P5 Puredrive vs Gaz
Discussion
Phil @ P5 said:
heebeegeetee said:
StressedDave said:
MX5Parts still appear to stock them, and I doubt that a dealership would turn you away...
But are they actually Mazda components, or just some unknown brand sold by Mazda dealerships?Phil, i don't know if its me, but i've been on your site and can't find details of price and availability of your Puredrive Range. The Puredrive 'box' on top right of the home page doesn't lead me to anywhere.
maz8062 said:
MX-5 Lazza said:
I was only saying that we should assume that any comparison between setups would be using the same tyres and geometry. It would be easy to prove that a car with stock suspension and perfect alignment fitted with 888s has more grip than a car with any uprated suspension, poor geometry and Dunlop D89s but what would it prove? If both cars had the same tyres & geometry you would have the basis of a fair and equal comparison.
This thread can never form the bais of a fair and equal comparison because none of the kits have been compared back to back so to speak. If it were my money I'd buy Tein's, but that's just my choice.
Edited by maz8062 on Tuesday 6th January 09:51
Edited by maz8062 on Tuesday 6th January 09:51
On the subject of Tein, I am a monotube fan (for those who can justify the additional cost) and I can announce that Gaz will be launching an aluminium sports monotube at Autosport this week. By spring I should have these valved up and sorted for the MX-5, I will of course be asking WIM for a volunteer car to play with.
BTW, these will be offered in 1,2 and 3 way
Edited by Ab Shocks on Tuesday 6th January 10:23
Edited by Ab Shocks on Tuesday 6th January 10:36
maz8062 said:
This thread can never form the bais of a fair and equal comparison because none of the kits have been compared back to back so to speak.
Gaz, by aligning itself with WIM and MX5parts is perhaps more accessible and has teamed up with respectable retail outlets. The WIM offer to fit the suspension and calibrate it is another plus. P5 Puredrive is the new kid on the block and may already have contributed to Gaz upping their game with the new GPP - The end user wins in the end from the competition.
If it were my money I'd buy Tein's, but that's just my choice.]
That's not entirely true, as we had a set of the Gaz kit on our test car before we even started with the PureDrive. I'm sure there's still some data somewhere....but not sure anyone's going to see that as unbiased though.Gaz, by aligning itself with WIM and MX5parts is perhaps more accessible and has teamed up with respectable retail outlets. The WIM offer to fit the suspension and calibrate it is another plus. P5 Puredrive is the new kid on the block and may already have contributed to Gaz upping their game with the new GPP - The end user wins in the end from the competition.
If it were my money I'd buy Tein's, but that's just my choice.]
Not sure that we're much behind Gaz in terms of the age of the kit. Gaz came along, what, a couple of years ago, and the PureDrive has been available for just over a year along with rave reviews.
You're right, competition is a good thing. And that's why we've been working on our PureDrive Pro kit for sometime now. Soon, there will be a SolidWorks rendering on our site with full information, but how does a monotube design grab you?
ryan-isla said:
So Protech are now bringing out a 'pro' kit (same as Gaz) and a monotube (same as Gaz). Gaz must be flattered seeing as protech copy everything they do !
Well if they copied the original GAZ kit, the copy was better than the original IMO.Edited by Herman Toothrot on Tuesday 6th January 14:04
StressedDave said:
The PureDrive Pro is not a ProTech product and until Derek announced it, I had no idea Gaz had any plans for a monotube damper.
Interesting, back to Koni is it? 
..... The Gaz Monoflex has been in development for the last year along side the Pro series and is done and dusted as far as production is concerned, hence the launch at Autosport.
The only thing left to do is valving and spring testing on the various car brands and I will be doing TVR and MX-5 testing after the show.
I think we are going to have to get a Mk1 and then convert it for the Ma5da race series after all the testing, so I suppose that might be handy for the odd test drive for potential buyers.
maz8062 said:
And this was such a civilised debate. No need taking pot shots guys as many interested buyers are using this thread as a point of reference.
Absolutely agreeOK up at the Autosport show to show technical differences and push brands but the forums are for debate not sniping and I hope I am seen as providing information and suggestions based on my experiance.
Phil @ P5 said:
That's becuase there's a 'cat to let out of the bag' and I'm nearly there with the details.....drop me a line.
How's the car running anyway?
Phil
Very well indeed thankyou, considering the amount of neglect the car gets. How's the car running anyway?
Phil
Just had to change a headlight bulb. Gawd knows when i last opened the bonnet.
Ab Shocks said:
StressedDave said:
The PureDrive Pro is not a ProTech product and until Derek announced it, I had no idea Gaz had any plans for a monotube damper.
Interesting, back to Koni is it? .....
I've think I've discounted all the big players there, but if you've got some more names...I've been having a good read back through the thread and I think the one thing that interests me as a developer is what the general public perceive to be 'good handling'. I've had the (mis?)-fortune to drive most of the kits on the market on both road and track. They certainly feel 'sporty' and 'improved' to the layman but more often than not from a measurement viewpoint the performance is worse than the OE configuration. It's not an easy job to improve handling, particularly if you're not going to introduce compromises and limitations elsewhere. If it was easy every car would ride like a Rolls Royce and handle like a Lotus and most of my R&H compatriots would be gracing dole queues.
StressedDave said:
It's not Bilstein, Tein, Leda, Avo, Ohlins, Reiger, JRZ, Penske or Gaz either I've think I've discounted all the big players there, but if you've got some more names...
I could quote loads more names of course but nobody likes a smartass I've think I've discounted all the big players there, but if you've got some more names...StressedDave said:
I've been having a good read back through the thread and I think the one thing that interests me as a developer is what the general public perceive to be 'good handling'. I've had the (mis?)-fortune to drive most of the kits on the market on both road and track. They certainly feel 'sporty' and 'improved' to the layman but more often than not from a measurement viewpoint the performance is worse than the OE configuration. It's not an easy job to improve handling, particularly if you're not going to introduce compromises and limitations elsewhere. If it was easy every car would ride like a Rolls Royce and handle like a Lotus and most of my R&H compatriots would be gracing dole queues.
I can see where you're comming from here but generally speaking the OEM kit whilst ok for cruising does not give a crisp ride and roll control is slightly boat like. On the contrary the Bilstein kit is crisp but a very fussy ride and disliked by many, soft springs and hard valving IMHO.I find most of the aftermarket kits are a vast improvement but with no difference on front/rear valving you have to play with rear springs to overcome the lack of rebound control once you find the right bump setting, I don't like the sticking plaster of dual rate springs either as an answer.
No the only real answer is to run two way shocks on a test car and then sling the shocks on the dyno to replicate the one way valving kit, while you have the shock on the dyno you can have a look at speed valving to see if piston bleeds are required. Monotube design would require 4 way data for optimum performance which cannot be justified on budget shocks for cost reasons.
So......if we have a naturally aspirated Mk2.5 1.8, with an LSD and as much weight as possible removed, and with lightweight (correct offset) wheels, Toyo 888s, urethane bushes, braided brake lines etc. etc., which brand/specification of suspension do we need to get round Croft in the least possible time? Absolutely no compromise needed for road use.
Grandad said:
So......if we have a naturally aspirated Mk2.5 1.8, with an LSD and as much weight as possible removed, and with lightweight (correct offset) wheels, Toyo 888s, urethane bushes, braided brake lines etc. etc., which brand/specification of suspension do we need to get round Croft in the least possible time? Absolutely no compromise needed for road use.
Are we talking about making you personally able to get around Croft in the least possible time, or getting the car round Croft in the least possible time? If it's the former then I say getting a lot of good quality driver training (preferably not by ARDS instructors) would make the biggest difference. I've been doing a lot of work with amateur racers and normally there are whole heaps of time available just by getting them to corner efficiently - I'm talking several seconds a lap, not just tenths. Once you can consistently drive the car on the limit for lap after lap with whatever setup it has, then you can think about changing the car...
If it's the latter then:
1. Spend a few thousand pounds putting the car on a kinematics and compliance rig such as the ones at http://www.abd.uk.com
2. Spend a few tens of thousands of pounds getting the tyre parameters for the R-888s measured using a rig like the one at Calspan: http://www.calspan.com/tire.htm
3. Weigh the car
4. Take all this information to a vehicle dynamics professional who will then work out what spring and ARB rates you need. Modesty forbids, but firms like either Multimatic in Thetford or Lotus Engineering do repeatedly good work.
5. Drop 10k at either Koni or Ohlins for either 2822 dampers or TTX dampers (they are repeatable four-way adjustable monotube dampers)
6. Budget a few thousand for a data logging setup - you'll be wanting to measure suspension position at around 100 Hz minimum and those sensors aren't cheap
7. Spend a reasonable amount of time on track with a race engineer who can read the data and set the dampers accordingly
If you don't mind crunching a few numbers, then the 'Springs and Dampers' tech tips available at http://www.optimumg.com will give a very simplified insight into the sort of things you'll need to calculate just to get into the ballpark of being quick around a single circuit.
I do most of my development work at a particular proving ground which has a well designed (or read truly evil) handling circuit. Because of its design, it's not a power circuit as it's nearly all corners and no straights. Going from an OE setup on a normally aspirated Mk II with no LSD, no upgraded brake lines, no ABS and cheap 185/60 R14 tyres to a properly optimised aftermarket setup (albeit with no LSD, no upgraded brake lines, and the same crappy tyres) knocked 1.5 seconds off a 53 second lap time. If you're whole seconds away from that theoretical ideal, then all the bling suspension bits in the world aren't going to get you there.
Grandad said:
So......if we have a naturally aspirated Mk2.5 1.8, with an LSD and as much weight as possible removed, and with lightweight (correct offset) wheels, Toyo 888s, urethane bushes, braided brake lines etc. etc., which brand/specification of suspension do we need to get round Croft in the least possible time? Absolutely no compromise needed for road use.
A very short sumary to come to a definative answer but Dave in a roundabout way has come up with an answer........MONEYIf I had less than £1000 I would go for Gaz Gold Pro with 450/375 springs, an agressive geometry set up and possibly corner weighting.
If I had less than £2000 I would go for Two way monotube shocks with remotes with geo and corner weighting
And On and on with the sky the limit but your driving ability is also a limiting factor and driver training can win you 5 seconds a lap.
wheels-inmotion said:
Why the rude reply?.... It was a perfectly polite question.
It wasn't meant to be a rude reply, although clearly I've got the sarcasm dial turned up to 11 at the mo.The points I was trying to raise were:
1) In general the driver is the limiting factor. In a way upgrading the suspension before the driver is folly as if you're only using 50% of the cars capabilities then increasing those capabilities won't get you much further down the road.
2) Once you've developed to the level where the car is a limiting factor then you want to be going for something bespoke rather than just putting a set of very stiff springs and matching dampers on. Although the list looked expensive, it would indeed give you a properly engineered system that would be as quick as that car configuration could possibly be.
I've not tested any of the kits at Croft, so I can't be as positive as Derek that his kit is exactly what you need. I do of course have my suspicions...
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff