Is this question in regards to preloading the shim stack inside the damper as mentioned a few posts earlier or preload on the main coil spring?

^Id be interested in either, but moreso on the preload on the main coil spring (since I probably will not have a hand on building a shock anyway). For years I've used 0 pre-load and understood that on bikes, they preload the shock based on spring rate and weight on that spring (to maintain full stroke at static height).

Also, I agree that once compression is set to spring rate, you should only have to worry about rebound... which is also why I prefer my shocks that adjust rebound only vs my shocks that adjust bump and rebound-- adjusting both usually ends up with too much bump for the compression levels (but in the end, my shocks are low-end shocks)

Bernie, Emilio, I was referring to the coilover spring preload and whether adjusting it has any affect on ride quality or how you'd spec shock valving.

The only adjustment the spring preload will do is ride height. The ride height does effect weight transfer, so you have to take this into consideration on the shock valving.

Preload
 

Coming from a car, bicycle and motorcycle background, spring preload does have an effect on suspension action and valving. For downhill mountain bike and motorcycle suspension that is more frequently fully extended, "topped out", we would always try to choose a spring stack (multi spring), progressive rate or overall spring length/rate that would allow us to use the least amount of preload.

Lets take an example of a 10" stroke damper with a 10" free length , 100 in/lb spring with zero preload.

At full droop, there is zero force pushing against the spring seats. At say, 1" compressed, you would have 100lbs of force trying to extend the shock. With 1" of preload, you would have 200lbs of force trying to extend the shock at 1" compression. In practice on a typical road car set up, the extra preload raises the vehicle so the assembly works in a different range of its stoke and ends up exerting the same force in extension for a given road bump. In other words, the car just gets raised up and the stored energy in the springs remains the same for a given bump force.

Where that example changes is when the shock is frequently topped out in either an offroad suspension or a short stroke car damper. In these cases, preload plays a key role in contact patch loading. That extra preload can quickly over power rebound damping and lead to harsh topping. This is one of the reasons you see position sensitive damping (PSD)(bypass shocks) and double or even triple rate springs in off road racing set ups. I have yet to see PSD in road race car dampers but that doesn't mean they aren't out there. So to answer your question on valving, no preload variances don't really affect valving spec in the context of Miata road suspensions.

What the rider/driver with too much preload would feel is a bit of additional harshness when the suspension was lightly loaded if it was near topped out. That is the remaining energy stored in the springs and and those wheels are no longer supporting much of the vehicle weight, overcomes the rebound damping otherwise designed to work against the sprung mass (weight of the car without moving suspension bits). In off road suspensions, the exotic stuff uses adjustable hydraulic bump stops for both topping and bottoming. The shocks on your typical million dollar Trophy Truck or WRC car are something to behold and absolutely cutting edge stuff.

This high preload causing harsh topping effect is usually not experienced in road car suspensions as they spend the bulk of their life in the other half of their travel range, near bottomed. The exception to this is the common "tuner" coilovers with adjustable length bodies for many cars, not just the Miata. There are several non-length adjustable shocks that are also inexplicably short stroke, Koni Race come to mind. See three locking collars and you are looking at a length adjustable damper. The adjustable length designs sacrifice stroke to gain the length adjustment. With so little available stroke, it becomes more critical to adjust them with sufficient droop as to avoid too frequent topping. Adjusted too short in length with a huge amount of preload is a recipe for an unpleasant ride and poor grip on bad surfaces. Conversely, no preload and shocks extended too long gives you lots of droop to avoid harsh topping but no bump travel. Trial and error adjustments will let each driver find what works best for them on that particular car. In general, I adjust shock length to give max possible bump travel given the tire/wheel being used, then set ride height as low as possible without causing excessive bottoming. The plus side of length adjustable dampers is their versatility by being able to quickly change ride height without changing bump/droop ratio.

With both the long stroke, non-length adjustable Xida's and the Bilstein HD's you have plenty of stroke to work with so the you aren't faced with any of the above mentioned sacrifices in terms of droop travel. The Bilstein will show it's street roots is in the longer body that doesn't quite have enough room for coaxial perches and dual springs without limiting stroke or custom made hyper extended upper mounts

Another example of this would be with the big bar, soft spring setups that many of the oval track teams are running. You have to compress/preload a softer spring more for the same wheel load than you do a stiffer spring. This is why they ride around in the pits with the nose of the car much higher than on the track. The shock is almost at full extension when static.

This got to the extreme to where teams would "chain" the front suspension from extending using the extension of the shock as a limiter to be able to run the softer springs. Even though the spring was preloaded more, it still had the same rate and allowed for more grip and a lower ride height dynamically with the downforce. The front suspension topping did not affect the car do to the downforce keeping the suspension compressed, but in a normal application you would always feel the suspension trying to lift a wheel during weight transfer.

A couple of rule changes later, you were required to remove the shocks during technical inspection to prevent this.

I've always set my pre-load to 0, keeping the spring seated at full droop. Haven't ran into bumpstop issues with my ride height and rubber compound as of yet. Might be changing out the suspension again and was wondering if I should set shock length to bottom out on the bumpstop before the tire does, prior to setting ride height? I am worried doing it this way the spring will not be loaded during droop and may cause problems in case the wheel gets unloaded during track time...

EDIT: Perhaps my grammar is horrible, for that I'm sorry. Just trying to get expert advice which is why I am in this thread-- here is my clarification:

I have set the spring to 0 preload (car on stands, sussy at full droop, spring is seated, no up and down movement) on both of my cars. I never hit bump stops at my ride height and tire compound.

BUT I maybe swapping out the suspension and since I have to set them all up again I am considering setting shock length so that the bumpstop bottoms out first rather than the tire against fender (pretty much what emilio was saying).

This is not something new to me as I've heard of this way of doing it before, but I did not like how with this way of the shocks being setup, the spring will inevitably have play at full droop (e.g. not seated). This can be bad once vehicle weight loads that corner again and the spring did not seat correctly. (or should I just add helper springs for this reason?)

As I said, I don't have issues of bottoming out w/ my ride height and tire compound as of now so I have no reason to change it, but if it would be better to set the shock to bottom out before the tire does, then I will.

http://www.shock-shop.com/images/Gen...%20divider.jpg

the top spring is like 10 lb/in just to hold your springs in place under droop.

So I need helper springs... is one way better than the other? I don't bottom out my shock at all with my ride height, spring rate and tire compound-- would it benefit me to make the shock bottom out first?

To be honest, I have no clue what you are saying/asking.

Bumpstop before the tire does? How are you adjusting your preload?

Please explain.

For a track or autocross specific set up and adjustable length shocks, I suggest setting shock length for maximum bump travel for the tire being used. If it's a street car mainly and ground clearance is an issue, then try a longer shock setting. No hard and fast rule or dimension here, it's trial and error.

The Xida length is optimized to be just a hair long with 225/45 race tires on our 15x9 +36. Tire touches when bump stop is about halfway into block height. With a narrower 205/50 on a 15x7 or 15x8 like an ITA, STS or PTE Miata would run the suspension will compress a tiny bit further before the tire hits the shock tower bulge/upper mount in front. In the rear, the shock will compress right up until the kinematic limit of the suspension, the bump stop going to block height just prior.

When choosing bump stops to maximize bump travel, you have to take a few things into account. With most billet aluminum upper mounts 225/45's on our 9's, the sidewall of the tire will just brush the upper front mount at full bump. Not an issue with smooth and compact alloy mounts. With an OEM NB mount, there is a sharp edge of the stamping that protrudes further into the tires path that could potentially damage the sidewall. So with the 225/45 & 9" and NB mount, you have to limit bump travel a bit unless you are running full OEM camber. Again, no hard and fast numbers here. Don't assume anything after reading this, go and check your car out to see what, if anything, contacts and if it will be a problem.

For competition set ups in general, I'll try to set shock length so that bump stop block height occurs part just after the tire starts hitting stuff and just before and metal to metal contact anywhere. The tire will flex a bit and that gives me a few more mm of bump travel. All our cars have a big polished area on the tub at the front shock tower bulge. Pretty common with our 8's and 9's from the pictures my customers send me.

Thank you for the reply. Now, if I set shock length for maximum bump travel for tire being used, that is essentially letting the bumpstop bottom out before the tire really bottoms out (so tire may scrub a little), am I right? I would rather scrub tires and bottom out the shock as I'm sure it is detrimental to shock life if it is bottoming out. So since bump travel is adjusted via shock length, spring height (e.g. preload whether positive or negative) would be used to set ride height... and if say a helper spring is needed for the desired ride height--let's make it 1" for ease-- that 1" of shock travel is pretty much wasted?

I am considering a set of FLEXs then, and my old method of keeping 0 preload and shock length for ride height would work with the kit right out of the box... but now it seems I would need to purchase helper springs if I were to set it up to maximize bump travel.,

Oh and btw, with 4.1F 4.4R heights with 15x8 et36 6ULs on 205/50-15" RE-11 with 10k rates up front, I have no problem with lack of travel-- that's not to mention that I have 20mm spacers up front inevitably worsening the wheel rate ratio, yet still does not bottom out.

I can't believe it... is my english this bad?

I said, "I've always set preload to 0"

If you need clarification on that, I also said, "keeping the spring seated at full droop"

METHOD #1... MY WAY
1) ZERO pre-load, spring (no helper) is seated at all times, even at full droop. Preload is set and forgotten. Set ride height via shock length. Done and done.

METHOD #2... Maximizing bump travel
1) Install shock, set shock length when wheel setup hits and bumpstop hits at the same time. (my fenders are shiny, from previous ride heights) Set and forget.
2) This means, ride height is set by the spring preload... negative preload to go lower or preloading the spring to go higher (depending on the setup). Helpers would be needed for this.

I was initially asking which method was better for performance as I've always done #1, and I've never had to use helper springs because that is why I thought I bought suspension with shock length adjustability-- so the spring remains seated.

If you want clarification, try not stating that you are adjusting the amount of preload. That is the way I read it.

After talking to Emilio about the Teins, a product that has never been in my shop, I understand what you are trying to say. The preload that you are referring to is changing the exposed shaft at right height, allowing you more travel in one direction or another. It's not that you are topping out the shock and preloading the spring more with the same right height.

I apologize for misunderstanding you, but using a product this unique you may want to mention the brand first.

While your spring may remain seated at full extension, you are starting at a higher ride height and not allowing the car to travel as much on compression.

It's OK to let the damper bottom out, it's designed to do just that without issue. You decide how much of that you want the tire to share. For me, it's just 5mm or so.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. Thank you for the reply. I set the spring to 0 preload, spring is not compressed at full droop. I don't see how I am starting at a higher ride height, not allowing the car to travel as much on compression. Are you suggesting I add helper springs and let it eat up some shock travel? I think only preloading the spring by 2" (on a 10kg/mm spring) would not allow the car to travel as much on compression because of that pre-load... it would need 1120 lbs on that corner to overcome the preload. With 0 preload at full droop, it is already compressing the moment I drop the car from stands...

With 10kg/mm (560lbs/in) rates up front, and with zero preload, the spring starts to compress immediately, and shock travel starts being used as soon as the vehicle's weight starts to act upon it. Assuming each corner is about 560 lbs, the spring and shock is already compressed 1"--spring compressed 1" and 1" of shock travel used up-- at static height.

If I've been setting up coil-overs wrong all this time, it makes me wonder why TEIN does not include helper springs for this. Their own manual says to set it the way I have set it (set spring preload to zero) and height via shock length.

Now I wish the TEINs come with helper springs. Adjusting for max bump travel and height via spring preload might lead to room btwn the spring and perches.

If you need helper springs and spring dividers either of use would be more than happy to help you.

Thanks, I came here looking for information, not where to buy helper springs. I don't even know where the ride height will end up yet as I am not sure if I am ready to throw off my height, alignment, and corner balance just yet. I would appreciate further technical responses, however.

It's funny you say that about the helper springs. Neither Emilio or I sell these parts, but both of us would be willing to help you contact the right people.

If you want to run helper springs, we can help you determine the correct ones and who has them. It's up to you on what set-up you choose for your car. We are just here to provide you with information so you can make a decision. Either way, our goal is to optimize your decision. At no point is anything going to be "sold" in this thread.

If you want to at least mitigate the "loose spring" issue, you can find a way to ziptie the springs to the top mount so they have the shock body to guide them back to the bottom perches if they ever are rattling loose in there.

In practice, when I asked Ground Control about "loose springs", they said it wasn't really an issue.

It's nice to see 949 and SD "crossing streams" in here.

To clarify, there are two different types of flat wound secondary springs; Tender and Helper.

That's a tender. Doesn't do anything to change wheel rate. Only job is to keep spring from rattling.

The Xida uses a 150 in/lb helper for example, which is about the same rate as the OEM front springs. It works to keep the tire planted at full extension where the much higher rate main springs runs out of stroke. Tender's are inexpensive, Helpers not so much.

Its like an allstar team.

OK so here's some confusion into the mix.

I've always understood:
helper = flat wire coil <10 lb/in to keep springs seated
tender = trapezoidal wire coil within normal rate range for creating your own dual / progressive rate suspension profile.

And from Eibach's website:

Semantics fail.

Yeah I guess so. Oops. Anyway, the important things is to understand there are two distinctly different functions with the auxiliary springs mentioned in this thread.

If you have 7 inches of spring and compare a 550# 7 inch spring to a 5 inch 550# spring with a 2 inch tender, which works better, why?

Better?

Just different. One stack will be a progressive rate through part of it's stroke, the other will be linear rate all the way through. You decide what will work best for your application. The stack will actually have a step in the rate, softer at first then stepping to a higher rate when the short helper goes to block height.

Hyperco FAQ and formula to calculate different combinations.

I agree. A bit surprising, but it is nice to see.

One reason is that Bernie isn't the type of guy to slam 949/AST/or FM in order to sell a set of revalves. And he doesn't seem to be the kind of guy to make people wait 6 months or a year to get a set.

Or maybe it's two companies with a "fresh" business philosophy where they understand what they're selling because they developed it, and also can play in the same sand-box.

And Emilio's enough of a gentlemen that he's welcomed Bernie to the forum and hasn't had the poor taste to hawk his wares on Bernie's thread. But luv fest aside, both of these fellows are experts in their field and it's great to have them spend their valuable and very limited time answering our questions. Thanks, fellows!

True, I've read enough threads where a vendor tried to talk smack about another vendor's product to try to get a sale. Emilio and FM know what it's like to be on the receiving end of that deal.

This thread is packed full of info and I've read every word of it.

Im ever so curious about the differences between the double and triple adjustable xidas. What kind of things can you adjust with the triples that the doubles can't.

Also, Berni or Emilio, have you thought about writing a book? lol

My understanding is that the double adjust the compression and rebound independently.

Triples separate low and high speed compression adjustments. Two concentric knobs on the remotes.

I'd say that VERY FEW people need triples.

Emilio, is there a reason why AST decided to increase compression and rebound together on the singles? Would rebound only have been less expensive to manufacture?

Cost wasn't a consideration in the case of the Xida-S. Adjusting both together is pretty standard for single adjustable monotubes. One can set up an SA monotube to adjust rebound only, with virtually no effect on compression. OTS Koni Sport/Race are like this I believe. The specific adjustment range and values of comp/rebound on the CS & S were my decision. The Tein Flex (twin tube) and MonoFlex (monotube) I had done a lot of experimenting with changed compression a bit with the rebound adjuster and I found it very useful when revalving. For the Xida's each click affects comp but we kept the bulk of the comp value and knee shape change towards the last few clicks near full stiff.

Let's break things down on compression and rebound to understand it a little better.

When you compress a spring, energy is being stored by the spring. When the spring extends, energy is being released.

The purpose of a shock is to absorb energy, and in return, control resonant frequencies.

The reason a shock needs less compression than rebound is because during compression you have energy going into the spring, and on rebound you have energy being released by the spring along, with the resonance.

A stiffer spring does not absorb more energy. Why? Because you are not transferring more weight. The weight of the car is the same no matter what spring is in the car. So, since you are not storing more energy, you store the same amount faster/shorter distance. On the other end, you are also releasing the energy faster with a stiffer spring. The reason for more rebound.

This is why when you go up on spring rate you also go up on rebound, and down on compression.

This being new to me I find myself easily confused with the explanations of what a shock and spring are doing as they go about their business. But if you don't mind humoring me a bit perhaps you can tell me whether the following simple analogy makes any sense:

I look at a spring as a mechanical storage device; it absorbs and stores energy as it is compressed, and releases it as it relaxes. It does this very efficiently and in this sense it's like a battery.

I look at a shock as an energy conversion device; it absorbs mechanical energy and converts it to heat energy. It also works with wonderful efficiency and in this sense it's like a light bulb.

In my analogy I'm going to hook up the battery and bulb with the following result:

When the car hits a bump most of the mechanical energy of the wheel traveling upwards is stored in the spring. In this oversimplified model you don't need compression damping at all, so let's pretend it's not there and the bulb remains dark.

As the wheel is traveling upwards the "battery" that is the spring is charged. When the wheel has reached its maximum elevation, mechanical energy input ends as does storage of that energy in the spring; the spring "battery" is fully charged for that bump event.

Since it's not our intent to maintain that store of energy, the energy stored in the spring is immediately transferred to the shock absorber, just as a battery's energy is released to a light bulb. The shock "bulb" glows brightly as the rapid conversion of mechanical to heat energy occurs in rebound.

Ideally, the shock "bulb" finally dims and goes out just as the wheel returns to it's neutral position. The battery is completely discharged, the bulb is extinguished, and everything is again ready to repeat the process at the next bump.

In my analogy the shock needs more rebound damping because that is when it converts the large amount of energy stored in the spring to heat. In compression it passively stands by as the spring does it's own job of storing that energy.

Yeah; of course it's much more complicated than that, and there are excellent reasons to have compression damping, but hopefully my simple analogy sheds some light on why the ratio of compression to rebound damping doesn't have to be 1:1, or any other particular value, other that that dictated by the proper function of the entire system for that particular car, road, and driving circumstances.

So what happens if we remove the spring "battery" and make the shock "bulb" do all of the work during the compression phase. This new system has lots of compression damping, but no rebound damping; in other words, the opposite of the first system.

Imagine the same bump, but this time rather than store the mechanical energy from the bump in the spring "battery" we've decided to convert as much of it as possible to heat energy immediately in the shock "bulb". As the wheel travels upwards the shock "bulb" glows brightly as that mechanical energy is dissipated as heat. As the last of the energy is converted the bulb grows dim and finally extinguishes. In this case, and with no energy remaining to extend the wheel, the car settles at a lower elevation - dare I call it "jacked down"?

This is also consistent with the state of energy (in this case, potential). We started at one energy level with the car at a certain elevation, then we removed energy from the car "system" by converting some of it to heat, and the (potential) energy state is now lower, as is the car.

I'd disagree with that. As spring rates increase, so do ride frequencies and therefore critical damping. Bump damping must go up also.

Phil

Pics of your trophy case?

The hardest thing to remember is that the shock has a function, and so does the spring.

When you try to tune one for the other's function it is only a compromise. If you want to do it proper, know what to change and why.

My battery and bulb analogy says otherwise.

But kidding aside, and considering that lots of us don't understand ride frequencies and critical damping very well, could you break it down and explain it like you would to a four year old.

Based on my limited reading, tuners increase bump to give the effect of a stiffer spring and give faster turn in. It's the same concept as increasing tire pressure but there probably is a limit before ride quality suffers.

I agree that stiffer bump damping replicates a stiffer spring, but that's more of a band-aid than the best solution.

KINEMATICS MOMENT:
spring rate is the resistance to displacement.
damping rate is the resistance to displacement velocity.

so when you increase spring rate, you're saying "i dont want the suspension to compress as much under the same loading conditions"

and when you increase compression damping, you're saying "I don't want the suspension to compress as fast" or conversely, "I want the suspension to compress more SLOWLY"





compression damping rate doesn't change how far your car leans in a turn, but it does determine how long it takes to set in that lean.

This suggests that the more compression damping you have the longer it will take for your suspension to take a set since the rate of movement slows but the total movement doesn't. Yes? I assume the same holds true for rebound damping as well.

Look at the newer shock technology that is available.

With Penske you have blow-off pistons to bypass more oil on sharp velocity spikes. You have Ohlin's with their DFV technology, also bypassing more oil on sharp/high velocity movements. Hell, you even have Bilstein with their digressive valving.

Each one of these shock companies use different ways of decreasing shock damping on the the compression spike. Why? So it doesn't affect the chassis. When you put more compression into a shock you end up unsettling the chassis because one tire hit a bump.

I never would have realized this without your thread. Thanks.

it's the "Speed bump at 50mph is smoother" design.

at that speed, the force of the bump is so intense that it overcomes the spring rate and the only thing acting on the wheel is the damping force. how fast your wheel can get out of the way of the bump is what determines the feel as you drive over it.

too high and it launches the chassis up in the air. too low and the wheel ricochets off and breaks traction.

but that compression value at very high speed (50mph bumps) is not the same that is responsible for how your car reacts to changes in direction or acceleration (+ or -).

With high speed compression, the wheel has to accelerate through the low speed compression first. With more low speed compression, the wheel may never see the high speed end of the compression.

So, when you use low speed compression to tune a car you end up unsettling the chassis when you do hit a bump because your suspension is already being over damped on the low speed end. Adding more velocity is only making things worse.

Another problem with compression tuning is that it will work for some turns and not the others. This is simply because not every turn is the same speed. In relation, not every turn is the same shock velocity.

Why do you want a velocity dependant tuning tool, especially on the street?

It sounds so much easier to tune with the shock doing one thing, the spring doing the other. Then you match the shock to the spring, the spring to the car.

Some of the confusion is due to not separating two jobs the damper has to do.
Roll control (low speed) is one thing, the other is control over bumps.
That is why good dampers have low and high adjustments.
Low speed control is for roll (turns) high speeds control is for bumps.
Dampers dont control the amount of weight transfer, they control the RATE of the weight transfer.

Don't you use swaybars and springrate to tune for roll? Springs function to support the vehicle. Shocks function to control the spring.

Dammit Bernie...stop teasing us with these hypothetical questions and scatter shot explanations...I want you to write a 100 page explanation on shocks, starting with basic theory and ending with real world application from your own experiences. Keith Tanner has done like 3 of these Miata books now...contact his publisher and work something out. Or ask Corky Bell or Matt Kramer about their books. It's absolutely worth it. I'd pay $30 for it.

OK, let's look a ride frequencies first. Take a soft rate spring and put a weight on one end and fix the other end to something rigid. Now pull on the weight and you'll notice the spring will naturally extend and compress; this is it's natural frequency. A softer spring will have a lower natural frequency, stiffer will be higher. Ride frequencies are the natural undamped frequency of the body in ride, but you need to understand that both mass and the motion ratio of the suspension are required for calculating this. Also important is we're interested in the ride frequency, not just the raw spring rate; a 350lb/in spring on a NB will have a different ride frequency on a NC mainly due to the change in motion ratio.

When you add damping to a spring, you allow the spring to reach steady state rather than eternally vibrate at its natural frequency. Damping does not effect the steady state position, rather the time in which it takes to get there. Less than critical damping and you have the fastest response time but overshoot, more than critical damping you have a slow sluggish response.

Bernie's made some comments on compression tuning and I'd add:

There are 3 main things to look at with compression and rebound dyno traces. The trace is split into 3 different sections:

Low speed rate
Knee position
High speed rate

There are schools of thought that low speed compression tuning should be controlling weight transfer, but if you build a damper to have critical damping to control a couple of thousand lbs of car in moment of inertia you're going to screw the ride. Rather I use low speed compression to control the ride frequency and add some vertical loading to the tire. Too little damping here and you end up with a bouncy ride as the spring wants to keep vibrating, too much and you get the horrible boulevard jerk on smooth surfaces where you're bouncing off the tire sidewall.

The knee point determines where the damping changes to ride, and this is where the main shims open or 'blow-offs' in the damper. The high speed rate is much more digressive than the low speed rate.

The actual stiffness, or numbers, is not nearly as important as the high speed rate. If you look at a Bilstien R-Package damper dyno trace you'll notice the high speed rate is almost flat. If we remember that the damper controls the rate to steady state, you're going to need more damping over a large hit than a smaller one (the damping available is based on the velocity of the piston), but the Bilstein is not offering that. You could add stiffness to the high speed and keep the same rate, but it wouldn't change the outcome; you'd have the right damping at one point and everywhere else you'd either have too much or too little damping.

Phil

Generally speaking, springs and sways have different functions even though that act together in roll. You should be using springs for your chosen ride frequency and look to have a higher frequency at the rear than the front. This allows the car to move as one over bumps and undulations to prevent the car from pitching (the front will hit the bump before the rear, so the rear needs to 'catch-up').

Sways are used for roll moment distribution. You should also match the sway rate with the spring rate if you want to have correct damping in roll. Slapping on a stiff sway will make you underdamped in roll. You'll get quicker response, a pointy car, but you'll also get overshoot of steady state and nasty contact patch loadings.

Once you've done the spring/sway stuff, you can then go on to design damper rates.

P