Lowered on KW Variant 3

[sparkyg]

mehhhh, I think things are better left alone.

Not going to come to a reasonable solution since there will the constant shadow of doubt between a manufacturer of goods and an end-user personal data.

KW suspension has been loved by many but cannot be the one-fit solves all suspension answer.

Thx for all the tech info Orb, as always very informative and certainly allows end-users to be much better informed prior to a purchase.

[sparkyg]

To Glen@KW

Is removing the rear swaybar required if you install the KW suspension. I am a little confused by this.

[Orb]

Originally Posted by sparkyg

mehhhh, I think things are better left alone.

Not going to come to a reasonable solution since there will the constant shadow of doubt between a manufacturer of goods and an end-user personal data.

KW suspension has been loved by many but cannot be the one-fit solves all suspension answer.

Thx for all the tech info Orb, as always very informative and certainly allows end-users to be much better informed prior to a purchase.

No problem...I am out and your comments I would very much agree with. I'm not going spam this thread with junk anymore. Back to something more enjoyable.

Orb

[Glen@KW]

Originally Posted by Orb

It doesn’t change anything if you now say the tires used were the same.

Orb,

Check your email. Once i receive your response, I will post regardless if you are out or not.

sparkyg, I will respond once I receive an email from Orb.

Until then.

[serven7]

Originally Posted by BMW-M-Mexico

I´m getting all confused!

So, all Ive heard is Orb say that this set up will add understeer and no one has yet addressed that. Maybe Im confused too?

[Green-Eggs]

You are something else, if you can't drive well then it must be the car's fault << "must figure out problem because it can't be me, I'm the control" - Orb

Let me clarify in case you don't understand , since your car doesn't give you the sensation of feeling fast then you would require to make adjustments to make it feel like it does. Are you adjusting the suspension to facilitate your limited driving ability? IMO, drive the hell out of the car & when it can't give you more - make improvements/adjustments.

Bold - Glen
Regular - Orb
Red - Sam

You know, I going have to respond to your half truths and lies and for what ever reason you only know. The only hijacking here is from you from you and Sam. No matter what marketing junk is presented you are still evading the questions. Let go through this one point at time.

I do not hold either Sam or Orb in contempt in this as they both have their own points of view, and do not feel insulted by either’s efforts or posts.

I think you’re getting a little high and mighty on your self as you speak like mediator or something. Obviously you know SAM very well…you both have the same agenda which is damage control.

I'm giving my point of view, can't speak for Glen. Damage control?? You think what you write is the only opinion out there so you are causing damage? HAHAHA

I am not an engineer, and will never be one. Allot of this theory and number crunching is beyond me at this point, but what I do understand and respond to is Customer Feedback & Lap Times.

You technical understanding is not great or you wouldn’t be posting nonsense…more on this later.

Orb believes that KW has miss engineered the kit for his car based on the factory spring rate balance front to rear, and feels the KW setup introduces even more understeer to the platform.

I never said anything about poor engineering. In fact, the designs are very good. Your kits produce more understreer because of some very basic physics. Let me repeat this basic 101 of suspension behaviour that you should know. “The stiffer end will lose traction first” and that is a fact. Now look at the spring rate in this thread and we see they are all stiffer in the front end. Therefore, the front of the car will lose traction first and this is understeer. It is no more complicated than this to start with. I was never unhappy with the product other than the defective spring at first. The simple fact is that the KW were slated for replacement with JRZ several months ago once I found out what was happening. No big deal…I’m real happy about getting the JRZ.

I have presented that KW has had multiple platform success stories with our product, including the 1 Series testing with a documented and GPS verified 9.4 second reduction in lap times.

This is not a success story but a lot of useless information. Please show me how you would quantify the data or at least compare it. What we have a one series that has no LSD. The tuning method chosen for this car is to use a good old big front bar to aid in rear traction. The key drivers in this setup up front tire size, camber and front roll with tire size being the most important thing of all. Oddly enough the tire sizes have been deleted for all the other cars except the OEM (don’t tell me that a testing engineer would not write this down). Going by my data you will at least need a 255 size tire to make this work given a 2000 lb load (265 would be better). It is not possible to quantify the results because each car is running many different setting so you can not validate if the KW suspension is indeed better. The front camber setting on the faster car is no surprise. Given the spring rates of the faster car the inside front wheel will go air born before 0.9 G and much sooner that the other car. I’m really sure 3 wheels on the ground is better that 4 without thinking about. Glen, you are showing KW is real engineering company indeed…you should be embarrassed presenting this as meaningful. I got a lot more info from JRZ just for the asking and it looks like others will to.

It is useful information with regards to the 1-series because it shows a control & improvements, with that being the case then the M3 should be a success as well. You have a 3-series which is closer to the 1-series & not an M3.

Without trying to sound condescending in any way, we would need to inject additional real world testing from Orb’s project to come to any sort of conclusion.

I suggest you make a line item list of what you need and also state an objective. You know my technical background so you are being condescending. Lets do it….wait a minute…did you say that you are going run a 7-Post simulation on this so I sort agreed because I though it would be interesting. Well have to get to your purpose of contacting me. Again, what a side track back to the main question everyone had or did you forget.

I don't know your background nor do I care. Your background doesn't make you smarter or more credible. In many cases - it limits how one thinks. The cause is the inability to adjust to other's thought processes (I'm Orb with a degree from ACME U which is better than your school so I'm better/smarter than you). You are not providing any real data, just calculations.

Oh Great Orb, why don't you ask the original question again?

I feel compelled to let this community know that the email correspondence between KW and Orb has been discontinued this morning at Orb’s request, as he believes that there is nothing we can do to help him, as he feels KW is not accepting his findings.

Wow, that was news to me and I was last to know. I questioning you motives, and in all fairness, I restated the question “What is your purpose in contacting me and to what end”. I gave you ample time to reply…it didn’t happen. You can’t help me because I need my rear damper retuned and that where it ended…I not sure why you can’t understand that. I never asked nor implied that I wanted any help. I only agreed to the 7 post test because, well…I’m curious. What finding are you talking about?

I have disclosed all of KW’s information on our setup and telemetry on the 1 Series testing. I am awaiting our 7-post dyno data on this platform as well, and will post once I receive it.

Great, lets spam a M3 Forum with one series car data. I’m sure you can get e92 M3 7-post dyno data but I guess it was never done or you gotten it by now…correct? Hopefully, you will present the data for a M3 with a bit more care and not embarrass your company.

In order to continue a rational discussion, we would need Orb to produce real world testing of equal value.

Be very specific what you want and state the objective. No more generalities please.

I would invite Orb to post his current setup and any and all information on his vehicle and its performance issues and we can discuss openly with all involved.

I am game for that. I will have the JRZ on my car shortly so we can compare them to the KW. The only performance issue with my car is a bit of oversteer but it is fairly neutral. This was deliberate for validating my worksheet. I am certain this is not what you mean because your making it about me when it is about the question your not answering.


Glen, I tired to show a little respect here and wanted to give you an opportunity to share something to this forum. Instead you made a big unnecessary drama to side step the questions. I truly wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt but you have shown your true colors just because I posted some technical information.

Orb

So you don't have the JRZ suspension on the car yet but can see into the future that you will have oversteer?




A little understeer helps control the car at high speeds, oversteer will get you in trouble really fast. Most people want a little understeer. Want to feel precise steering with a little oversteer, drive a Carrera GT. ACR Viper has both understeer & oversteer depending how it's driven. The M3 with KW & a little understeer is fantastic, you want to fight a little to raise the limit.





Videos from YouTube

Loaded BMW E46 M3 CSL - The quote provided earlier was from the gentleman that drove this car

Link -

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZL7T9BD_Q3k&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZL7T9BD_Q3k&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


Dodge Viper ACR - comes standard with KW (not first rate/choice driver but he did well). We all know from previous model Vipers what junk they are in terms of handling. What's funny is that while people were arguing about Nissan GT-R versus Porsche GT2, this came from the sidelines & beat them both.

Link -

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/08nxInpgTGc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/08nxInpgTGc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Originally Posted by serven7

I´m getting all confused!
So, all Ive heard is Orb say that this set up will add understeer and no one has yet addressed that. Maybe Im confused too?

I'm confused as well but what I know is if it works well then drive it well. How can someone tell how much improvements there is by the way the car feels? My ass does not have a clock timer on it If the car is faster by 3 seconds around the track, can one tell right away? How does one know what the limits are compared to someone else? Real numbers tell all, if the car is softer and faster & doesn't feel like it's going to spin out to my sudden death then I'm happy. It always helps to be faster than the next guy as well

Most people don't drive their car to the limit

[EZ_TUR90]

WOW THAT LOOKS SICK. Clean Ride!!!

[sparkyg]

I think what was being looked for was a quantitative reason for the KW suspension difference in spring constant and how it related to understeer,

There was a formula presented, lets analyze the formula, the assumptions and if it is correct great, if not, then lets discuss it. The formula suggests that the KM suspension will understeer more, not less. Okay, lets talk about it. Is the formula correct? If so why does the KW suspension appear on paper to cause more understeer given the the spring rates. If this is not true, explain why.

What won't work here is a qualitative explanation. The butt dyno may be correct but if the car is faster and handles better then there should be a clear technical answer that can be put on paper based on formulae.

The technical reasonings really need to be the basis for the conclusion. The butt dyno can follow, but not lead the reasoning.

I appreciate Glen's input and Orb's pursuit of the truth. While things may get a little heated it would be great to understand things better.

Thx all.

[michaeldorian]

Originally Posted by sparkyg

I think what was being looked for was a quantitative reason for the KW suspension difference in spring constant and how it related to understeer,

There was a formula presented, lets analyze the formula, the assumptions and if it is correct great, if not, then lets discuss it. The formula suggests that the KM suspension will understeer more, not less. Okay, lets talk about it. Is the formula correct? If so why does the KW suspension appear on paper to cause more understeer given the the spring rates. If this is not true, explain why.

What won't work here is a qualitative explanation. The butt dyno may be correct but if the car is faster and handles better then there should be a clear technical answer that can be put on paper based on formulae.

The technical reasonings really need to be the basis for the conclusion. The butt dyno can follow, but not lead the reasoning.

I appreciate Glen's input and Orb's pursuit of the truth. While things may get a little heated it would be great to understand things better.

Thx all.

Well said.

I'm curious, as the spring rates on the KW system do suggest a tendency to create under-steer. If similar ratios are being applied to the 1 series, and we assume the same effect is happening with the 1-series, is the increase under-steer the main catalyst for the quicker laptimes?

It addition to better lap times, it would be great to know how what was actually improved on each suspension test. Even better if it was data from an E92 M3.

I.e. After changing the stock 1 series OEM setup to KW V3, the increase in spring rate in both the front and rear, improved the car's under steer characteristics leading to better lap times. (Paraphrasing and needs more detail of course, but you get the point. )

Hopefully the "thinkers" on this thread can continue to chime in on this discussion.

[sparkyg]

Also, was the rear swaybar purposely ditched? Is this mandatory? Is this recommended in this case only or all KW suspension.

Originally Posted by michaeldorian

Well said.

I'm curious, as the spring rates on the KW system do suggest a tendency to create under-steer. If similar ratios are being applied to the 1 series, and we assume the same effect is happening with the 1-series, is the increase under-steer the main catalyst for the quicker laptimes?

It addition to better lap times, it would be great to know how what was actually improved on each suspension test. Even better if it was data from an E92 M3.

I.e. After changing the stock 1 series OEM setup to KW V3, the increase in spring rate in both the front and rear, improved the car's under steer characteristics leading to better lap times. (Paraphrasing and needs more detail of course, but you get the point. )

Hopefully the "thinkers" on this thread can continue to chime in on this discussion.

[Glen@KW]

Hello Everyone,

Your patience on my response to this thread is much appreciated during this holiday season.

Unfortunately due to pre booked Race Team and OEM testing on our 7 post dyno during December, we did not have an empty slot before our holiday closure on the 22nd to get a M3 in.

Therefore, I will not have any answers to the main question of suspension frequency & understeer that you are asking about until my German staff return from their well earned Christmas break on January 7th, and are able to schedule in both a standard 3 Series and a M3.

Today I spoke with the German Head of Engineering, and he has assured me that this will be no problem, and will be booked in ASAP when they return. From there, the resulting data will be presented to the community for review.

[michaeldorian]

Originally Posted by Glen@KW

Hello Everyone,

Your patience on my response to this thread is much appreciated during this holiday season.

Unfortunately due to pre booked Race Team and OEM testing on our 7 post dyno during December, we did not have an empty slot before our holiday closure on the 22nd to get a M3 in.

Therefore, I will not have any answers to the main question of suspension frequency & understeer that you are asking about until my German staff return from their well earned Christmas break on January 7th, and are able to schedule in both a standard 3 Series and a M3.

Today I spoke with the German Head of Engineering, and he has assured me that this will be no problem, and will be booked in ASAP when they return. From there, the resulting data will be presented to the community for review.

Glen,

Thank you for the update. Looking forward to the findings.

[Glen@KW]

Originally Posted by sparkyg

Not going to come to a reasonable solution since there will the constant shadow of doubt between a manufacturer of goods and an end-user personal data.

sparkyg, Your point is well taken, and frankly is a large personal concern of mine, and one reason why many manufacturers do not get involved in forums.

From my personal point of view it is disheartening to think that anything that I post as a ranking manufacturer’s representative is downplayed, discounted and even argued, even when validated by 3rd parties or sanctioning bodies.

Information such as:

• Races & Series won by KW Equipped vehicles
  
  
• Vehicle Manufactures, Tuners, and Race Teams that trust KW to help their cars perform to their fullest abilities.
  
  
• Magazine Tests, Racing Data of KW Equipped vehicles etc..

It is still amazing to me that all of this irrefutable data can be put into question in a single post by an anonymous user.

That is the beauty of the internet I guess.

I am not saying that you should trust KW or any other manufacturers 100%, you NEED to verify what we are saying.

What I am saying is that you need to DEMAND the same quantifiable information and background from everyone that will offer you advice.

Personally, I can say that I am an accountable automotive enthusiast, working with a team of likeminded individuals worldwide. We are fortunate to live and breathe what we do.

To back this claim of accountability up, I have added my phone and email information to my signature, and I invite any and all of you to contact me anytime if you have questions regarding KW products or my posts here, and I will do my best to get you answers.

[Omar@ActiveAutowerke]

Glen,

Thank you for taking time to share this information with the board. We have been using KW for quite sometime now and it has never let us down. We build a few track cars here and there but this year we were able to enter our own E46 M3 into the One Lap of America race without much to prepare. The driver of the E46 M3 was shocked when we explained the type of suspension upgrade we were running.There is no doubt in our mind that without the KW Suspension we would have had a much more difficult time winning first place in class for the 2008 One Lap of America Race. We now run KW's on our E46 M3, 335, and E92 M3 and we are pleased with each car.

My $.02

[sparkyg]

Thx Glen@KW

Is there a source for suspension info that you have that talks about the rear swaybar delete or that talks about some of the formulae we have been discussing.

Maybe taking the vendor out of the discussion and going to another source will clear up any confusion in suspension dynamics.

Thx anyhow.

[bigjae1976]

First, Badfish's car looks bad@ss.

Second, I do like how Orb's argument lead to KW's response which probably made a lot of viewers more informed.

[serven7]

Originally Posted by Glen@KW

Therefore, I will not have any answers to the main question of suspension frequency & understeer that you are asking about until my German staff return from their well earned Christmas break on January 7th, and are able to schedule in both a standard 3 Series and a M3.

Im looking foward to the results!!!

[Radiation Joe]

sparkyg,

You've been questioning the KW set-up based upon a "formula" presented by someone who professes to understand suspension engineering. He is dead wrong, and the successful set-ups from Ground-Control and TCKline prove it. I have no reason to believe that the KW set-up is far from optimum for the market they are selling to.

If I had applied the "magic number" methodology to my e46 with a .46 wheel ratio, Orbs logic would have me using a 2600 lb spring in the rear with my 500 lb springs in the front.

1.1 * 500 / (0.46 * 0.46) = 2600

By the way, contrary to what Orb wrote, you do not square the wheel ratio when calculating the wheel spring rate. This is mechanical engineering 101. Even without squaring the wheel ratio, the formula comes out with an absurd rear spring rate 1.1 * 500 / .46 = 1200

Poppycock!

The correct spring to use in the rear of an e46 with 500 lb front springs is a 550 lb spring. I can see no reason why the e9x chassis will require anything much different than this. This is because there is no formula for determining the proper spring rate. It's a function of the design of the car. Do you really think a GT3 Porsche will behave in a similar manner to a Ford Mustang when the "magic number" methodology is applied? I think not. Every single person who drove my e46 with the exception of Steve Dinan (he said it was too stiff) thought it was the best balanced e46 they had ever driven. The magic number theory says the e46 needs >200% stiffer rear springs than the acknowledged best set-up.

You don't have to believe what I'm saying. Just keep in mind that just because someone throws a bunch of formulas at you doesn't mean those formulas are valid for the argument at hand.

90% of the statistics you read on automotive forums are incorrect.

[serven7]

^Thanks!

[tightie]

Seems like Orb is MIA now... hahaha

[Orb]

Originally Posted by Radiation Joe

sparkyg,

You've been questioning the KW set-up based upon a "formula" presented by someone who professes to understand suspension engineering. He is dead wrong, and the successful set-ups from Ground-Control and TCKline prove it. I have no reason to believe that the KW set-up is far from optimum for the market they are selling to.

If I had applied the "magic number" methodology to my e46 with a .46 wheel ratio, Orbs logic would have me using a 2600 lb spring in the rear with my 500 lb springs in the front.

1.1 * 500 / (0.46 * 0.46) = 2600

By the way, contrary to what Orb wrote, you do not square the wheel ratio when calculating the wheel spring rate. This is mechanical engineering 101. Even without squaring the wheel ratio, the formula comes out with an absurd rear spring rate 1.1 * 500 / .46 = 1200

Poppycock!

The correct spring to use in the rear of an e46 with 500 lb front springs is a 550 lb spring. I can see no reason why the e9x chassis will require anything much different than this. This is because there is no formula for determining the proper spring rate. It's a function of the design of the car. Do you really think a GT3 Porsche will behave in a similar manner to a Ford Mustang when the "magic number" methodology is applied? I think not. Every single person who drove my e46 with the exception of Steve Dinan (he said it was too stiff) thought it was the best balanced e46 they had ever driven. The magic number theory says the e46 needs >200% stiffer rear springs than the acknowledged best set-up.

You don't have to believe what I'm saying. Just keep in mind that just because someone throws a bunch of formulas at you doesn't mean those formulas are valid for the argument at hand.

90% of the statistics you read on automotive forums are incorrect.

Wow, what I can say other than maybe you should go back to school and get your grade 10 Math because I see you’re having some major problems. If you think I’m wrong then prove it without the theatrics and be civilized. Sparkyg is a mechanical engineer so I know you just insulted him.

Anyone can determine the motion ratio with little effort. You need to know the following:

• Rear corner weight of the vehicle
• Spring length and rate (550 lb/in)
• Compress spring length at ride height.

I’m done with your nonsense.

Orb

[Radiation Joe]

Originally Posted by Orb

Wow, what I can say other than maybe you should go back to school and get your grade 10 Math because I see you’re having some major problems. If you think I’m wrong then prove it without the theatrics and be civilized. Sparkyg is a mechanical engineer so I know you just insulted him.

Anyone can determine the motion ratio with little effort. You need to know the following:

• Rear corner weight of the vehicle
• Spring length and rate (550 lb/in)
• Compress spring length at ride height.

I’m done with your nonsense.

Orb

Sorry to upset you.