Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. 5
No no no.
I put in all of the variables of the ZSP springs and solved for G. That was the only thing that I didn't know so I solved for that.
I had the following:
Given:
460 lb/in
Measured:
d = .556
n = 7 (total - 2)
D = 3.871
So, I got the G to be aproximately 15.6 x 10^6
I then used the same G to solve for the force for the performance springs given the measurements that I came up with.
I kept everything the same because the coils were the same. I assumed that the G is the same.
I changed the d to .581 and D to 3.978 and got my 505 lb/in.
I did the same for the front spring:
Given:
145 lb/in
Measured:
d = .476
n = 3 (total - 2)
D = 5.702
So, I got the G to be aproximately 12.5 x 10^6
I then used the same G to solve for the force for the performance springs given the measurements that I came up with.
I assumed that the G is the same.
I changed the n to 2.25 since there was 3/4 less of a coil.
I changed the d to .506 and D to 6.172 and got my 195 lb/in.
I know that the best way was to get them actually tested but I reallky didn't know where.
I figured that I would do my best with the info that I had to come up with a close aproximation.
I'll read what you gave but it would be nice to know the spring rates with these new springs.
I can tell by feel that the fronts are stiffer but the rears are hardly noticeable.
|
I see what you did but it is not very accurate and subject to a lot of error. The springs are conical and barrel shape so you have to measure one coil at a time and then add them in series. Just in case you did not know the “D mean” is measured from the center of wire not the outside diameter. The diameter is to power of 3 some even small change makes a difference so you cannot be guessing or simplifying. No need to solve for G as it’s a given and it did not work out close enough. Remove 1.75 active coils in the rear (close enough). I’m not sure about the front but it is not going to be -2 coils.
Orb