Ford Focus Mk2 [ST] Estate Sleeper - Build Thread

[CHR15 G]

Sf_Manta said:

Loving this, having read through from it being posted till today.

You sir, are utterly bonkers

Thank you, that's what I like to hear! The car is pretty bonkers in this weather, an absolutely animal!

[CHR15 G]

Another quick picture of the car with the surfboards on the roof, and a boot full of stuff again.



Which brings me quite nicely onto the topic of the rear suspension, as brought up by Jack.

JackP1 said:

Unless i've missed it, have you changed out the rear suspension from the ST or kept the originals on there?

Which as he quite correctly has pointed out is completely Diesel Estate standard. It sits far too high when the car is empty, bounces around compared to the front springs and I think the rear dampers are shot anyway.

As the picture above, the car sits nicely when fully loaded which is about 30mm lower than when empty and then the same ride height as the front end. It still bounces around terribly when it's loaded though!

To try and combat this I have ordered a set of Eibach lowering springs (-30mm) as these are the only estate springs I could find that are actually stuffer, but should also match the ride height of the front springs. This may not be the final solution to the problem, but it's a good starting point.

Despite a lot of suggestions otherwise, there does not seem to be a mk2 estate 'Handling Pack' option on rear dampers, as equipped and non-equipped cars bring up the same rear damper part numbers. Therefore I have selected a set of Sachs rear dampers, nothing special but I don't want to spend a load of money on something as a starting point.

[neilbauer]

I have just fitted eibach 30mm springs on my fiesta and very happy with it, noticeable but not stupid

[Furyjoell]

It looks so plain and boring in that picture, I absolutely love it, the ride height looks spot on too, in my opinion.

[luggie]

Don't gaz do custom stuff? Been looking at them for some shocks for my caddy

[CHR15 G]

Furyjoell said:

It looks so plain and boring in that picture, I absolutely love it, the ride height looks spot on too, in my opinion.

In the picture the boot is fully loaded so that's why it's siting level, that's the ride height I want to achieve when it's empty. But I also want to make it stiffer as the rear is far too soft compared to the front.

[CHR15 G]

luggie said:

Don't gaz do custom stuff? Been looking at them for some shocks for my caddy

Yeah they do, but I'm not sure what I want so this is a much easier starting point!

[Furyjoell]

CHR15 G said:

In the picture the boot is fully loaded so that's why it's siting level, that's the ride height I want to achieve when it's empty. But I also want to make it stiffer as the rear is far too soft compared to the front.

Yeah I know, I was agreeing that that amount of drop when empty would look perfect.

[blueST]

neilbauer said:

Furyjoell said:

CHR15 G said:

In the picture the boot is fully loaded so that's why it's siting level, that's the ride height I want to achieve when it's empty. But I also want to make it stiffer as the rear is far too soft compared to the front.

Yeah I know, I was agreeing that that amount of drop when empty would look perfect.

You could cut the springs as a temporary measure, which would have the duel effects of reducing the ride height and increasing the spring rate. Or is that too bodgetastic for this thread

[pixelatedJH]

Stumbled upon what must be the most absolute, complete opposite to your car.

(Cover your eyes)

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2005-FORD-FOCUS-LX-RS-RE...

[Heaveho]

CHR15 G said:

What sort of heat wrap would you recommend?

I used Agriemach products, the woven stuff on rolls of varying widths..........I used it primarily to reduce underbonnet temps, but if I was faced with trying to reduce exhaust boom, I'd also try it for that.

[chrisnic0]

Hi Chris,
Great sleeper!
Are you based near Chester? I am sure I spotted you on the A55 the other day

Nico

[CHR15 G]

Furyjoell said:

CHR15 G said:

In the picture the boot is fully loaded so that's why it's siting level, that's the ride height I want to achieve when it's empty. But I also want to make it stiffer as the rear is far too soft compared to the front.

Yeah I know, I was agreeing that that amount of drop when empty would look perfect.

Right, I see! And yes, that's what I'm going for, a 30mm drop from empty.

[CHR15 G]

blueST said:

You could cut the springs as a temporary measure, which would have the duel effects of reducing the ride height and increasing the spring rate. Or is that too bodgetastic for this thread

Not really into chopping springs, and I don't thin that will actually change the spring rate either.

[CHR15 G]

pixelatedJH said:

Stumbled upon what must be the most absolute, complete opposite to your car.

(Cover your eyes)

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2005-FORD-FOCUS-LX-RS-RE...

I'm not going to judge, as the person who did that car probably wont understand my car either, but yes-that is the complete opposite!! (they haven't swapped the interior either)

[13aines]

blueST said:

You could cut the springs as a temporary measure, which would have the duel effects of reducing the ride height and increasing the spring rate. Or is that too bodgetastic for this thread

It still takes the same load to deflect the spring one unit of measurement. A 100 N/mm spring (for example) requires 100N load to compress it 1mm.

To increase the rate of a (standalone) spring you can produce it from wire of a larger diameter, or coil it with a smaller outer diameter, or fewer active coils.

(Spring rate, when fitted to a vehicle, is dependant on spring-damper angle and wishbone geometry I think though)

Edited by 13aines on Thursday 19th November 20:11

[Six Fiend]

I showed this car to my mother, she loves it and wants one. She's 82 and batty

[blueST]

13aines said:

It still takes the same load to deflect the spring one unit of measurement. A 100 N/mm spring (for example) requires 100N load to compress it 1mm.

To increase the rate of a (standalone) spring you can produce it from wire of a larger diameter, or coil it with a larger outer diameter, or fewer active coils.

(Spring rate, when fitted to a vehicle, is dependant on spring-damper angle and wishbone geometry I think though)

I am not recommending cutting springs, but it definitely does increase the rate. I'm not great at explaining stuff, but spring rate is also a function of length of the wire. Think of a straight torsion spring, if you shorten it it gets stiffer, same applies to a coil as it is still torsion that gives the springiness. If you google it there a some far more detailed explanations than I can manage.

[CHR15 G]

blueST said:

13aines said:

It still takes the same load to deflect the spring one unit of measurement. A 100 N/mm spring (for example) requires 100N load to compress it 1mm.

To increase the rate of a (standalone) spring you can produce it from wire of a larger diameter, or coil it with a larger outer diameter, or fewer active coils.

(Spring rate, when fitted to a vehicle, is dependant on spring-damper angle and wishbone geometry I think though)

I am not recommending cutting springs, but it definitely does increase the rate. I'm not great at explaining stuff, but spring rate is also a function of length of the wire. Think of a straight torsion spring, if you shorten it it gets stiffer, same applies to a coil as it is still torsion that gives the springiness. If you google it there a some far more detailed explanations than I can manage.

If you think of your spring unrolled as a single bar: a shorter bar is stiffer than a longer bar of the same cross section. Therefore a longer Spring is less stiff than a shorter Spring of the same cross section.

[13aines]

Wow, you learn something new everyday. I think you were correct all along blueST... I think this is the explanation mathematically, as I was thinking.

Length does not come into the equation for calculating spring stiffness - I thought it did, so assumed that with a linear spring by reducing length you would reduce the number of coils roughly proportionally.



k = spring stiffness
d = wire diameter
G = shear modulus of spring material
D = mean diameter
N = number of active coils

When you cut the springs you reduce the active number of coils and the length. Since length doesn't come into calculating the spring stiffness the only change in the equation for calculating the spring stiffness is a reduction in the number of active coils, which since this is on the denominator increases the spring rate.

Embarrassing! My apologies for doubting you.

Edited by 13aines on Thursday 19th November 20:35