be moving inward and outward so i assume you are referring to front to back?

im asuming the main bushing you have a problem with is the inside one? not the shock bushing right?

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
i thought caster was a static thing. i dont see why you would want your wheel moving front to back? am i missing something obvious?

as far as i know, as my car is now it has limited front-back movement due to my aftermarket front crossmember. It has helm joints, nut bushings on the radius rods like stock.

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,058 Posts
btw, take apart your Function 7 arms and look at the difference between how they made their poly bushings and the ES design.

ive spoken with F7 a lot. and i wont go into detail. they know the limitations of the ES design and have specifically re-engineered their product differently for very good reasons.

the ONLY bushing i dont have a problem with in the suspension where the ES design works is the front upper control arm. because they are in line with each other, theyre designed to be restricted to one axis of movement. but then, the oem bushing offers an actual added spring rate to the suspension and i believe to be beneficial over the unrestrained poly.

poly is stiffer, but it does deform when heated and will eventually cause MORE slop in the suspension than OEM. im contending that ES bushings will deteriorate FASTER than your 18 year old bushings that you speak down of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,058 Posts
mattminerDOTcom said:
i thought caster was a static thing. i dont see why you would want your wheel moving front to back? am i missing something obvious?

as far as i know, as my car is now it has limited front-back movement due to my aftermarket front crossmember. It has helm joints, nut bushings on the radius rods like stock.

[email protected]
so think about that then. think about the name "RADIUS rod". its rotating about a point, specifically that heim joint. its NOT just moving up and down. its moving in an arc.

(for you math freaks, cosine law be damned, its not negligible in the suspension.)

and NO, caster is not static. nor is camber or toe. suspension is all dynamic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
interesting.

so pretty much, your rule of thumb is that if stock it allows more than one axis of movement, then poly is inappropriate?

I dont really feel like taking apart my new lcas, so i guess it will be a big mystery how they are different.....

i dont see why you would want to retain dynamic caster at all, it would appear to me to provide unpredictable camber changes. is ther ean obvious thing im missing where youd want dynamic camber?

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I still think that dynamic caster changes under hard braking especially are detrimental. you are going to get negative caster and with that will come toe out and unpredictable handling.

This study includes a conclusion that 'reducing suspension compliance on the inside lower bushing' will improve braking feel and control the wheel better during heavy braking.

i think theres more to this then meets the eye.

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
btw i guess i shouldnt have said caster is static, becuas ei know it moves stock, becuase of the deflection in the rubber.

I cant see anything obviously different in those F7 arms, besides thats theres a groove or something in the middle of the sleeve inside.....im not gonna press them apart.

oh and i found this on their website describing my superior lca's "High quality Energy Suspension polyurethane bushings are included, and are pre-installed with this kit. "

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
*from the IM logs of mattminerdotcom*

mattminerDOTcom: im discussing whether or not poly buhsings are bad in front lcas on the pivot joint on the inner frame, i think that you want to minimize dynamic caster. alternate opinion is that you want ti to deflect like stock

revoltrise: its true, dynamic caster isnt what you want, changing caster at all effects toe, the last thing you want during turning is an increase of toe, but the worst effect would come under braking...and anything that artificially inflates the amount of tire slide during a hard stop is obviously terrible

mattminerDOTcom: it seems like stiffer would be obviously better under hard braking, where there would be large force and large deflection
that caster change would create a weird torque and cause steering drift among other things. a whitepaper i found states the same thing for the most part

revoltrise: exactly, negative caster all else being equal will cause toe out which will make the car squirrly under braking to say the least plus changing caster affects steering force and the car's tendency to 'rebound' from steering input which you dont want mid corner

mattminerDOTcom: because that force is gonna snap back at som epoint

revoltrise: yeah exactly like at the apex when you start to straighten the wheel the car is going to tend to want maintain its line more with a more negative caster but at the onset of the turn the car is going to fight to stay moving straight a lot more becasue of the more positive caster,h aha unless you are on the brakes into the corner at which point itll be more prone to steering drift. for a primarily race setup its poly/solid traction bars are the best or no moving, but a stock bushing with the traction bars would probably be better for street since the bars do 99% of the stiffening, and oemm bushings are quiter than poly

mattminerDOTcom: right and matt doesnt give a edit about noise or vibration

revoltrise: lol me neither

mattminerDOTcom: thats why i kept a cd player

[email protected]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,058 Posts
when did i say you WANT dynamic caster?

the thing is that caster IS dynamic.

so are you trying to say ES bushings are better because they PREVENT dynamic caster?

its not matter of the bushings. its a matter of the design of the suspension arms.

if you want as rigid, yet freely moving suspension as much as possible, you should spring for spherical bearings every where.

ES bushings are the furthest thing you can get to a spherical bearing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,568 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
my line of thought was that the rubber bushings on the inner pivot allow hte lca to deflect backwards easier. if you stiffen up that interior bushing, it should allow less dynamic caster...

id this thinking is fundamentally flawed then maybe im heading in the wrong direction.

that whitepaper states that you can reduce dynamic caster by stiffenening that interior bushing.

spherical bearings would probbaly be a little over the top, although ive half jokingly suggested it. downests car used to have them in it.

I still dont see how my F7 arms are any different than my stock/ES ones, or why eliminating forward and rear flex is bad.

if you have like a silver bullet response to all this you should just say it, rather then leaking out tidbits of knowledge. im willing to change my opinions if i can see an error with what im doing, but currently the way I see it im doing nothing wrong.

that link you posted with those screwed up bushings looks nothing like ive ever seen before, on any of my cars.

[email protected]
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top