P5 Puredrive vs Gaz
Discussion
StressedDave said:
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...
I would of course need a bit more detail on driver and usage but this set-up is one I run on the Planet MX-5 Hornet trackday car, which has about 7 regular drivers of mixed ability and so far everybody seems happy. 
A healthy discussion as far as I can tell... 
And it's all been good natured, more or less, notwithstanding my frothing at the brain last night. And Derek is right, at the end of the day the only thing that really matters away from the competition arena is customer satisfaction with the product.
And it's all been good natured, more or less, notwithstanding my frothing at the brain last night. And Derek is right, at the end of the day the only thing that really matters away from the competition arena is customer satisfaction with the product.Many thanks to StressedDave for his last evening's comprehensive answer to my innocent question.
I had hoped that it was implicit in the question that all parameters such as the driver, his or her ability, the track and the car specification remain constant and that the suspension would be the only variable.
Thereafter I was hoping for some guidance on the relative merits of readily available suspensions, rather than a thesis on how to achieve the best absolute suspension.
It appears that this guidance has been provided by Ab Shocks.....for which many thanks.
This thread started with a request for any thoughts on puredrive and gaz suspensions. Many of the thoughts proferred have been influenced by road use.
My question, which should preferably be considered in the original context of the thread, sought to ask how those thoughts might (or might not) change for track use only.
On the subject of context, isn't it improbable that anyone with the money to execute StressDave's recommended course of action would be playing around with an MX5?
Next innocent question about an apparently infinitely complex subject is......given a competent driver, and if everything else were to remain constant, by how much could a lap time typically be reduced by spending Ab Shocks suggested £2000 rather than his alternatively suggested £1000?
I had hoped that it was implicit in the question that all parameters such as the driver, his or her ability, the track and the car specification remain constant and that the suspension would be the only variable.
Thereafter I was hoping for some guidance on the relative merits of readily available suspensions, rather than a thesis on how to achieve the best absolute suspension.
It appears that this guidance has been provided by Ab Shocks.....for which many thanks.
This thread started with a request for any thoughts on puredrive and gaz suspensions. Many of the thoughts proferred have been influenced by road use.
My question, which should preferably be considered in the original context of the thread, sought to ask how those thoughts might (or might not) change for track use only.
On the subject of context, isn't it improbable that anyone with the money to execute StressDave's recommended course of action would be playing around with an MX5?
Next innocent question about an apparently infinitely complex subject is......given a competent driver, and if everything else were to remain constant, by how much could a lap time typically be reduced by spending Ab Shocks suggested £2000 rather than his alternatively suggested £1000?
Probably not enough to make a real difference unless you are racing/sprinting and every 10th of a second counts.
The point Dave was trying to make was that you could spend many many thousands developing the perfect suspension for the car/track/driver but unless you are capable of actually driving the car to it's absolute limits consistently lap after lap you are wasting your money and would be better off spending the money on tuition.
There is a big difference between being able to drive consistently fast and being able to drive consistently at the limits.
If you can't lap quick & consistent on stock setup you won't be much better on £100k suspension.
I have the P5 PD suspension because I much prefer the way it feels on road & track compared to stock suspension (very soft on a Mk2.5, even with the Sport Bilsteins) but I very much doubt it is improving my lap times.
The point Dave was trying to make was that you could spend many many thousands developing the perfect suspension for the car/track/driver but unless you are capable of actually driving the car to it's absolute limits consistently lap after lap you are wasting your money and would be better off spending the money on tuition.
There is a big difference between being able to drive consistently fast and being able to drive consistently at the limits.
If you can't lap quick & consistent on stock setup you won't be much better on £100k suspension.
I have the P5 PD suspension because I much prefer the way it feels on road & track compared to stock suspension (very soft on a Mk2.5, even with the Sport Bilsteins) but I very much doubt it is improving my lap times.
MX-5 Lazza said:
The point Dave was trying to make was that you could spend many many thousands developing the perfect suspension for the car/track/driver but unless you are capable of actually driving the car to it's absolute limits consistently lap after lap you are wasting your money and would be better off spending the money on tuition.
There is a big difference between being able to drive consistently fast and being able to drive consistently at the limits.
If you can't lap quick & consistent on stock setup you won't be much better on £100k suspension.
This is exactly how I read Dave's comments - I didn't detect any sarcasm and I think Dave went to huge lengths in trying to illustrate his points. There is a big difference between being able to drive consistently fast and being able to drive consistently at the limits.
If you can't lap quick & consistent on stock setup you won't be much better on £100k suspension.
Grandad said:
Next innocent question about an apparently infinitely complex subject is......given a competent driver, and if everything else were to remain constant, by how much could a lap time typically be reduced by spending Ab Shocks suggested £2000 rather than his alternatively suggested £1000?
It could be argued that a well designed £1000 suspension would be just as good as the £2000 suspension. Effectively the things you are interested in are the damper rates in low and high speed and in bump and rebound. Low speed control handling, high speed control ride. (The links I posted last night to OptimumG give details on how to work out the rates by calculation rather than experience - or at least a first approximation to those rates tha you can go developing with) Getting those rates is a function of the internals of the damper and if the 'cheapo' damper gives the right rates then you wouldn't need to spend the extra £1000. OTOH if things like the springs rates and ARB rates aren't correct for the car then you're trying to put a gloss on faeces.As Derek said earlier, one of the ways of developing a suspension kit is to develop those rates using decent (read expensive) dampers and then try and replicate them in an off-the-shelf aftermarket damper. The problem normally arises in that you can't develop those rates in an off-the-shelf damper - you have to work with some of the basic things they have and you end up with a compromise somewhere along the line. If I've understood Derek and Tony correctly, one of the advantages of the Gaz Gold Pro range is that they have five specific 'base units' to work from so the level of compromise is likely to be less.
One of the advantages of the forthcoming PureDrive Pro is that there are no built-in parameters - the whole damper can be built to give any rates you need. So, you could start off with a road biased kit, similar to the current PureDrive and then rebuild the damper (at minimal cost as the bits that need changing are relatively cheap) to match changes in the car's use.
Last summer we owned a 2006 MNR Vortx RT and I, as a completely indifferent driver, was able to get round Croft in far less time than in my S2000.
This crystallised the logic that the better equipped I was, the more quickly I would lap.
Hence the desire to equipe a stripped down MX5, if we pursue that route, to a level which would benefit lap times.
We are aware that in the cost:benefit ratio there comes a point of diminishing return, and that this point will vary depending upon whether tracking a car is a past time or a profession.
What everyone seems to be saying is that, additionally, there is a cut off point in the cost:benefit ratio determined by driver ability, and that if a driver isn't especially capable that cut off point precludes upgrading the stock suspension.
In other words we are saying, are we, that I, as an indifferent driver would not reduce my lap times by upgrading the suspension on a Mk2.5 MX5?
This is a fairly fundamental point upon which I'd very much appreciate confirmation.
This crystallised the logic that the better equipped I was, the more quickly I would lap.
Hence the desire to equipe a stripped down MX5, if we pursue that route, to a level which would benefit lap times.
We are aware that in the cost:benefit ratio there comes a point of diminishing return, and that this point will vary depending upon whether tracking a car is a past time or a profession.
What everyone seems to be saying is that, additionally, there is a cut off point in the cost:benefit ratio determined by driver ability, and that if a driver isn't especially capable that cut off point precludes upgrading the stock suspension.
In other words we are saying, are we, that I, as an indifferent driver would not reduce my lap times by upgrading the suspension on a Mk2.5 MX5?
This is a fairly fundamental point upon which I'd very much appreciate confirmation.
Aswell as the actual damping properties of the kit, there will of course be other difference between then £1k and £2k kit.. Stuff that may not directly affect the performance for 'casual' user - IE build quality, higher grade fixings, ease of stripping down and changing shim stacks etc etc....?
Having followed the thread my thoughts on the off the shelf kits are:
100% Track focus: Gaz Gold Pro as per the MA5DA or whatever racing series.
Sports Road setup: P5 PureDrive
Impulse buy for sports road: Gaz by Ab Shocks from mx5parts
Never going on track, used by the OH daily: Standard
100% Track focus: Gaz Gold Pro as per the MA5DA or whatever racing series.
Sports Road setup: P5 PureDrive
Impulse buy for sports road: Gaz by Ab Shocks from mx5parts
Never going on track, used by the OH daily: Standard
MX-5 Lazza said:
So what you are saying (I think) is that you might spend £100k developing the perfect package only to find that the settings you end up with are exactly the same as those of the £1000 package.
That's one way of looking at it... the quality of the £1000 package is dependent on the skill of the engineer who developed it. Effectively the damper is a commodity item (as is the spring) - you're paying for the skill and knowledge of the person who decided what rates it produces, notwithstanding the issues I mentioned about being able to get that commodity item to do what you want.I'm not sure it's fair to describe the PureDrive as just for 'Sporty Road' given that one user won his local sprint championship equipped with it. I'd also be slightly wary about reading across the equipment used for a 'Spec' racing series as therefore the best for a given application. I'm not criticising the Gaz Gold kit in any way (I've limited experience of it), but such kit may not work as well unless you have all the other parts of the package. Caterham had big issues with the CSR because the new suspension was developed on a rollcage equipped car and when moved to a less stiff chassis the lack of torsional rigidity introduced some 'fun' handling characteristics.
Grandad said:
Last summer we owned a 2006 MNR Vortx RT and I, as a completely indifferent driver, was able to get round Croft in far less time than in my S2000.
This crystallised the logic that the better equipped I was, the more quickly I would lap.
Hence the desire to equipe a stripped down MX5, if we pursue that route, to a level which would benefit lap times.
We are aware that in the cost:benefit ratio there comes a point of diminishing return, and that this point will vary depending upon whether tracking a car is a past time or a profession.
What everyone seems to be saying is that, additionally, there is a cut off point in the cost:benefit ratio determined by driver ability, and that if a driver isn't especially capable that cut off point precludes upgrading the stock suspension.
In other words we are saying, are we, that I, as an indifferent driver would not reduce my lap times by upgrading the suspension on a Mk2.5 MX5?
This is a fairly fundamental point upon which I'd very much appreciate confirmation.
I call it 'Radical disease'... This crystallised the logic that the better equipped I was, the more quickly I would lap.
Hence the desire to equipe a stripped down MX5, if we pursue that route, to a level which would benefit lap times.
We are aware that in the cost:benefit ratio there comes a point of diminishing return, and that this point will vary depending upon whether tracking a car is a past time or a profession.
What everyone seems to be saying is that, additionally, there is a cut off point in the cost:benefit ratio determined by driver ability, and that if a driver isn't especially capable that cut off point precludes upgrading the stock suspension.
In other words we are saying, are we, that I, as an indifferent driver would not reduce my lap times by upgrading the suspension on a Mk2.5 MX5?
This is a fairly fundamental point upon which I'd very much appreciate confirmation.
the ability of car >>> ability of driver so it doesn't matter how Jeremy Clarkson (officially 85% talent free according to Sabine) you are, you'll still be quick.Of course adding grippier tyres will give you quicker lap times. Improving the transient handling through better dampers and getting the right roll moment distribution to control steady state handling will make a large difference to any drivers ability to create fast lap times. I quoted the 1.5 seconds a lap I found while developing the PureDrive kit - retaining the same tyres, engine power and brakes as before. I don't see why you wouldn't get similar improvements.
However, the limiting factor I've found is having the confidence to drive slowly enough to be fast. I get a lot of 'track day warriors' for training and they're brilliant at finding the limits of grip on circuit, but less good at efficiently doing so. The classic behaviour is to try and enter the corner too quickly, get on the wrong line and have to use reserves of grip in the second half of the corner to stay on circuit.
I'm not saying don't do it (it'll make the experience more enjoyable and will make learning easier to boot), but in terms of seconds lost per pound, decent driver training (think of people like Mark Hales, Don Palmer, John Stevens and Rob Walker) gives a much bigger return on your investment. I'm normally finding several seconds for even seasoned racers in a day at something less than the cost of a suspension upgrade.
Back from a busy day at Autosport and the thread rumbles on.
Just a few points to make.
The Gaz Gold Pro kit is only a track focused kit if I make it so, if I want to make it like your favorite armchair I can. Most kits will run some variety of spring rates with reasonable control the GGP will just run more and with specific valving, run it well. I would expect that GGP buyers would buy for durability and quality anodised high tensile materials used as much as performance.
I have agreed in principle with MX-5 Car Parts today that we will offer in the near future two kits in the standard Nickel kits and these will be a road kit for drivers that want to be 20% over the standard kit and a sports kit that is 40% over standard.
If this seems excessive I would remind you guys that the race cars run about
200% stiffer than standard and these represent better control with ride comfort.
Just a few points to make.
The Gaz Gold Pro kit is only a track focused kit if I make it so, if I want to make it like your favorite armchair I can. Most kits will run some variety of spring rates with reasonable control the GGP will just run more and with specific valving, run it well. I would expect that GGP buyers would buy for durability and quality anodised high tensile materials used as much as performance.
I have agreed in principle with MX-5 Car Parts today that we will offer in the near future two kits in the standard Nickel kits and these will be a road kit for drivers that want to be 20% over the standard kit and a sports kit that is 40% over standard.
If this seems excessive I would remind you guys that the race cars run about
200% stiffer than standard and these represent better control with ride comfort.
StressedDave said:
I'm not sure it's fair to describe the PureDrive as just for 'Sporty Road' given that one user won his local sprint championship equipped with it.
That's me. 
I would just add that my car is driven to and from every event (sometimes up to 500miles) and is still very usable on road. I would describe PureDrive as a road kit you can use for trackdays/club competition.
Look forward to AutoSport in the morning.
Cheers,
Kev
Edited by kevham on Friday 9th January 22:44
Just a bit of an update to the thread. We've been busy in development and have designed and manufactured our own monotube damper. I've put more info up on the site here: http://www.performance5.com/handling_suspension.as...
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff