Ohlins v Nitrons
Discussion
We've got Ohlins on ours & i can heartily recommend them, they really seem to come into their own round the twisty bits, Cadwell track days being a favourite 
The only problem with the Ohlins ( apart from initial cost ), is that they need servicing every 2 years or so & the last time we did it, it was a struggle to find somewhere to get it done.
The only problem with the Ohlins ( apart from initial cost ), is that they need servicing every 2 years or so & the last time we did it, it was a struggle to find somewhere to get it done.
RUSSELLM said:
Anybody running Ohlins on thier Cerb ? At £1400 plus vat, I'm presuming they're pretty decent.
Also, has anyone had any faulty Nitrons ?
No comment on the faulty Nitrons but a certain indy in Cradley Heath may have a few things to say.
Maybe consider Double adjustable twintube shocks if you want complete control of your suspension, ask Jonny W.
Don't know about Nitrons!Tripps said:
or for a lot less the new Gaz shocks.
But not double adjustable??
These arn't new, they have been supplying them to the race boys for about 5 years, they are only new to TVR because I didn't see a market for them, bit like remotes I suppose but if everbody wants to follow the sprint stars for less than Nitron NTR money, then go for it.
>> Edited by the gazman on Wednesday 15th March 19:05
mongoose said:
Doesn't Trackcar do double adjustable Protechs for these cars?-Bl**dy marvelous on the Griff,recently had them fitted,and i still havent finished adjusting(playing) yet 
>> Edited by mongoose on Wednesday 15th March 18:33
What are you playing with? the bump or the rebound.
the gazman said:
Doesn't Trackcar do double adjustable Protechs for these cars?-Bl**dy marvelous on the Griff,recently had them fitted,and i still havent finished adjusting(playing) yet
>> Edited by mongoose on Wednesday 15th March 18:33
What are you playing with? the bump or the rebound.
[not_the_nine_o'clock_news_hi_fi_sketch] no, no clues!
[/not_the_nine_o'clock_news_hi_fi_sketch]trackcar said:
Doesn't Trackcar do double adjustable Protechs for these cars?-Bl**dy marvelous on the Griff,recently had them fitted,and i still havent finished adjusting(playing) yet
>> Edited by mongoose on Wednesday 15th March 18:33
What are you playing with? the bump or the rebound.
[not_the_nine_o'clock_news_hi_fi_sketch] no, no clues!
Just interested, mind you I would have expected the rebound to be OK when he got the car back from you and maybe him to tweek the bump to suit his needs.
trackcar said:
[not_the_nine_o'clock_news_hi_fi_sketch] no, no clues!
the gazman said:
Just interested, mind you I would have expected the rebound to be OK when he got the car back from you and maybe him to tweek the bump to suit his needs.
Derek,i've been playing with allsorts to be honest, not much help i know but thats how its been.Joo set it up to a good start point before i left,and i've been adjusting to my personal preferences scince,but i don't get to try out as often as i like!I've also been trying to get both a road and a track type set up,so i've been busy.I'm a serial twiddler,so its been great fun
As i promised on the Chim forum,when you said you were interested,i'll give you the full sp when i'm done mongoose said:
[not_the_nine_o'clock_news_hi_fi_sketch] no, no clues! the gazman said:
Just interested, mind you I would have expected the rebound to be OK when he got the car back from you and maybe him to tweek the bump to suit his needs.
Derek,i've been playing with allsorts to be honest, not much help i know but thats how its been.Joo set it up to a good start point before i left,and i've been adjusting to my personal preferences scince,but i don't get to try out as often as i like!I've also been trying to get both a road and a track type set up,so i've been busy.I'm a serial twiddler,so its been great fun
Fine but I can't see how you can play with the rebound properly when you need an observer who knows what he is doing and a driver.
The rebound rate is not subjective IMHO, its either right or wrong for the spring rates. Bump is a different story and that is subjective. All IMHO from watching the experts.
the gazman said:
Fine but I can't see how you can play with the rebound properly when you need an observer who knows what he is doing and a driver.
The rebound rate is not subjective IMHO, its either right or wrong for the spring rates. Bump is a different story and that is subjective. All IMHO from watching the experts.
Sorry Derek but you're talking guff again.
observer? fooey
no variation on rebound resistance required? codswallop.
If that's what you've gleaned from watching the experts you need to watch a bit closer.
trackcar said:
Fine but I can't see how you can play with the rebound properly when you need an observer who knows what he is doing and a driver.
The rebound rate is not subjective IMHO, its either right or wrong for the spring rates. Bump is a different story and that is subjective. All IMHO from watching the experts.
Sorry Derek but you're talking guff again.
observer? fooey
no variation on rebound resistance required? codswallop.
If that's what you've gleaned from watching the experts you need to watch a bit closer.
Gugi was right 95% of the people haven't got a clue how to set up D/A's and the general public playing with them just gets unstable cars and this post rather proves his point.
I'm just going to let APM Andy,the two Steves Gugi & Howard,Warren, Richard at Dulford and Neil at Horizon fit doubles because they know what they are doing and they will set them up properly and explain about meddling with things you don't understand.
the gazman said:I dont want to get in between your argument here,but i dont see what you mean derek
Gugi was right 95% of the people haven't got a clue how to set up D/A's and the general public playing with them just gets unstable cars and this post rather proves his point.
How does Joos' post prove his(Gugis')point?Joo explained thoroughly to me,how to set up my double adjustables,and what he told me has proved very usefull and informative,as always. I dont care which adjustment you make,they all have an affect which is,without question,noticeable.You would have to be numb not to notice imho.I honestly couldn't care less about what an 'observer' says,and i sure as heck dont need a driver to drive my car for me,thanks!What matters to me is how i,not someone else,feels whats happening when i make alterations.And only i truly know what i prefer my car to handle and ride like,why have someone else try to interpret that?.So having someone else drive and observe seems daft to me
I think I've got a pretty good academic understanding of dynamic systems and suspension dynamics, and I've played with the suspension on my own car for years without killing myself, but I don't feel competant to set up a double or tripple adjustable system. I think for most people it would be better just to establish roughly what bump/rebound ratio works for most people and then stick with that. The more adjusters there are, the more 'wrong' settings there are!
As I understand it, the main reason for lowering the bump rate and raising the rebound rate on road cars is to take advantage of fact that the load on the wheel never goes negative so the damper can never apply loads of more than -1G on rebound. Conventional wisdom when I worked on this was that ratios of between 2:1 and 3:1 seem to offer the best compromise between NVH and body control.
Purely from the point of ride quality and steady-state handling, the bump/rebound ratios that you guys have mentioned in the past seem way too high unless you are also running the dampers much stiffer than I am. I've run very high ratios in the past and it produced some extremely uncomfortable handling, with the car jacking itself down quite noticeably in sharp manoeuvers.
I can see how it might be possible to use the bump/rebound ratio to couple the roll and pitch modes, this could be used to change the transient handling in and out of corners, you would need to be a lot smarter than me to exploit this, though!
So perhaps you two clever guys could enlighten the rest of us as to how you arrived at these bump/rebound settings, if it isn't revealing too many tricks of the trade!
As I understand it, the main reason for lowering the bump rate and raising the rebound rate on road cars is to take advantage of fact that the load on the wheel never goes negative so the damper can never apply loads of more than -1G on rebound. Conventional wisdom when I worked on this was that ratios of between 2:1 and 3:1 seem to offer the best compromise between NVH and body control.
Purely from the point of ride quality and steady-state handling, the bump/rebound ratios that you guys have mentioned in the past seem way too high unless you are also running the dampers much stiffer than I am. I've run very high ratios in the past and it produced some extremely uncomfortable handling, with the car jacking itself down quite noticeably in sharp manoeuvers.
I can see how it might be possible to use the bump/rebound ratio to couple the roll and pitch modes, this could be used to change the transient handling in and out of corners, you would need to be a lot smarter than me to exploit this, though!
So perhaps you two clever guys could enlighten the rest of us as to how you arrived at these bump/rebound settings, if it isn't revealing too many tricks of the trade!
mongoose said:
So having someone else drive and observe seems daft to me
In the past I've had some very useful feedback from people who've watched my car as it is being chucked around. Sometimes from inside it is hard to see exactly what the body is doing, strange but true! I've also been able to diagnose handling problems with other people's cars from time to time, just by seeing how the car responded to power and steering input and guessing what the driver was trying to achieve. Sometimes it's just poor technique, but sometimes the handling problems are so obvious that even I can see them.
Gassing Station | Cerbera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff