Spherical bearings - Page 2 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain discuss the wondrous effects of boost and your miata...

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-04-2015, 04:11 PM   #21
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Anderson, SC
Posts: 149
Total Cats: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafy View Post

Sharky, you need to have your friend measure those sphericals and then buy the same size from NHBB. NHBB sells the only sphericals with actual thrust load testing done on them, aurora only gives you a rule of thumb based on the radial load rating, NHBB gives you an axial load rating on some of them.
Thanks for the info. Not sure what Ohlins uses standard, but I'm sure there's other options. Good to know for future reference, as I believe the car is sold. He's tracking an FRS now.
sharkythesharkdogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 01:18 AM   #22
Elite Member
 
codrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 3,877
Total Cats: 344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huesmann View Post
The Mustang chassis was based on the Ford Fairmont platform, introduced in 1978. The only SLA suspension ever available was expensive aftermarket kits.
IIRC, that chassis has struts because it was intended to support FWD applications as well.

--Ian
codrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 12:43 AM   #23
SadFab CEO
iTrader: (3)
 
hi_im_sean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: your mom's house phoenix, AZ
Posts: 3,903
Total Cats: 612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Interesting...

Given how enormous and expensive the Mustang has gotten over the years, I find it difficult to imagine that packaging constraints or cost dictated the change to strut suspension as opposed to the traditional double A-arm.
as mentioned, its a "*****" platform, designed for many different layouts, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Fox_platform#SN-95
hi_im_sean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 01:17 AM   #24
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,317
Total Cats: 1,915
Default

As someone with a background in design and manufacturing, I still fail to comprehend the desire to share a common "platform" across vehicles with differing wheelbases and drivetrain configurations.

Different presses, different jigs, different molds... Where exactly is the commonality?
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 01:29 AM   #25
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
patsmx5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,796
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
As someone with a background in design and manufacturing, I still fail to comprehend the desire to share a common "platform" across vehicles with differing wheelbases and drivetrain configurations.

Different presses, different jigs, different molds... Where exactly is the commonality?
Some of the engineering caries over when platform sharing, which allows them to spend more time/money designing that platform well vs multiple platforms, ultimately saving them money.
patsmx5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 01:40 AM   #26
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Lebanon, TN
Posts: 1,668
Total Cats: 63
Default

I will say that the upper hat and spherical bearing made a very noticeable difference. We did only that mod at that time and without proper alignment (aka put it in a drove around) it made the steering far more precise. The 2000 Mustangs are built more like trucks. Like trucks with fail struts and fail 4 link rear.
TorqueZombie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 01:50 AM   #27
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,317
Total Cats: 1,915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by patsmx5 View Post
Some of the engineering caries over when platform sharing, which allows them to spend more time/money designing that platform well vs multiple platforms, ultimately saving them money.
It sounds good in theory, but I've participated in that mass hallucination on several projects. You wind up spending way more time in design revision and document control than if you'd just started with a clean sheet and a parts bin.

That's one thing Mazda did right on the NA. Threw it together out of discarded bits of other cars, but without deluding themselves into thinking that it'd be a good idea to start the chassis design by laying a sheet of translucency over the old F or H blueprints.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 02:49 AM   #28
Elite Member
 
codrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 3,877
Total Cats: 344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
It sounds good in theory, but I've participated in that mass hallucination on several projects. You wind up spending way more time in design revision and document control than if you'd just started with a clean sheet and a parts bin.

That's one thing Mazda did right on the NA. Threw it together out of discarded bits of other cars, but without deluding themselves into thinking that it'd be a good idea to start the chassis design by laying a sheet of translucency over the old F or H blueprints.
Perhaps. I'm a software guy, and if we threw out the source code and started over every time we built a new router, we wouldn't get very far.

The NA may be a clean-sheet, but the NB is barely changed at all from the NA, and the NC shared a lot of parts with the Rx-8. Dunno about the ND.

I suspect that platform sharing makes more sense for more "normal" cars, where you just want to crank about a few different sedans of different sizes and luxury levels in order to appeal to more buyers. Trying to apply it to sports cars leads to things like the 350Z weighing 400 pounds more than it really ought to have.

--Ian
codrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 02:56 AM   #29
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
triple88a's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,131
Total Cats: 598
Default

I'm more so surprised that each manufacturer uses a different frame for each model. By now i would have expected 2-3 different types of sub frames and thats it. The only other difference being in the body mounts.
triple88a is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 05:27 PM   #30
Elite Member
iTrader: (15)
 
patsmx5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8,796
Total Cats: 248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by codrus View Post
Perhaps. I'm a software guy, and if we threw out the source code and started over every time we built a new router, we wouldn't get very far.

The NA may be a clean-sheet, but the NB is barely changed at all from the NA, and the NC shared a lot of parts with the Rx-8. Dunno about the ND.

I suspect that platform sharing makes more sense for more "normal" cars, where you just want to crank about a few different sedans of different sizes and luxury levels in order to appeal to more buyers. Trying to apply it to sports cars leads to things like the 350Z weighing 400 pounds more than it really ought to have.

--Ian
This. Some things are not worth starting over on. You said it better than I could have.
patsmx5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2015, 11:11 PM   #31
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 143
Total Cats: 8
Default

I agree with leafy, they're pretty far down on my list of things that will make a difference on the miata setup. Honestly the better value would be in the rod eye solution up thread. At least that gets you access to lots of good motorsports shocks.
PatCleary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2015, 12:01 PM   #32
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kensington, MD
Posts: 324
Total Cats: -26
Default

The more parts that interchange between models, the smaller the inventory system has to be for both production and maintenance.
huesmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2015, 12:03 PM   #33
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 951
Total Cats: -252
Default

Shocks and struts function differently in terms of arc travel(AFAIK). What gains you'd find with a strut probably don't translate to a shock.
wannafbody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 10:25 PM   #34
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (3)
 
emilio700's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,311
Total Cats: 1,334
Default

Bearings, effectively, don't have hysteresis that rubber bushings have. This eliminates a lot of undamped movement in the coilover.

Beyond that undamped movement, the rubber bushings bind and have their own spring rate. As the damper is compressed, the lower half travels through a shallow arc while the top is constrained. This swinging back and forth acts on the coil spring, leveraged against the shock seals. This lateral and twisting force adds a lot of seal drag and not in a linear curve.

Most "pillow ball" mounts just replace the rubber bushing with a bearing. Unfortunately, the greatest tangential loads imparted on the shock shaft are from the spring acting on the body mount off axis. That generate a lateral thrust load. Some higher end coilovers will have a separate, semi isolated "coaxial" upper perch just for the spring that is allowed to swing independent of the body mount. This coaxial perch mount is the inspiration for all the JDM style coilovers with "pillow ball" mounts but without the actual coaxial perch function. The coaxial perches takes up a few mm of space that has to be allowed for in the layout of the coilover to insure the correct bump/droop travel and stroke.

In a nutshell, it's friction we're reducing or eliminating by replacing bushings with bearings.

Teaser of the new SuperMiata coaxial billet mounts we just put into production. Coming around December (not taking pre-orders). These will be available as an option for Gen 1/2 Xidas for $299 for the set of four. We're adding options for 70mm (Tein) and 2.5" spring perches along with a simple adapter kit so any damper with a NB sized 12mm pin can run them. So Bilsteins, Koni's or whatever else you have.

We also reshaped them a bit for tire clearance. These are much narrower than an NB mount but still fully supported on the body.


emilio700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 11:01 PM   #35
Elite Member
iTrader: (3)
 
concealer404's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,464
Total Cats: 782
Default

hnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
concealer404 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 11:04 PM   #36
SADFab Destructive Testing Engineer
iTrader: (5)
 
aidandj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Beaverton, USA
Posts: 17,992
Total Cats: 1,459
Default

<p>Thank you for the reasonable pricing (in my eyes) emilio. You're product will be selling for half as much as some others on the market and looks ****.</p>
aidandj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 11:38 PM   #37
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago (Over two miles from Wrigley Field. Fuck the Cubs. Fuck them in their smarmy goat-hole.)
Posts: 26,317
Total Cats: 1,915
Default

I swear, I wasn't deliberately shilling for Emilio.



(where's my check?)
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2015, 11:48 PM   #38
Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: KY
Posts: 699
Total Cats: 50
Default

Damn that's cheap. Awesome.
jpreston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2015, 08:26 AM   #39
Elite Member
iTrader: (3)
 
concealer404's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 8,464
Total Cats: 782
Default

Are these taller than stock NB?
concealer404 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2015, 12:37 PM   #40
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 143
Total Cats: 8
Default

Emilio, do you have any data on change in shock performance? I do believe that they work, I'm just not sure how much of an effect they'll have. They're pretty low on my list (pretty much after replacing every other bushing with sphericals) if I decide to keep my Miata, but I'm open to reconsidering.

How do they take up axial loads. Most spherical bearings either aren't rated for them, or aren't rated for very much. I trust with your name on them they work, I'm just curious.

Also, I think that the JDM style pillow ball mounts reflect the fact that a lot of these go on McPherson struts, where they do actually do something.
PatCleary is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another Alternator thread ihiryu General Miata Chat 9 09-28-2015 11:22 AM
2003 VVT Head/Valve Cover/Actuator/Coil Packs - Low Miles! - $250 StratoBlue1109 Miata parts for sale/trade 7 09-24-2015 04:50 PM
91 Celica manual trans, is this fucked? Onyxyth Insert BS here 1 09-19-2015 08:27 PM
SOLD-Rear knuckle/spindle upper spherical bearing adapter hi_im_sean Miata parts for sale/trade 1 09-16-2015 01:45 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:55 PM.