<p>Some light bedtime reading I ran into reading about shocks.</p><p></p><p>Why is hysteresis bad?</p>

 

<p>Light bedtime reading link</p><p>Page 5:</p><p><a href="http://imgur.com/XEsD9ps" target="_blank"><img alt="" src="https://www.miataturbo.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=149036&amp;dateline=14 41837523" /></a></p><p>The graphs in question</p><p>MCS:</p><p><img src="http://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.miataturbo.net-vbulletin/1024x791/80-bi4nmwo_cf3a837834790b08b991a257782cac3864c3f23b.j pg" title="" /><br /><br />Xidas:</p><p><img src="http://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.miataturbo.net-vbulletin/1024x791/80-oaibxjt_e97624416fbffa4fa9abb767223cafd320a36845.j pg" title="" /><br /><br /><img src="http://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.miataturbo.net-vbulletin/1024x791/80-pwnea9n_c76b1af2f31817072c686434cf29019d02e8c956.j pg" title="" /><br /><br />&nbsp;</p><p>@emilio700 could you touch on what aspects of the shock you can/have tuned? Is there a reason Xidas have a certain feature that can be seen in the dynos? Seems like there is a lot of vague information going around that is not helpful to us suspension mortals.</p>

 

Wow, I never expected the MCS FvsD plot to look like that of a KrasI Yellow.

 

In the case of the Xida and other digressive shocks, they add compression and rebound to add feel and increase effective spring rate by slowing the motion of the spring, it's a bandaid to fix a street suspension. On a race designed suspension, a linear shock might work better.

 

Sub'd for science.

 

The Xida vs MCS looks simply like a double digressive vs linear dampening. Which is better? Depends on who you ask and which tracks you runs. The popular trend was double depressive in pro series a few years ago. I have not kept tabs lately so who knows. One of my Ohlins (dealer/racer/tuner)friends hates digressive style dampening and swears by linear.

I also want to point out the dyno forces etc may not be related to what your car is experiencing. It would be helpful to have shock pot data to plot over the shock dynos to know what you can expect in your application. This is your testing on your track (s) with your car.

Lastly both MCS and Xida are distributed by vendors I trust have done waaaay more research and development then I have the time and money for. Like the Pepsi/Coke debate there is always gonna be different tastes and opinions. Pick you product/vendor/theory you're comfortable with and don't look back.

 

That is what I hate about all the Xida hate. How many people of bought them, tracked them, streeted them and loved them? Pretty much everyone?

And for $300 less, I can get NB top hats, springs, helper springs, and Torrington bearings.

So yeah, MCS setup is $1000 more? I'd hope it might be a bit better. That'll also buy a running NA these days.

 

I'd like to hear Emilio comment on the rear shocks. Curious if this is why he recommends fairly large rear sways in his big grip kit, I assume it's to keep rear movements to a minimum because the rear shocks can't keep up?

Curious because I tried running a stock NA6 bar on mine and hated it, took it off immediately when doing initial MCS testing.

 

one thing that hasn't been discussed is that I believe that the MC shock is adjustable for rebound only, rather than being a combination of both bump and rebound. To me, as long as the compression is in the ball park, it seems easier to fine tune the cars handling by only working with the rebound or the compression adjustments; not both at the same time.

 

<p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Single adjustable shocks are rebound only adjustment. &nbsp;Compression changes due to rebound adjustment is just cross talk basically. &nbsp;At least, I haven't seen a (single adjustable) shock different from this.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Its bad because the shock doesn't behave consistently. &nbsp;Think of it this way:<br /><br />@ 2in v while accelerating my shock provides 400 lbs&nbsp;rebound.</p><p>@ 2in v while decelerating my shock provides 200 lbs&nbsp;on rebound.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Its the same spring in both cases, but the force is different. &nbsp;I can't come up with a good real world example at the moment.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

 

Dyno charts from a single-adjustable shock that adjusts both compression and rebound have been posted in this thread.

 

<p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Which one is that? The Xida? &nbsp;Certainly doesn't look like it to me (at least the range is pretty small). &nbsp;Although the 949 site did say they are adjustable together.</p>

 

<p>I mean even more basic than that. I understand what it is, but why do you want the same force, aren't they different movements that might require different forces?</p>

 

If I understand what you are asking right, Then yes, it would be more desirable to be able to control both compression settings and the rebound settings to perfect your handling settings; especially if you have the benefit of employing an engineer on your pit crew. In the past, I had a car with great shocks. However, these proved to be "too great" for me... I had so many setting choices that I never could figure out how to get the car dialed in. e.g. if you want more front bite for t-4, do you change the front compression setting, or the rear rebound; or both? Then how does each of these choices impact the handling on t-5? What a lot of fiddling...

 

<p>Nope. I mean why is it beneficial to have the accel and deccel of your shocks be the exact same. In other words, why is hysteresis bad, other than &quot;because people say so&quot;</p>

 

don't worry about hysteresis.


I think it's funny when non-pro teams are analyzing over (very similar) dyno charts- damper curves are only a small percentage of actual suspension performance on your shitty miata (i'm not singling anyone out, but all our miata's are in general- ****)...

Do you have the right springs?
Sway bars?
Alignment?
Good bushings?
Tires good?
Tire pressure?
All the other **** on your car working right?

Now start thinking about turning the ***** on your dampers or getting new ones... AND of course you are doing A-B-A testing on the same track, tires, day, temperature etc etc etc to verify your results-- right?



For me- I just bought xidas because they are on lots of fast miatas and resale is really good.

 

I've had a pretty good experience with a miata this season. I not only won the SPM regional class for the season, but I was able to beat out (in points) a guy that I've been chasing since the early 2000's.

In the past, my sb2 powered Corvette could catch him, but it would barely last a 30 min race, let alone a season... at at a great cost; spun rods, busted valve springs, broken half shafts ... even busted a Jerico once.

Come this season in the miata: It cost me less that 1k/race to field the car in SPM. In only a mild state of tune the miata would out perform many n/a race prepped 911-933's. Even though my nemesis, Jim Walsh, in his gt3-cup car would lap me when he showed up.... at 3+k/race to field a cup car, he would only show up on "special" occasions. I finally beat him by out participating him.

Props to Miata... this year my **** smells sweet!

 

<p>What suspension do you run on your non-**** miata </p>

 

My suspension is ****... that's why I'm checking out this thread...

 

<p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>You've basically just completely validated his argument and his point:&nbsp;The Miata is cheaper, and has great bang for the buck, but carping about a bit of minor hysteresis on a car of this caliber is a little silly. It's not a GT3 cup car, it's a Miata.</p>