Sup w/them 2024 Summer Projects?
Mar 7, 2019, 03:30 PM
#349
Flipped lower arm. The mounting holes aren't in a straight line. If you think about the chassis and shock mounts being fixed points at full extension, the OEM bias pushes the hub up. If you flip it the hub would move down. It's only effect is moving the wheels position at max droop down about 0.75"(19mm).
But with the angle down you only want to do it if you have limitations in droop like if your shocks are too short or how my rear uprights sacrifice 1.25" of droop by the nature of where the rear shocks attach. If you flip with already having excessive droop you could cause a bind.
But with the angle down you only want to do it if you have limitations in droop like if your shocks are too short or how my rear uprights sacrifice 1.25" of droop by the nature of where the rear shocks attach. If you flip with already having excessive droop you could cause a bind.
The following users liked this post:
alpinaturbo (Mar 8, 2019)
Mar 7, 2019, 04:28 PM
#352
Just to put things in perspective, James Houghton's integra, one of the fastest time attack cars in North America still uses factory rear brakes, 260mm. Our rear brakes are waaay bigger than that, 300mm. Just because it's better doesn't mean it's going to make any noticeable improvements.
Mar 7, 2019, 05:26 PM
#353
When I had my Type R, upgrading front brakes to Spoon, Mugen, blah blah was common, but same as our cars: the rear didn't do much work, so there was no reason to swap them out. I don't recall anyone who tracked their Hondas changing rear brakes.
P.S. My buddy just got Dekgrams for his Atom. They are a nice looking wheel and I wish they made my size.
Mar 7, 2019, 06:14 PM
#354
Look I understand, but if mitsu thought it fitting to put a bigger diameter front/rear rotor on the EvoX. I dont see it being a bad thing to use those parts on CT9A. Not to mention when the 8/9 were designed they came with 17" wheels. Being full time 18" why not fit the larger brakes from the Evo X
Mar 7, 2019, 06:43 PM
#356
The Evo X is a heavier car. Other than that, It's a completely different model, so I don't know the reason the engineers decided to go with larger brakes.
With matching F/R brake pads, my rears lock up first. I had to go with a much less-aggressive pad for the rear to balance it out. It's my understanding Evo X brakes flex less and dissipate heat better, not so much simply bite better (I could be wrong). If I put X rear calipers and they have more bite, then I have to ease up on rear pads even more.
All in all, The rears don't see enough heat/flex/etc to justify putting on X brakes, IMO.
With matching F/R brake pads, my rears lock up first. I had to go with a much less-aggressive pad for the rear to balance it out. It's my understanding Evo X brakes flex less and dissipate heat better, not so much simply bite better (I could be wrong). If I put X rear calipers and they have more bite, then I have to ease up on rear pads even more.
All in all, The rears don't see enough heat/flex/etc to justify putting on X brakes, IMO.
Last edited by kaj; Mar 7, 2019 at 08:15 PM.
Mar 7, 2019, 08:01 PM
#357
weight dist is also more even on the X, and obviously heavier yes. The evo x brakes did make a difference in bite for me, it's increased torque due to the larger rotor. I'm running "staggered" pads in the sense that I just run something an aggressive pad on the front for track days, don't see anything wrong with that. The rears generate so much less heat than the fronts
Dallas, is there a write-up on the front and rear uprights? I'm sure this throws me out of any lower level class I'd like to run in, but I'm curious about the product and the specifics of what it does, corrects, and how those things add speed and handling charm to the Evo - I believe you're also running the ER ACD tune + TRE rear diff, that may multiply benefits that you see by a small factor
Dallas, is there a write-up on the front and rear uprights? I'm sure this throws me out of any lower level class I'd like to run in, but I'm curious about the product and the specifics of what it does, corrects, and how those things add speed and handling charm to the Evo - I believe you're also running the ER ACD tune + TRE rear diff, that may multiply benefits that you see by a small factor
Mar 7, 2019, 08:48 PM
#358
weight dist is also more even on the X, and obviously heavier yes. The evo x brakes did make a difference in bite for me, it's increased torque due to the larger rotor. I'm running "staggered" pads in the sense that I just run something an aggressive pad on the front for track days, don't see anything wrong with that. The rears generate so much less heat than the fronts
Dallas, is there a write-up on the front and rear uprights? I'm sure this throws me out of any lower level class I'd like to run in, but I'm curious about the product and the specifics of what it does, corrects, and how those things add speed and handling charm to the Evo - I believe you're also running the ER ACD tune + TRE rear diff, that may multiply benefits that you see by a small factor
Dallas, is there a write-up on the front and rear uprights? I'm sure this throws me out of any lower level class I'd like to run in, but I'm curious about the product and the specifics of what it does, corrects, and how those things add speed and handling charm to the Evo - I believe you're also running the ER ACD tune + TRE rear diff, that may multiply benefits that you see by a small factor
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing
Mar 8, 2019, 01:44 PM
#359
Evolved Member
The Evo X is a heavier car. Other than that, It's a completely different model, so I don't know the reason the engineers decided to go with larger brakes.
With matching F/R brake pads, my rears lock up first. I had to go with a much less-aggressive pad for the rear to balance it out. It's my understanding Evo X brakes flex less and dissipate heat better, not so much simply bite better (I could be wrong). If I put X rear calipers and they have more bite, then I have to ease up on rear pads even more.
All in all, The rears don't see enough heat/flex/etc to justify putting on X brakes, IMO.
With matching F/R brake pads, my rears lock up first. I had to go with a much less-aggressive pad for the rear to balance it out. It's my understanding Evo X brakes flex less and dissipate heat better, not so much simply bite better (I could be wrong). If I put X rear calipers and they have more bite, then I have to ease up on rear pads even more.
All in all, The rears don't see enough heat/flex/etc to justify putting on X brakes, IMO.
Evo 9 stock has>
Front: 2x40mm, 2x46mm
Rear: 2x40mm
so, 2918 mm2 per side front, 1256 mm2 per side rear
Front disc: 320x32mm
Rear disc: 300x22mm
Raliart/Brembo racing setup is 355 mm front + 295 mm rears (so smaller than stock)
With 38/44mm front pistons and 26/30 mm rear pistons
so, 2654 mm2 front and 1237 mm2per side rear...
the recipe seems to be just to increase the fronts and keep the rears.. Race setup does use larger pads than stock..