Vorshlag BRZ/FRS Project Development Thread

[Fair!]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ/FRS Project Development Thread

continued from above



We have been keeping an eye on the used prices of these cars and recently she found some listings on Craigslist offered by a body shop / car dealer in our area that specializes in 86 cars. He usually buys them with some "history", fixes them up, and sells them at lower than normal prices. All on the up and up, no false records, and we knew this car had some light front end damage that was repaired with OEM parts. We checked out this car closely, test drove it, negotiated a great price and then bought it.



We had previously weighed Matt's BRZ at 2775 pounds (Limited model with some options) but this FR-S was a good bit lighter at 2634 pounds. This was with the trunk junk removed (see below), low fuel, but otherwise bone stock. Even had the heavy stock 17x7" wheels still on. The low fuel level and removal of the trunk junk skewed the front bias to nearly 57%. Not what you'd expect in a front engine/RWD chassis, but I would reserve judgement on how this affects that car once I drove it on track. If it had massive understeer, I knew what to blame...



We pull all of the spare tire, jack and other junk from the trunk to get our initial baseline weights because that's how we race these cars. We even ran it fairly low on fuel at our first road course test (see below). The low weight is what is so amazing about these cars... this weight is an astonishing 810 pounds lighter than the 2016 Focus RS we have been doing track testing and suspension development with lately (see development thread here).



This car was no cream puff, but we knew that going in, and it was reflected in the price. The front tires were corded, one ball joint was shot, and the brake pads were kaput. The video below shows how to test the ball joints on a car, and the left front was badly worn on this car. No worries.


Short video showing the worn ball joint + new control arm

The ball joint was not easily sourced from our normal wholesale parts suppliers (other than some aftermarket, racing style ball joints), and neither was the entire front control arm (other than some sketchy looking units on eBay). Many of the wholesale parts site listings for the 86 chassis said "under development" for the control arm and ball joints. WTH?



We were pressed for time so we ordered a new control arm (see above left) for the car from our local Subaru dealer, which had it to us the next day. $247 retail, ouch. I talk about the design issues we can see in the front control arms in the video above, but yea - I'm not a fan of the "axially opposed" bushing layout nor the thin, single layer, stamped steel control arm. Very easy to flex this arm, and that becomes important when you really add a lot of mechanical grip (see "Plans" below). Oh well, it was replaced and the front toe reset.



Since the tires were damaged from the bad ball joints, and we wanted to get a "stock baseline lap" in at our local road course, I went ahead and purchased some cheap OEM replacement tires for the car. I was looking for something in the factory 215/45/17 size with close to the 240 treadwear of the craptastic Michelin Primacy tires they come with. Not because I like those tires, but just to see similar grip for the baseline test lap. I found some "Firestone Firehawk Wide Oval Indy 500 XL" all-seasons on sale for $50/each from TireRack. These were the right size and 320 treadwear. Close enough!



As much as it pained me to buy what I consider to be "plebeian parts" to replace out the worn OEM bits, it was all for the baseline track test. So we picked up some cheap O'Reilys house brand, quiet "ceramic" style brake pads for the front and rear. $45/axle set, and we didn't even turn the rotors. We might be replacing all of this with aftermarket bits soon, so I wanted to keep costs low and just get it "as close to stock" as quickly as possible.



The engine is bone stock on this car and with 71,000 miles it seems to run as good as any other. We might test some new parts from a few suppliers we have worked with in the past under the hood - things that weren't yet developed in late 2013, when we had Matt's car available to use as a test vehicle.



There is some weird fake diffuser panel on the rear, which looks factory, supposedly part some option package I'm not familiar with. The exhaust looks pretty stock as well.



Pulling the front undertray off reminded me how convoluted and "non-flat" these front panels were. Maybe there's a need for a flat undertray? That's a zero point mod in NASA TT classes. Oh and that exhaust manifold and catalyst setup? Gah, what a mess. Haven't really kept up with the 86 scene to see what long tube headers are worthwhile, but we might have to try something to give this 200 hp 2.0L boxer a bit more "pep".



My shop manager Brad did a full track inspection and flushed the brake system on the FR-S with Motul RBF600 fluid. Why? Well I won't skimp on the brake fluid, even for a "baseline stock track test" like this. This is the FIRST upgrade we tell people as an HPDE instructor that is a MUST DO - the fluid. Craptasitc parts store DOT3 fluid boils at much lower temperatures, and when that happens your pedal pressure drops and you often go flying off track. Brake fluid pressure loss is never EVER fun, and we do this to even bone stock cars before they go to track events.


Setting the warm tires to 34 front & 30 psi rear, which made for decent wear patterns on the shoulders

The FR-S was now ready to take to Motorsport Ranch and run on one of their member days, which we did last Saturday. Normally we would load up the car into our enclosed trailer and go to the track but I had a customer's Corvette loaded for an autocross on Sunday. Two hot August days racing in a row was going to take its toll on me!

FR-S BASELINE TRACK TEST - MSR-C, AUGUST 27, 2016

In less than a week since buying the FR-S we had it repaired, filled with proper brake fluid, and ready for track use. We replaced the worn parts with as close to OEM spec as possible, to get a fair baseline lap time that represented these cars in stock form. We never got to do this in Matt's BRZ - because it wasn't my car, and he wasn't crazy about tracking his brand new BRZ. This cheaper, 4 year old FR-S was bought to be driven hard!



Photo and Video gallery: https://vorshlag.smugmug.com/Racing-...n-Test-082716/

We got out to the track at 7:40 am with the first cars going out at 8:00 am sharp, due to a fog delay. The pictures from the first session are pretty foggy.



In the first session I did what I *assumed* was the correct sequence to disable both the traction and stability control systems. Pressed the two separate buttons. Of course that didn't work and above about 30 mph the stability control system still kicked in. Amazingly the car would rotate fairly well but if the rear saw any "yaw" the dash would light up and it felt like the rear brakes were engaging. GRR.



Chase came out with his co-driver Mark and he showed me the crazy Konami Cheat Code sequence needed to disable the electronic nannies. Never seen such a crazy thing: E-brake up and down 3 times, brake pedal up and down 3 times, then E-brake twice more, than brake pedal twice - all within 30 seconds of starting the engine, with the coolant up to temp. Sure enough, the light came on and it never engaged once in the next session.



So instead of going through this crazy pedal sequence each time we want to drive this car hard, might be a good idea to invest in this "magic box" that disables these two systems with a button press (or even defaults them off).


In-Car Video of the FR-S in session 3, best lap

I drove Scottish Joe's 2015 VW Mark7 GTI (below) in session 2, then went back out in the FR-S with the "pedal dance" sequence and took another second off my best lap time in session 3 (shown above). There was a LOT of traffic to deal with in every session, and even my best lap had a pass, but I still managed to run three laps within the same tenth of a second (best of 1:31.90) in this session. I guess that's as good as I can do, and we will call this our "Baseline Lap Time" for a stock FR-S there.



Some reference times for MSRC 1.7 CCW: My quickest lap time in a street legal car here is a 1:17.25, which I set as the class track record in 2014 (still holding) in our NASA TT3 classed 2011 Mustang GT. More recent NASA lap times from March 2016 in my TTC classed 1992 Corvette (nearly bone stock in every way) were a 1:21.9 and a 1:27.6 the same day in our TTD classed BMW E46 330 (with cord showing on the tires). Those times were all on DOT-legal Hoosier R-compounds (A6 for the Mustang, R7 for the other two). In mid July of this year I tested a stock 2016 Focus RS to the best of a 1:27.40 on the stock 235mm Michelin PSS tires. This same day in August I ran the 2015 VW GTI to a best of 1:28.10 (don't have the video up yet).



So yea, the FR-S is relatively slow compared to these other cars, but these skinny 215mm tires are CRAP; these other cars had between 90-250 more hp than the FR-S does (except the BMW 330, which made 195 whp). We have several upgrades planned that I will discuss below, and we will try to get a new lap time after each stage to quantify any gains or losses.



Considering how cheap the tires were, I was strangely impressed with how neutral the car handled in stock form. Just a hint of understeer at the limit. And look at the lateral G traces that were logged on the AiM SOLO - they hovered at or even exceeded 1.0g in most corners. That's on 340 treadwear all seasons I paid fifty bucks a piece for! This is the first time I've tracked an 86 that was bone stock - the last time I ran some laps at ECR in Matt's BRZ (Nov 2012, shown above) it already had 17x9" wheels, 245mm MPSS tires, Vorshlag camber plates and Swift lowering springs. It was showing closer to 1.3g lateral on those tires, which is nuts for street meat.

The coolant temp gauge also stayed rock solid all day, even as ambient temps rose to near 90°F, the needle never even got to the middle of the range. The stock brakes and O'Reily pads worked admirably, logging in the .9 to 1.0g range for braking each time, even if the fronts were billowing smoke in the pits after my stints. I never had a long pedal or any hint of fade. And I was Left Foot Braking and late braking the crap out of this poor car.

So for once I'm not going to dog on the car maker for making a crap suspension setup right out of the box. Could it have less dive and roll, more camber, grip and brake bite on a road course? Of course. We will address those things in time and share what we learn here.

PLANS AND FUTURE TESTING

We have a number of new 86 parts from some of our vendors that we would like to test on our own car before we add them to our website. Of course we will upgrade the suspension, likely with MCS or Bilstein coilovers and proper spring rates. We might develop a better OEM spring style camber plate solution before we go right to coilovers. We have made some OEM spring perch camber plate solutions lately that work with even the craziest factory top mount designs - like the S550 Mustang (below left) or the F22/F30 BMWs (below right).



Wheels and tires will be upgraded beyond the stock 17x7" and 215mm rubbish, of course. Deciding if we just hit the "easy button" and use the 17x9" Enkeis again or if we make a custom Forgestar 17" or 18" sized wheel instead. Once we get proper negative camber in the front of the car we can measure for wider wheels and tires. We will likely go with a BFG Rival-S or Bridgestone RE71R tire in the 255-275mm variety.



We might build up and run this car for a while in NASA Time Trial TTD or TTC classes, so we will work up some TT build sheets for both classes. I'm about to sell my TTC classed Corvette (above left) and Amy already has a TTD classed BMW 330 (above right), so maybe TTC makes more sense.



After that initial phase of product testing, well, we have some more serious plans in mind for this little FR-S. I will comment more about that at another time. Until then, thanks for reading.

Cheers,

[Fair!]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ/FRS Project Development Thread

Project update for August 31, 2016: It has been 3 years since I last updated this thread. When we left off in August 2013 I had just autocrossed Matt's '13 BRZ on the newly installed set of MCS coilovers and 255mm Rivals. Matt left Vorshlag shortly after my last post, so we lost our "in-house" 86 test chassis. We have of course worked on many more 86 chassis cars since then, and have even developed some new products. I will cover all of that, plus introduce another 86 into the Vorshlag shop - my wife Amy's red 2013 FR-S (see below) which she bought a week ago.


Vorshlag 2013 FR-S which we tracked in stock form last weekend to get a "Baseline Lap Time"

We've already weighed it, fixed a number of worn or broken items, then tracked it at Motorsport Ranch to get a "baseline stock lap time", which we will use to gauge improvements over time. We bought this car to test fit "some new items" we just moved into production for this chassis, and we will also use it to develop and test more new products over the next year or two. Let's get caught up first, then cover the product developments we've made for the 86, then show our new shop car and the track test.

SCCA AUTO-X AT CRANDALL, AUGUST 18, 2013

Yes, I am doing an event write-up from 3 years ago - but it was a very memorable event for several reasons. This event happened during a hectic series of weeks, as we were developing and track testing a new aero package for our NASA TT3 classed Mustang, which we took to the NASA National Championships at Miller Motorsports Park a couple of weeks later (where the car did OK, trophied 3rd in class - we changed the aero package further soon after and made even bigger gains).


August 2013 was a hectic time at Vorshlag - working on a lot of cars & prepping for NASA Nationals

This August autocross was also the first and last time I competed in Matt's BRZ, as he turned in his notice shortly after this event (moving on to a higher paying job outside of motorsports, which we wished him well with). The local autocross clubs lost this site shortly after this event, and it was the last time I ever got to race at Crandall. Just a bunch of reasons why I lost track of time and never did this event write-up in the BRZ after adding the MCS coilovers.



Event Photo and Video Gallery: https://vorshlag.smugmug.com/Racing-...andall-081813/

At this August 2013 autocross, Matt ran his BRZ in Novice class with an STX pax and I ran it in the open STX class. The car at this point had a few Whiteline bushings & swaybars, MCS coilovers with the rates we have since spec'd on dozens of 86 cars, Vorshlag camber plates, and the ever popular Enkei RPF1 wheels in 17x9" with 255/40/17 BFG Rival tires (this was long before the Rival-S or RE71R arrived on the "200" treadwear autocross scene).



Right off the bat the handling felt so much better than with the stock dampers and lowering springs. This clean concrete parking lot had a busy layout, but similar to several events we had run at this now defunct site. As they typically did, this course had lots of turn-arounds, slaloms and offsets.



We made only a few damper and tire pressure adjustments and swept both the STX and Novice classes. Matt took first in novice out of 29 cars at this, his first autocross event in the car. My entry in STX was 1st out of 4, 13th out of 111 in PAX, and compared well to other STX and STU cars that ran that day.



There were other STX cars running in other classes, like Brad in "X" class (for pro level drivers), and Sipe who ran in SMod that day. Sipe was ahead of us but that was in an RX8 with possibly the highest STX level prep of any car in the nation at the time, and he also run in a later heat. So with a car that was just setup on MCS coilovers the BRZ was pretty dang quick, and we were happy with that.



That same day Amy and another autocrosser Mark Council both drove very well prepped Mustangs in STU class - as a test. Amy was driving our 2013 Mustang GT (on AST remote doubles, bars, brakes, 18x10" wheels, more) and Mark was in his even more prepped 2012 GT. Their two drives provided two more pieces of data to show that the pony cars didn't belong in STU class. Mark and I both raced his car in STU the month before at this same site, too.

At that August event they were both on competitive tires and drove well, but they both still brought up the bottom of the STU class and were 3.5+ seconds behind my STX time in the BRZ. Remember - STU is supposed to be faster than STX. I've co-driven with both of these drivers many times - they are both fast, and Amy even has the National Championships to show for it. This data from this and some previous events was what we used when we wrote in for new rules allowances for the stick axle cars in Street Touring... which led to a letter writing campaign... which eventually led to the formation of the STP class (right after CAM was introduced, terrible timing). So their drives were worth noting and comparing to the STX times of this BRZ, if you follow those classes.


In-car video of my fastest time that day

The in-car video above was my fastest autocross time of the day in the BRZ, but there were still a number of "qualifiers" from this run that I have to note. First, I had Mark Council riding with me, and he is no dainty little boy. Second, there was a lost car randomly driving around on course, which I noted so I backed off briefly... to make sure he wasn't going to swerve in front of me (the corner workers red flagged the course, behind me). Lastly, STX ran in an earlier session that day and the course had about a dozen spots of water seeping up through the concrete (from a recent rain) that slowed us down a tick. The course dried out in later sessions and those drivers were generally faster. So the car could have been even quicker without these issues.

I remember that autocross vividly. The BRZ handled so well, just did everything right - rotation/corner entry, stopping, slaloms - other than not having much horsepower (100% stock drivetrain, making 166 whp). This was before everyone and their brother started autocrossing the 86 chassis, and the BRZ really crushed it that day. Good fun that day, and I aim to make our FR-S handle as well as Matt's BRZ did, if not better.

BILSTEIN PSS10 + REAR SHOCK MOUNT DEVELOPMENT

We have sold a good number of MCS coilovers for the 86 chassis but the price point does put some people off. We have been selling more and more Bilstein monotube coilovers and in early 2016 we reached out to a local autocrosser, Chase Reeves, to see if he would test a modified version on his BRZ. He jumped at the chance to become a Vorshlag Tester, and even though he's only been autocrossing for 2 years he goes to a LOT of these events, as well as road course club trials.



The Bilstein PSS10 kit for the 86 chassis is shown above. This kit has adjustable damping, uses an inverted strut and a 40mm shaft housing, and works well for "spirited street use" with the springs provided. There is one knob that adjusts both Rebound and Compression, but the Rebound changes are significantly larger. This is not the type of valving adjustment what you'd see in a true Motorsports monotube adjustable, but the price is often $800+ less than the entry level MCS TT1 kit - and the Bilstien kit also comes with ride height adjusters and springs, so the price difference is even larger.



Like we do with all shock kits that come with unmarked springs, the spring rates were measured here at Vorshlag (the right way) and we found them to be too soft for even semi-serious serious autocross or track use. The rates were almost the same as stock, to be honest. The spring rate charts we measured on our digital spring rating rig showed a front spring rate of about 172 #/in, and was somewhat linear. The rears had a more variable rate, from 175-275 #/in (avg rate of 207).



We tend to see these somewhat soft rates and oddly shaped "Tapered" springs on most Bilstein "PSS series" kits (PSS with non-adj valving and the PSS9 and PSS10 adjustables). The included springs are usually 60mm ID at one end (the bottom) and the OEM diameter at the top (huge). We almost always ditch these springs, for two reasons: softness and size. The rates above are too soft for use with a grippy 255mm tire - the car would have too much roll and dive when driven in competition.



To fix this we converted this kit with a 60mm coilover spring rate upgrade front and rear, which allowed us to ditch the giant OEM strut top mount and use our Vorshlag camber plates. We chose a linear 350 #/in rate Hyperco spring up front, with no tender spring. This works in conjunction with our 60mm upper perches and camber plates to convert this from an "OEM" style upper spring diameter to a much smaller 60mm spring. The smaller diameter spring allows for more inboard camber travel, as the 60mm spring takes up much less space laterally and allows the top of the strut to travel inboard more than the stock spring ever could. The 60mm sparing is also about half the weight of an OEM or the Bilstein kit's "tapered" spring.



Out back we used another 350 #/in spring from Hyperco We coupled this with a prototype set of Vorshlag spherical rear upper shock mounts (RSM) shown below, which we made on our CNC machines while the car was here for installation. We coupled the new spherical upper shock mount with our 60mm upper perches and an integral single-row sealed radial bearing, which deals with any spring rotation during compression. These have been used for testing on Chases BRZ since early March 2016 with zero issues, so we will move these into production soon.



If you look at the post above this one we have the spring rate charts for the factory BRZ and FRS springs. The stock BRZ had springs with rates of 162 #/in Front and 201 #/in Rear. The stock FRS curiously had a stiffer Rear rate at 221 #/in but a softer Front rate at 125 #/in. Like we have done in the past with PSS10 Bilsteins, we "about doubled" the spring rates, to get to what we felt would work right off the bat and within the PSS10's damping adjustment range. With an MCS coilover we tend to start with triple the front rates as our softest option, but the PSS10 damping doesn't have quite as much range as a Motorsport level shock like the MCS.



Since this was Chase's daily driver, car we kept the ride heights almost identical to stock, which he asked for. Normally that is tough on a Motorsports damper, and we could have gone an inch or more lower, but this is what he wanted and the Bilstein's adjustable ride heights allowed for this. We did gain a lot of negative camber and some positive caster with the camber plates and smaller diameter springs, and the total negative camber goes up with lower ride heights.



The setup sheet we did for this BRZ, like we do for all cars we install suspension on, shows the before and after ride heights and camber measurements. With camber maxed out (and front toe set to .125" total toe out, to minimize tire wear but still allow for a razor sharp turn-in) we saw -3.5° camber up front. With his 255/40/17 Dunlop Direzza Z2 tires on the 17x9" wheels above we knew this would work well, and camber adjustment is easy if he wants to change it.



The damping adjustment was also easy to dial in for street use, and Chase uses 2 out of 10 clicks from full soft for daily driving use. The rear knob is visible in the trunk, as shown above. The front strut's damping adjustment is at the bottom of the strut, since it is inverted. This means to access that knob you have to turn the wheel to full lock and reach in under the strut to get to it.



That is a picture of another PSS10 strut, from a Porsche 996 install we did a week before this BRZ. The strut's damping knobs are marked well and have very distinctive clicks, so once you visualize which way "soft" is, you can do this adjustment by reaching in and turning it blind.



Chase has been co-driving a Corvette for autocross this summer, but recently competed in two events in his BRZ. But he moved up to 245mm Hoosier A7 competition tires. This really wasn't what we designed this modified PSS10 kit and associated springs for, but damn if it isn't doing well anyway! He won CSP at his first event on A7s and came in a close second this last weekend, narrowly missing out on another win by .020 sec. That was running against some dedicated CSP Miatas (see in frame above) with flares, big tires, built motors, serious levels of prep and some of the fastest drivers in the region.



Not bad for 350#/in springs and PSS10s on an otherwise stock BRZ. Well he has a 20mm front Whiteline swaybar and the 16mm Whiteline rear bar as well.



Here is Chase's best autocross run from the most recent SCCA event, where he came in a close 2nd in CSP. Once he gets back to doing more road course events, mostly SCCA Club Trials, I'll try to get some lap times from him on the new Bilstein / Vorshlag suspension.

VORSHLAG 2013 FR-S TEST CAR: REPAIRS

So I'm caught up on the last autocross I did in Matt's BRZ, and showed the PSS10 kit we modified and installed on Chase's BRZ. Now let's take a look at our new shop car - this 2013 FR-S. We had some pressing deadlines on some 86 parts we have built which we needed to verify on an 86 chassis - a car that we could take mostly apart - so a tester's car on loan wasn't the solution here. There were also some new suspension bits we have dreamed up that it would help to have a stock 86 on hand to test with, too.



Amy has been wanting an 86 for the past year and a half. Strangely enough she never drove Matt's BRZ, but about 18 months ago she test drove a new 2015 FR-S one random Saturday - and she loved it! There was a series of cloverleaf exits next to the Scion dealer, she did all 4 of those twice each, and she was hooked. Even with the skinny Prius tires they come with it was still fun. The seats, greenhouse, visibility, stock handling, ergonomics - it all worked for her.

continued below

[Fair!]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ Project Build Thread

continued from above

We got our first FT86 set in and they looked absolutely beautiful. We could see they already had a lot problems we saw in other brands solved. The included strut bracketry was made to fit the hoses and lines on the BRZ perfectly. They had a nice solution for the slotted holes found in many struts using precision CNC machined fixed offset insert slugs. The coilover perches were all metal (not plastic) and 2-piece, that clamped in place with spanner wrenches (not bolted) and one of the Vorshlag pinned spanners we've made for other brands of coilovers fit perfectly.


Testing the strut and shock lengths on the first set of MCS singles - almost there...

Sure enough, as the MCS folks expected, their "C Stock" length singles were too long to work at the lowered ride heights we wanted to run this BRZ at. And they should have been, as they were initially intended to be SCCA Stock class legal (it is nearly impossible to make anything legal for Stock class work at properly lowered ride heights - without some major compromise somewhere). You see, we had been looking at NASA Time Trial and SCCA STX to run in, and in those classes we could lower the ride height and use true coilover springs in any rate we wanted - a novel idea that almost any competitor would want.



That day we went through the same battery of measurement exercises with the MCS singles as we always do on any new set of shocks we test. We re-spec'ed them with our desired ride heights, then measuring bump and droop travel at the wheels, with and without springs installed. We sent along our wish list of drawings and measurements and shipped this first set of coilover shocks back to MCS, hoping they would make us a set of housings, shafts and lengths that would work.



Lo and behold, they delivered a new set built to our specs in less than 2 weeks. We were floored, as this turn-around time was much quicker than we had even hoped for. We took the 2nd set and tested these on the BRZ again, going through our full sweep of tests with and without springs once again. By now we had burned about 4 days of shock testing on this poor car over the previous few months and hadn't driven one mile on anything but the stock shocks. Luckily the third time was a charm, and the 2nd MCS set was a winner. They fit with the lowered ride heights we wanted and now offered real usable bump and rebound travel at both ends. Hot damn!


Left: New Vorshlag tender spring. Right: The MCS TT1 shock worked with the stock rear top mount, Hyperco spring & our tender.

This may seem like a trivial thing to some of your readers, but getting these MCS "TT1" shocks built correctly and onto this car, with real spring rates and usable travel in both bump and rebound directions, was a long time coming. Big thanks to Lex and the folks at MCS for getting these re-made so quickly and for working with us and our needs. So now we needed to know - how do these dampers RIDE and HANDLE?

The ride aspect was easy - let's go drive it. With the initial set of springs we went with a 450 #/in spring at both ends. If you look at the charts below of the OEM and lowering spring rates, which we measured here at Vorshlag, you will see that we nearly tripled the front rates and doubled the rear rates. That's usually a good starting point for us, and we also based the 450F/450R rates on our years of Subaru GD chassis shock sales, testing and racing. To keep the rear spring seated at full droop we added our new Vorshlag 60mm ID tender springs (shown above) on the rear shocks, too.


Left: Stock 2013 Subaru BRZ spring rates, front and rear. Middle: Stock 2013 FR-S rates. Right: Swift BRZ progressive rate lowering springs

A few drives on our 2 mile "shock test loop", a couple of rebound knob changes, and we had the ride set to "Amazing". Yes, with triple the front spring rate it was handling bumps better than the stock shocks did with lowering springs, which often bottomed out. It was firmer but not at all jarring, and we quickly knew this would be a big seller.

Note: We have renamed MCS' line of shocks with actual model names that are easier to type and remember. We began referring to the non-remote single adjustable shock as the "TT1". This refers to the fact that in many forms of Time Trial racing you get dinged points for remote reservoirs, so these non-remotes are better for that sport, hence TT. The "1" refers to the number of valving adjustments. There are TT1 and TT2 models for most MCS applications - yes, the elusive double adjustable monotube without remotes does exist. We've already sold several sets of TT2s from MCS. And the RR2 and RR3 are "Remote Reservoir" 2 or 3-ways. Get it?



Of course we used our Vorshlag camber plate solution, mated to our custom built 60mm radial bearing upper spring perches. These worked perfectly, giving the car an extra .75 degrees of positive caster over stock (by moving the strut pin backwards). The camber setting range is huge, and at this lowered height we were able to get a max reading of -3.4° camber in the front and -2.6° rear (with the stock rear arms). Our technicians corner balanced the car and the final ride heights at 13" front and rear, approximately 2 inches lower than stock. And yes, it clears the big 255/40/17 BFG Rivals with ease.

Now, when could we find a competition event to run this in?? There was a Texas Region SCCA autocross (Aug 18th, 2013) only a few days away, so Matt and I signed up...

What's Next?

Well this forum update has already run far too long, and I barely covered the MCS TT1 install. Sorry - it was such a long wait getting proper coilovers on this car, you have no idea. I am going to cut it short and cover the rest in another installment in about a week, before we head off to the NASA National Championship event to compete in our TT3 Mustang (we're thrashing to finish up some front aero work on that car in our shop this week) and visit with other customers there.


Left: The BRZ with MCS shocks was surprisingly fast at its first autocross. Right: MCS RR2 remote doubles being installed onto an FR-S at Vorshlag

In our next BRZ Project Thread update I will show details of another set of 17x9" wheels we tested, how a set of 255/40/17 BFG Rivals felt, cover an autocross event we ran in the BRZ with 2 drivers, and show off some MCS RR2 shocks we're installing onto a customer's BRZ track car this week. We have several more autocross and track events planned in the car this year as well.

Thanks for reading,

[Fair!]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ Project Build Thread

Project Update for August 20, 2013: It looks like we had a huge delay since our last project build thread update on the BRZ Project; it hasn't been discussed since December of 2012. There were some lengthy delays waiting on shocks that were a bit out of our control, which we will explain below. We also got very busy with other projects and racing in other cars. But in the past few months a lot has happened behind the scenes with our in-house 2013 BRZ and we've finally installed proper monotube adjustable coilovers that actually fit these cars at lowered ride heights. We put these to good use at an autocross recently with surprisingly good results. Read more below...


What a difference a year makes! Left is bone stock, right is last week on MCS TT1 shocks, 17x9" Enkei RPF1's and 255 BFG Rivals.

One more thing. Starting in early 2013, all of the pictures in my forum posts can be clicked for higher resolution versions, unless they are posted in-line with BIG format pictures. This takes more time and makes the character count of my posts longer, but we feel it is worth the extra effort to split up posts into multiple sections. With a professional photographer on staff, we WANT you to see our images in higher detail. As always, these watermarked pictures are all copyrighted by Vorshlag, so we ask other shops NOT to steal them (yes, it happens). Anyway, if you see something you like, click that pic!

Where Were We? Waiting On Coilovers...

At the end of my last post (What's Next?) in December we had mapped out future suspension mods. Coilovers were the obvious next modification slated, but that didn't quite pan out as we had expected. There were some early coilover shock options for the FT86, most of which were straight off of the Subaru Impreza that this FT86 chassis was loosely based on. But as we saw, many of those early kits were compromised in some way - namely in the fact that the front struts were not utilizing the room under the spindle for extra travel. Unlike the AWD Impreza, the RWD-only FT86 has several extra inches that could be exploited up front for more strut travel, using the area that the AWD Impreza front half shafts would have been. None of the rushed-to-market coilover solutions used that room. The rest of the kits we saw were all twin tube shocks, which we are not fans of.


This picture was made for a photo shoot last year with stock shocks/springs/sway bars. Handling was pretty awful.

Without proper coilovers to install we weren't about to try to autocross or track this car seriously, either. Sure, the production Swift lowering springs arrived and they looked good, but with the stock length struts and shocks there just wasn't a ton of compression travel to be had. And no lowering spring is going to be significantly stiffer than the OEM bits, not enough to matter for performance handling. Sorry, that's just the truth. Lowering springs are 90% for looks and 10% help handling by lowering the CG. When we see folks arguing one brand of lowering spring over another regarding performance, or one model of OEM spring vs another (BRZ vs FR-S), we have to bite our tongues... because we know it is completely pointless internet talk.

Real coilovers geared towards competition use can work with substantial increases in spring rates. Not 0-30% stiffer, like most lowering springs add, but 100-500% stiffer spring rates. Spring rate changes like this cuts way down on chassis roll/heave/dive, and that's where we've seen the biggest gains over the years with suspension changes - spring rate. And no, the spring rates I'm talking about do no automatically mean "bone crushing ride", not if used with proper monotube shocks. The relatively massive pistons in monotube shocks (relative to twin tube shocks, like the OEM bits) make for a massive increase in low speed sensitivity to movement, so they react more quickly to bumps than any twin tube shock ever could, no matter how stiffly valved. And the large range of adjustment in most aftermarket monotube adjustable shocks means they can work with much stiffer rates and still provide a good ride when the valving (knob) is turned down for street use. These reasons are why Vorshlag ONLY sells monotube shocks - we've seen the glaring limitations of twin tube shocks and just don't want to be a part of that "solution". Sure, Twin Tubes shocks are cheap to make and they have their share of budget-oriented fans, but they don't belong on a car that will be used in competition, and are never going to be something we recommend or sell. Yes, some folks call us shock snobs - but we have our reasons.



Nearly 8 months after we ordered the first prototypes we finally got a set of coilovers from a monotube company to test. We tested their set-up on Matt's BRZ several times over 2 days, with and without springs, and we found several issues. These included brackets that didn't fit the mating hoses, mounting holes drilled the wrong sizes, and strut and shock lengths that were completely wrong. There was no easy fix for the strut length problems, either, other than running them at stock ride heights - which we weren't about to settle for. These tests were a real set-back and we knew this would turn into another huge delay. Still, we had hope, so we spec'd out the proper front strut and rear shock lengths and waited to hear back about a new set that could actually work at a lower ride height.

More months of waiting turned up nothing. It was a problem with the supplier, who was unwilling to make any changes - even if every issue we noted was true. Nobody involved came out ahead on this one. We wasted months waiting for a fix that never came and lost a lot of time in the FT86 suspension market. Matt's BRZ was just tooling around on nice wheels, good bushings, and lowering springs - all dressed up but not race worthy. After seeing how this car fared on track with the stock shocks and soft springs, we knew it would be better suited to proper coilover spring rates and dampers, and really wanted to move to the next step.

I cannot fully put my frustration into words, but I'm not throwing any names around. I'm just going to leave it at that. So after we ran out of patience waiting we broke down and looked at other vendors making quality monotube coilovers for the FT86.

Monotube Coilover Solution Found in the MCS TT1

A relatively new shock company we've been eyeing for a while was Motion Control Suspension (aka "MCS"). This is an American company started in 2011 that has the same principles that formerly ran Moton for 12 years. We had seen that they had made their new MCS non-reservoir single adjustable monotube coilovers for the FR-S/BRZ and the SCCA C Stock guys seemed to love them. This run of FT86 coilovers were made explicitly for this class's unusual shock rules: where OEM spring must be used and the shock length can be no more than 1" different from stock.


Left: Moton 2-Way Dampers we built for SCCA Stock Class BMW 135i. Right: Custom perches for F Stock use on S197 Mustang

The MCS solution for this class was sold with adapters to convert them from adjustable height coilovers normally holding 60mm springs over to fixed height struts that worked with the OEM springs. As crazy as that sounds, we have built shocks like this with other shock companies in the past. It is a very small, niche market of a few dozen racers a year that buy shocks for SCCA Stock class. They can easily cost upwards of five thousand of dollars for custom built double adjustable, remote reservoir shocks that work within the narrow confines of the SCCA Stock classes, and they do find performance benefits in a few loopholes... but nothing like a set of proper coilover springs would give them if they weren't saddled with that class' oddball shock/spring rules.



We loved the quality and durability we've seen in Motons, and I run Moton Doubles with remotes on my personal NASA-TT3 Mustang. But while Moton never offered a single adjustable shock, the folks at MCS did, releasing their non-remote single adjustables in early 2013. A Single adjustable non-remote reservoir monotube coilover is one of the areas we at Vorshlag really excel in. This type of shock has a big chunk of the performance benefits of a 2 or 3-way remote reservoir monotube (that can costs $4500-8000+) but at about half the cost of "remote doubles", and without the hassles of mounting reservoirs/hoses. Monotube Singles are a great solution for 80% of the coilover users out there, and we really needed this "internal single monotube" coilover if we were going to play in the FT86 market.



Since stock springs and stock length struts and shocks aren't what 99% of the FT86 crowd wants, we saw a glimmer of hope in MCS, and wanted to give them a try. We talked to MCS, set-up Vorshlag as a dealer, and ordered one of these FT86 sets in our initial stocking order. We knew they might not be the right length but were willing to test them and see, and they said they'd be willing to customize them to our specs.


Left: MCS TT1 singles for FT86, kit priced as shown is $2750. Right: Vorshlag pinned spanner fits the ride height perches perfectly.

continued below

[Fair!]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ Project Build Thread

(continued from above)

GRM Photoshoot

We got a call from someone that writes for Grassroots Motorsports asking for a pictures of an FT86. They were looking for some action shots with typical autocross classing/sponsor stickers shown mid-corner or in a slalom. They had a tight deadline and nobody had any pictures of an STX prepped FR-S or BRZ they could find. We love working with magazines and especially the folks at GRM, so we made it happen.



Olof washed and detailed Matt's car, Jason cut some class/number/sponsor decals, and Olof and I slapped on the numbers and some GRM decals. I asked Jason to make the numbers big, but dang - you can see these from space! Then we went in search for a parking lot that would work for the photo shoot. Once there, we set up a slalom and Brandon got his camera gear ready. I got in, strapped on a helmet, and hooned around the cones - while keeping an eye out for the law. This was an unsanctioned operation...



The parking lot we picked was a local movie theater across the highway from Vorshlag, and by a large helping of dumb luck we just happened to see my 2013 Mustang GT parked in the same portion of the giant parking lot. Apparently my wife had snuck off to watch some sparkly vampire movie - on a vacation day she took from work that she "needed" in order to get ready for a Thanksgiving party we were throwing the next day. Sneaky. What she didn't know was that I had an extra key to this car... so we moved it to another lot about a half mile away and I waited for her panicked call.



It didn't take long - half an hour later I got the call, "The Mustang is stolen! Either that... or.... YOU took it!" She knows me too well. I told her where the car was parked and she hung up on me. Later that day she admitted it was a good practical joke, heh. We laughed about it for days!

The photos came out well and you should see one of the above shots in an upcoming GRM issue.

Two FT86 Track Tests @ ECR

At the end of my October post we had three track days in the works for October and November. Matt was out of town for the NASA event, where we ran two of the other Vorshlag shop cars and set some new personal best lap times (in our 2011 and and 2013 Mustang GTs). Then the SCCA Club Race/PDX event was cancelled (they had all of 37 people sign up...and we were 3 of those. Club racing in our region is virtually dead), but the Five Star Ford track day event was the first one where we had some FT86 content.

Vorshlag Picture Gallery - 5 Star Ford ECR Track Day - http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/Racing-E...ar-ECR-111712/

This November 17th event was an HPDE hosted by Five Star Ford of Plano at Eagles Canyon Raceway. We had fun at their event back in June so we signed up three more cars for their November 17th event. Amy drove the red Vorshlag 2011 Mustang GT to her new personal best at this track (1:57.70!) and Matt drove his 2013 Subaru BRZ (2:11.0). I was there for track-side help and in-car instruction, Ed was there to help with the three cars, and Vorshlag's photographer Brandon was on hand and took some great track pictures of many of the cars in attendance. Perfect weather, well run event, and we had about 63 cars in attendance, so we got a LOT of track time. Big thanks to Corey White for setting this event up!


Left: Matt's BRZ on course. Right: Britney and her FR-S.

Being a Ford dealership sponsored event there were a crap ton of Mustangs in attendance, and I will go into more of that in our next Mustang project thread post. Having two FT86s there was a treat - and in fact there was a third one, but it was still on the stock tires and had no lap timer (we ended up doing track preparation work to that car at Vorshlag in December).



Britney and Stephen also brought her FR-S to this event, and you can see me riding along with Stephen in the Asphalt Gray FR-S, below right. NASA Time Trial racer KenO took some hot laps in her FR-S during a later session, and I took some hot laps in Matt's BRZ at the same time (below left). We both had lap timers/data loggers on board, but unfortunately we didn't get any in-car video in either car that day. Still, we did get some good pictures and data.



The data showed what we felt in the BRZ - the new brake pads were working VERY WELL and I saw some braking data that I couldn't quite believe (1.5g peak braking?!). The harder I pushed the brakes, the deeper it would brake. This was just with Motul fluid, our SS brake lines and the Carbotech XP12 front / XP8 rear pads! No brake ducting, but we never saw any fade - and I pushed the brakes hard for about 4-5 laps. Lateral grip was also extremely impressive, showing sections of corners with sustained 1.3-1.4g lateral?!



Again, I have to see more data to believe this, but the fat R-S3's were making mountains of grip. Like I said before, the track width on these 17x9" wheels is 71", which is WIDE. By comparison our Mustang, which is a giant 3600 pound car, on the mega-wide 18x12" wheels is 73.5" wide - a mere 2.5" wider than the 2750 pound BRZ. So you can see where some of the massive grip is coming from on the FT86. This chassis has a "wide stance" and as we know, track width adds lateral grip. The OEM shocks were a bit floaty in bumpy sections of the track, and it bottomed the fronts a few times a lap, so it will be much better with real monotube dampers. In a handful of laps with Matt riding along, I managed a 2:10.5 lap in heavy traffic, after seeing a 2:09.5 indicated on this same lap. So given a few more laps and no passenger it is a 2:08-2:09 car at ECR as it sits, which ain't half bad. I was making Matt nervous sliding the car around, but he hopped in for the second half of this session and dropped two seconds following the same lines, and pushing the braking points deeper like I had, to manage his 2:11.0 lap.


Left: We set-up a table showing off some Vorshlag and Whiteline parts. Right: Vorshlag/AST tester KenO in his E46 M3.

KenO took the 215mm R-S3 equipped FR-S to a best lap of 2:11.5, which was quite good considering it had Hawk HPS pads and only 7" wide wheels. We both had passengers on our laps, and in a 2750 pound car an extra 150-200 pounds matters. I hope we can get these FT86 twins back out to ECR soon and really open them up. I haven't had this much fun tracking a sub-200 whp car... EVER.

Yes, I will admit that driving the BRZ on track with these minor mods was a lot of fun. And I'm a bit of a snob when it comes to track cars, normally driving something with nearly three times this power level, which says a lot about the "fun factor" of the FT86. The car did everything so well - turning, stopping, shifting, corner exit. The pedals are placed perfectly for heel-toe down shifting, the brake and steering feel is superb, the shift throw is short, and the stock seats mostly keep you in place on sticky street tires. Sure, a proper harness and race seat would help driver confidence considerably, but it was a great overall package with just the added negative camber, fat and sticky street tires, and good brake pads/fluid/lines. The prototype Swift springs were a bit on the soft side, and we're about to swap in the production units next, along with shortened bump stops. That should keep the front suspension from bottoming on the bumpy bits at ECR and should help drop lap times too. We'll be back!

Vorshlag picture gallery for ECR Toy Run - http://vorshlag.smugmug.com/Racing-E...un-ECR-120812/

We were back at ECR once again a few weeks later, on December 8th, and Matt again brought his BRZ with zero changes from the November event. It was a much colder day and lap times were a solid 1-1.5 seconds off our times at the Ford event, when the weather was a bit more favorable. This time Matt took a lot more laps and got more acquainted with his car. I was busy driving my 2013 GT with new AST double adjustable shocks and Vorshlag camber plates, and Amy was in her 2011 GT again. Also, two of my buddies and I were doing our first track laps in our future ChumpCar, so it was a very busy day. It was so busy, in fact, that nobody got any pictures of Matt's BRZ on track! Doh. It looked so purdy with all of the decals... oh well.



He did get a little in-car video with his new GoPro Hero3. Not the best audio, but you can get some idea of what this car looks like on track.



For NASA TTD competition (the NASA class we are building it for), it needs to run closer to a 2:05, but with coilovers and some other tweaks we think that is doable on these R-S3's. For SCCA we're building it around STX class, which allows up to a 265mm tires. I don't think that will fit as it sits, but with their poorly written rules concerning fender contours and lip rolling, "anything is possible".

What's Next?

Coilovers are the next obvious modification, but we don't have anything to install yet - still waiting on his AST 4150's. For now we will go ahead and install the production Swift lowering springs and confirm the data we have seen on Mark's car (1" drop, great ride). There are some additional Whiteline FT86 bushings that have made it to market (rear UCA bushings) and more are promised in late January - as are their adjustable FT86 sway bars. No power mods will be done until there is a proper tuning solution, so 167 whp is where it will stay for a while.

We don't have any autocross or track events until February, but if we get in some parts before then we'll post up again. Sorry for the long update today, bu we had almost three months to cover. I will try to be more prompt in my updates in the future.

Cheers,

[Fair!]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ Project Build Thread

(continued from above)

Other FT86 Track & Autocross Preparation Work

We have worked on a number of local FT86 owner's cars, getting them ready for track and/or autocross use. Britney's FR-S was already modded with a custom exhaust and some aftermarket 17x7" wheels and 215mm Hankook R-S3 tires when it came to Vorshlag for some front camber help.



Looking at other Subaru modders online, they went with the smaller shank diameter Subaru "crash bolts" at the upper front strut to spindle bolt location. Normally the FT86 (similar to the Impreza which the suspension is based off of) has the "enlarged shank" 16mm bolt in the upper spindle mount holes and the 14mm bolt in the lower holes. This "crash mod" entails swapping out the fatter upper spindle bolt with the slimmer 14mm bolts, so now there is slop in the mounting holes and you can tweak the strut inboard a bit more without slotting any holes. It... is not the ideal way to gain camber, but it is a simple and inexpensive way to gain about a degree.

So Britney's FR-S and it had -.2° and -.4° deg camber up front from the factory. We spent a whopping 30 minutes installing these bolts and got the front camber to -1.7° on both sides. Not bad for the stock ride height, and anything is better than the stock setting for track use. Personally I like to see -2.5° or more for track but hey, for as cheap as these bolts are it isn't half bad.

Next up was Mark's FR-S, which got the first production Swift lowering springs we've installed as well as Whiteline's front and rear camber kits. The front kit is similar to the crash bolt fix, but uses nicer bolts and other specific hardware (see below for further details). The rear kit includes a pair of offset and adjustable elastomer bushings for the upper control arms. Mark already had some 18x8" ET48 "Sparco" wheels, which were pretty and at least an inch wider than stock. However, since the costs were low and they were 18" diameter, they were also fairly heavy. Still, almost anything is an upgrade over the skinny stock 17x7" wheels. For tires he had 225/40/18 Michelin PS2s.

We started by checking his ride height, toe and camber settings at all four corners.


Before and after ride height checks shown on the RF corner (from 14.5" down to 13.5").

Then we pulled his OEM springs and rated them on our digital spring rater. And we rated Matt's OEM BRZ springs as well. Yes, they are indeed different...



Here are the FR-S and BRZ OEM spring rate charts. Kind of big, but they need to be to be legible.


FR-S and BRZ OEM spring rates, as tested by Vorshlag. Click above to enlarge.

As you can see, the stock FR-S rates are pretty soft, but fairly linear both front and rear. The BRZ's OEM springs are stiffer up front (+63 lbs/in) and softer in the rear (-20 lbs/in). In the grand scheme of things that isn't a lot of stiffness, but the balance difference is probably noticeable if you drive the two cars in stock form back to back on track. But who wants to keep these soft stock rates and 4x4 ride heights? Most of you reading this won't.

After rating Mark's FR-S springs, we installed the Swift BRZ lowering springs, p/n 4F912, which we also tested for rate.


Click the Swift spring rate chart above to enlarge.

The overall drop when we installed these Swift springs onto Mark's FR-S was almost exactly 1" at all four corners. We shortened the bump stops as well. We took about 1/3rd of the OEM bump stop off from each corner.



Once the springs were installed, it was onto the Whiteline rear UCA bushings. These were tricky to install, mostly due to the hassle of cutting apart one of the OEM bushings to be able to press it out of the control arm. We figured out some tricks and with our bushing installation rig we were able to get the old ones out and the new Whiteline bushings installed. Kind of a mess, but once the "flange" was cut off the OEM rubber bushings they could be pressed out. This is a job probably best left to "advanced" modders or your local suspension shop.



Now the rear camber can finally be adjusted (which the stock rear suspension is otherwise lacking) and a pair of OEM rubber bushings are gone, so this point will no longer deform under heavy lateral loading (track/autocross use). We like this kit and will be picking up a set for Matt's BRZ as well as some sets to stock and sell.


Whiteline's eccentric camber bolt kit as installed on the front strut of an FT86 @ Vorshlag.

Last up was the installation of the front camber adjustment bolts. Unlike the smaller diameter Subaru crash bolts we installed on Britney's FR-S, Mark went with the eccentric camber bolts from Whiteline. Again, these replaced the big 16mm shank upper strut mount bolts on the front struts and also allow the struts to be tweaked relative to the spindle, for some slight camber adjustment. Again, about a 1 degree change is normal. We sell this kit here at Vorshlag, as well as all of the Whiteline parts for the FT86. This is another cheap and easy way to get some camber adjustment in the fronts of these cars. But ... just like with slotted strut mounting holes, there are downsides.

First, given enough lateral force on the strut mount, the smaller diameter or eccentric bolts could slip, which would knock your camber out of alignment on one corner. This could happen from tapping a curb or heavy pothole, or even aggressive track driving with high enough grip tires. This didn't happen on Britney's FR-S on 215mm RS-3 tires, even with crazy KenO driving it, so that was a good test. Mark's car seems to be holding up with these eccentric bolts as well.

Next, any time you tweak the strut angle relative to the spindle you are removing wheel and tire room inboard at the strut. Now this doesn't pose a problem unless you are pushing the envelope on wheel/tire room inboard - on Matt's car with the 255mm tires, it was a big deal. Even without any strut mounting tweaks the 245's barely fit inboard, and the wider 255mm tires needed a 5mm spacer. If we had done crash bolts instead of camber plates, both situations would have needed to move the wheel outboard more, with more spacer thickness. There is no free lunch - every modification always has pros and cons. Just keep that in mind when using crash bolts or slotted strut mounting holes to gain negative camber. For street use on normal street tires of normal widths it isn't an issue. And keep an eye on your camber; if it slips, get the car re-aligned.


Left: Before with the OEM springs. Right: After the Swift spring and Whiteline bushing installation.

Mark's finished FR-S now sits 1" lower, rides better, and should handle better with a bit more spring rate. The camber is adjustable both front and rear and the rear UCA has Whiteline elastomer bushings. The added negative camber up front will help handling at the limit and save tire wear on the track. I'm still not a huge fan of camber bolts, but on certain set-ups and street tires, they can work. And honestly we sell camber plates, so crash bolts are never going to be high on my list of approved mods.


2013 Scion FR-S on Swift lowering springs + Sparco 18x8 ET48 wheels.

Mark also has our Subaru M12-1.25 long wheel studs installed on the rear hubs of his FR-S. He uses the longer studs to work with a 10mm hub-centric spacer he needed to make the +48 offset 18x8" Sparco wheels sit with a wider rear track out back. He said it fit without the spacer, it just didn't fill out the fender very well.



Mark said the rear studs were easy to install once he figured out how to remove the rear hub assembly (see above left). Off comes the half shaft retaining nut, then you unbolt the hub assembly from the emergency brake bits and you can remove the rear hub. Once removed from the car, you can use a press to push out the rear studs; the new studs go in the same way. With the Vorshlag 65mm studs installed out back, now there is full engagement of the threads on the longer/larger Vorshlag lug nuts even with that 10mm spacer installed (see above, right).



Our 65mm Subaru style Vorshlag wheel studs install into either the front or rear hubs relatively easily. As you can see the installed length is 48mm past the hub face up front, compared to only 25mm of stud protruding with the stock wheel studs. This upgrade gives you a solid 23 mm increase in stud length over stock, but they don't look silly or stick out excessively with the Vorshlag lug nuts. A solid upgrade for any track or autocross car - more lug nut engagement and the ability to run up to a 20mm thick spacer, if needed.



We installed these on the front hubs of Matt's BRZ when he upgraded to 255/40/17 Hankook R-S3 tires. The front wheels needed a 5mm spacer to allow this fat tire to clear the struts. Any spacer use requires longer wheel studs, as the stock studs are very short. This also necessitates new lug nuts since the stock nuts are very short, close ended lug nuts.



For those extra picky folks worried about long wheel studs making their FT86 look like Roman chariot wheel spikes, or the modern equivalent, fear not. As you can see above on the BRZ with our "65mm wheels studs" and a 5mm spacer there isn't a hideous amount of stud protruding past the lug nuts. This is just how a race tech inspector wants to see - full lug nut engagement, plus a little more. Perfect.

(continued below)

[Fair!]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ Project Build Thread

Project Update for December 28th, 2012: Well, we made it past the Mayan Apocalypse so I guess I can finally post up the work we've been up to for the past three months on various Subaru BRZ and Scion FR-S cars. We have done a bit with Matt's BRZ, drove it at two track days, installed various Whiteline parts and springs into multiple FT86s, and more. I worked on this update for two solid days, so it got pretty long. Let's get started.

BRZ Baseline Dyno Testing

Vorshlag isn't a "engine tuner" shop in any shape or fashion - we don't own a chassis dyno and likely never will. The only things we do to add horsepower are custom fabricated exhaust systems and LS1 V8 swaps, but we don't do any on-site engine building or tuning. So to do any power testing, we have to go to a few local shops that have chassis dynos. Back in mid-October, we took three of our shop cars to a local speed shop we use for tuning our Mustangs (True Street Motorsports) and got 2-3 baseline chassis dyno pulls on each. The BRZ was one of these cars, as was our brand new and bone stock 2013 GT (378 whp) and our headers/cold air equipped 2011 GT (424 whp).



Not only do we have dyno pulls done on our cars to see baseline stock numbers we are starting with, we do it after each power upgrade to verify results as well as sort of "regular engine health check-up". Kind of like an annual physical at your doctor, an annual dyno pull is a good test to make sure all systems are performing how they should. If you see big changes from the same tune/set of parts, it is worth investigating. You do this not only by looking at the peak dyno numbers but also checking the shape of the torque and hp curves (looking for irregular humps, drops or spikes) and also checking the air:fuel ratio (any decent shop that has a dyno will have a wide band O2 sensor reading as well).

Everything looked fine on all three cars and the baseline numbers on the BRZ were right about what we figured they would be. We have one dyno chart showing all 3 cars, and you can see the BRZ plot way down at the bottom. Hey, it is not a horsepower killer!



So there it is - the 167 whp BRZ monster dyno pull. This will be the baseline for hopefully some power improvements. Looking at the shape of the curve told us how the motor pulled through the rev range, with most of the power concentrated from 5000-7000 rpm. With the 6-spd gearbox, the ratios are pretty tight, which meant we knew that shifting at 7000 rpm was probably best, as the power fell off a cliff above 7K. When I was at a track day instructing with someone in an FT86 recently, who was shifting every gear on every lap at the 7500 rpm redline, you could feel the engine power falling off hard at the higher revs. I told him about the shape of the dyno curve above and asked him to shift at 7000 rpm instead. Lap times immediately dropped a full second and engine wear went down considerably (friction goes up with RPM nearly exponentially). Knowledge is power... in this case, literally.

From research done by looking at results from tuner shops, most bolt-on mods that add power to other cars are not showing significant gains on these FT86 cars. We have seen beautifully made, custom mandrel bent exhausts lose power on an FT86. Cold air kits that make the engines run poorly. It all boils down to the ability to add a custom tune - which is proving elusive to the various tuner shops, for now. Once the Toyota/Subaru engine management code is cracked, there could be potential gains to be had. For now we recommend concentrating on handling - tires, brakes and suspension - where we have seen SIGNIFICANT improvements with the right choice of parts.

Wheel & Tire Improvements - EVEN BIGGER!

Obviously we have been big supporters of ditching the factory FT86 17x7" wheel and 215mm all-weather Prius tires. The stock rubber is so very, very bad for performance, the OEM wheels are somewhat heavy, and all of it is too narrow for this 71" wide car (that is WIDE!). We've been preaching the evils of the factory rubber since before the car came out, and I got a lot of flak for the negative review of these skinny stock tires. But we didn't back down, and our theories proved correct - these cars respond immediately to wider tire and wheel upgrades with big grip increases.



A decent wheel and tire upgrade makes huge, HUGE gains in lateral grip on this chassis. Early on we went to a light-ish 17x9" alloy wheel on Matt's BRZ and have used two different performance street tires on them now. First was the 245/40/17 Michelin Pilot Super Sports on the 17x9" wheels, shown below. These tires fit these ET42 offset 17x9" wheels with just a little extra camber up front. No fender rolling or spacers were needed. Excellent street tire, quiet and grippy, and could even double as a good autocross or track tire.


Left: The 245/40/17 Michelin on the 17x9" wheel dwarfs the stock 215mm tire on the 17x7" wheel. Right: 245s installed.

Before his first track event, Matt decided to upgrade to some more track proven EPS (Extreme Performance Summer) tires, the Hankook R-S3, in a slightly wider 255/40/17 size. We ordered these through our TireRack account, then mounted and balanced them here at Vorshlag on the same wheels.



These 255 tires are big and actually fit the 17x9" wheels a bit better, but proved tricky fitting on the front of the car. The 10mm wider tire was touching the lower spring perch, with the large diameter OEM style springs. Just touching, but that's enough to necessitate a spacer.



We had to slip in a 5mm spacer up front to clear the strut, but o make that work we had to add longer wheel studs to the front hubs. You can read about that process below (luckily we stock and sell 65mm press in Subaru studs!). Ain't it fun modding cars? Sometimes it can snowball... one change (tires) can sometimes involve two more (spacers and wheel studs), but the results can sometimes be worth it (crazy grip!). The 5mm spacer proved to be the perfect amount of tire to strut clearance needed up front, with no rubbing on the strut or front fenders (with additional negative camber). The rear bolted on with no adjustments - we could easily get a 9.5" if not a 10" wide wheel out back (but why?).

Notice how we did NOT go to 18" wheels on the BRZ for his track tire? This was no accident. The FT86 chassis is light and nimble, and the stock brake rotors are relatively small in diameter. The only performance reason to increase wheel diameter is to clear larger rotor sizes, period. Everything else is done for STYLE. Big ballin' wheels look cool and cool cars are fast - or that's at least what we've been taught. If you can turn off that instinct and go with what is actually better for handling, you will stay with 17" wheels on these cars. As you can see below, even with +30mm more tire width (that is huge!) and +1" of wheel width, the 17x9" combo is very similar in weight to the 18x8" combo shown (and this 17" wheel isn't particularly light).


Compare the weights of a somewhat heavy 18x8" wheel and 225mm tire to a light-ish 17x9" wheel and 255mm tire.

Technically the FT86 could even use 16" wheels and still clear the stock brakes with ease, but then your tire choices shrink to almost nothing. This stems from a problem of tire size availability in smaller diameters. The tire manufacturers have catered their offerings to the car manufacturers' ever larger wheel diameter fascination, and now to get any decent widths in performance tires you have to go to 17". Well 17" diameter tires tend to top out at 255mm (some 17" tires go to 265mm) width, so if you want wider you have to go up to 18". Each step up in wheel diameter shortens the sidewall height (bad for ride and handling), ups the weight (bad), and ups the cost (bad). It just becomes a whole big bag of bad, so if you are chasing ever wider tires you end up in 18" wheels - but on big heavy cars you have to do that. We feel that the 255mm tire fits the lighter weight and overall performance of this car very nicely, so 17" wheels will work the best. For a street-only "fun" set of wheels... sure, go crazy 18", but just know that it will be heavier, ride worse, and tires will cost more than a similar 17" wheel set-up would.


This BRZ on the 17x9" wheels and 255/40/17 R-S3 Hankook tires is 71" wide, and the big track width is great.

Better Brakes for the BRZ?

Matt's car has also had some brake system upgrades to get it ready for the track. We left the rotors and calipers alone, because we wanted to see how well the car could do on track with just upgraded pads, lines and fluid. And the results are that it does VERY well with those upgrades alone. Incredible braking performance, no noticeable fade, and no need for more brake torque. So a "Big Brake Kit" (BBK) upgrade is not on the short list for mods, or even the long term wish list, until the car gains a lot more horsepower.



We took a gamble and went with a pad brand that several racers recommended - Carbotech. The XP12 compound were used up front and XP8 in the rear. This seemed like the best "track pad" for the size brakes the car had, according to Carbotech. And they were right - it was spot on perfect. They did recommend the XP10 compound for the front as well, but it wasn't available in time for the first event. Sure, they dust and make lots of noise, but we didn't want a compromised dual-purpose pad. These are used for track events only and after tracking with them twice, we think they were the right choice (and they still look great!). We swap back to the OEM pads and rotors for street and autocross use, which are quiet, work better cold and make a lot less dust.



While the pads were going in, we had custom stainless braided Teflon lined brake flex lines built to order. These are made by a friend of ours using high quality BrakeQuip brand parts, and all ends are crimped on a DOT numbered machine, for the best possible quality and street legality. We made them exactly like the OEM brake lines, with all of the goofy Subaru style banjos and FT86 specific ends and brackets, unlike the lower cost brake line kits we've seen popping up for the "FT86" chassis. Most of those are somewhat generic Subaru WRX kits, with many of the brackets missing and none of the locating tabs.



This makes our Vorshlag FT86 brake line kit cost nearly fifty or more dollars than the other braided brake hose kits out there, but our lines actually fit the FT86 exactly like the original Subaru lines. The lines attach to the struts just like the stock ones, and aren't held in place with a zip-tie. The ends are clocked properly and point in the right directions, for a kink-free installation. Our motto is Do It Right The First Time. The details are too numerous to go over here - check out the product page linked here to see the differences in our lines vs cheaper ones. Our kit will never be the cheapest out there, not by a long shot. Making the lines to fit and function exactly like stock lines is harder and costs more. These are DOT approved stainless braided lines, so they don't have the expansion/flex of the stock rubber lines. Better brake feel and the utmost in safety.

We also flushed the old factory brake fluid out and went with a full bleed using Motul RBF600. The much higher boiling point of the Motul brake fluid means less chance of boiling on track and going all to mush. We didn't do this on my 2013 GT for the October NASA event and I lost the pedal about halfway through my first sessions and drove right off the track! Huge mistake - never skimp on proper brake fluid for any car you take on track. At the bare minimum the brake fluid should be replaced with high quality, high boiling point DOT4 fluid.

Does the car need brake ducting? Surprisingly it didn't. After I took several hot laps in the car, abusing the brakes like I tend to do, Matt's BRZ with these pads/lines/fluid made lap after lap topping 1.4-1.5g under braking. Hey, at least that's what the AIM Solo data shows, and we were out-braking all sorts of cars. I was amazed that I couldn't overheat the brakes, but maybe I could on a hot Texas day taking a full 20 minute session of abuse. I could overheat the 255mm tires before the brakes would fade, so who knows? If we see the brakes fading with more suspension mods and lower lap times, we will come back and look at adding brake ducting to the front. But for now it seemed fine without it - a rare thing in modern sports cars.

(continued below)

[Fair!]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ Project Build Thread

Project Update for October 2, 2012: Well a lot has happened in the last four weeks since my first BRZ post. We've been super busy with some big race weekends, and have been working on several LS1 swaps in-house among other cars. Still, we have made some strides on this FT-86 project. First, the SCCA classing news.

FT-86 Twins Classed In STX!

If you are interested in SCCA autocrossing this FT86 chassis, there were some notable things said and seen at the 2012 SCCA Solo Nationals. We noticed a number of FR-S/BRZ cars entered in C Stock and a few in Road Tire, but the car was not classed in Street Touring category for this years Nationals, which was held last month in Lincoln, Nebraska.


Left: We saw seven FT86 cars at Nationals in CStock and RTR. Right: Our ESP Mustang did all right with four months of ESP development

I went to the SCCA Town Hall Meeting and it was said there that the FT86 twins would be classed in Street Touring soon after Nationals. It was inferred to me personally that the twins would go to STR, racing against the S2000, 3rd Gen MX5, and the other roadsters in that class. I felt this was a bad idea and that it belonged in a slower class, STX, which is made up of heavier 4 seat cars like the FT86 chassis. Behind the scenes the SEB and STAC (the two groups that class cars in ST) were split down the middle, and I "read the tea leaves" as they would be conservative and put this car in the faster class.


There's two things you don't find in Nebraska: good Mexican food and predictable weather

I made predictions soon after Nationals that the twins would go to STR, but was thankfully wrong, as this October 2012 FasTrack notification a couple of weeks ago placed the BRZ and FR-S into STX class. There are very few preparation differences between STR and STX classes, with X having a 265mm tire width maximum and R being 255, but both are limited to a maximum of a 9" wide wheel. The rest of the rules are identical - header-back exhaust, high flow cat, cold air intake is somewhat unrestricted, outer fender contours cannot be changed, but suspension has lots of allowances. You can't use metal bushings or move pick-up points (avoid those silly "anti-lift kits"!) but you can use coilovers, camber plates, poly/plastic bushings, and more. Great classing choice b the SEB and STAC, and I commend both on their choice and apologize for ever doubting their wisdom.


These are your typical STR (S2000, left) and STX (325 & 328 E36, right) front running car models

I made some statements on roadraceautox forum (aka: The Sandbox) that, if I was wrong about these cars going to STR, I would eat crow, dance a jig and prep Matt's car for STX. Ran out of time today and didn't get to take a video of me "dancing a jig" but we will do it this weekend at the NASA event. I have never been happier to be wrong, too. The SEB still has a 12 month window to change their mind when they first class a car, so if the FR-S or BRZ proves to be dominant in STX they said that they will move it to STR, potentially before the 2013 Solo Nationals. So if you prepare your car for STX just... be careful not to go TOO fast at a National Tour or ProSolo.

This STX classing for the twin has already made a big impact on racers - just today a long-time SCCA Solo racer called me and said "As soon as I saw the STX classing I bought a car that week!" Again, I don't feel the FT86 twins will be a threat to STX, but they should at least be competitive here, unlike in STR, where they would have been cannon fodder.

Whiteline FT86 Parts Going On

We at Vorshlag were already an Energy Suspension and Powerflex bushing dealer, but picked up Whiteline products last month as well. This was because they had some new bushings, Watts Link kit, control arms and relocation brackets for our twin 2011 & 2013 Mustang GTs that we needed. We put them to the test at the Solo Nationals and Global Time Attack events last month and did very well at both. When one of their reps came to our shop before the GTA event, he saw that we had a BRZ project and offered up some new goodies to test straight away. The early FT86 items from Whiteline available right away were two of the WRX/STi holdover parts that made it to the FT86 unaltered.



The first thing we installed was the Whiteline transmission mount bushing insert, part number KDT926, shown above. We have these ready to sell, of course. This kit is a polyurethane shifter bushing insert that fills a massive void in the OEM transmission bushing. Installing this bushing took minutes from underneath and it really tightened up the shift feel, but added a tiny bit of NVH in the process (noise/vibration/harshness).



You can see the gap in the OEM bushing above left and the Whiteline insert installed above, right. The main bolt from the bottom secures the insert in place. Very easy install and very worthwhile for anyone wanting a better shift feel or anyone doing competition events where this is allowed. Matt says it has a little extra vibration at 750-800 rpm and a little more engine noise at 2500-3500 rpm. It isn't too harsh and I barely noticed it myself, but just wanted to warn anyone. He says it has become less noticeable since he has been driving it for the past week.



Next up was the Whiteline polyurethane rear crossmember bushing insert kit, part number KDT922. We also have this ready to sell in our FT86 model section. This kit has two-piece polyurethane inserts for the rear crossmember bushings, which are made of rubber and also have BIG voids in them to make it all squishy and sloppy. Again, the OEM has to make these cars 100% smooth for every single type of driver on the road, but enthusiasts and competitors are going to want firmer bushings in several places.


Left: Stock bushing installed. Right: Whiteline KDT922 kit installed

This rear crossmember insert kit prevents the rear differential housing from having to "wind up" against those big, open rubber bushings. They are easy to install (and easy to remove later, if the car gets sold) and tighten up the reaction time from when you mash the throttle to the car accelerating forward. Once the car was in the air, the rear subframe was lowered an inch or so and these inserts were bolted above and below the rubber bushings, removing the gap and firming them up. It took about 45 minutes.


Here is a animated GIF showing the installation of the KDT922 kit

Swift Lowering Springs, Test 1


Left: OEM ride height reality. 15" from fender lip to center of wheel, F&R. Right: Photoshopped ride height goal, about 1.5" lower?

One of the most visually irritating things about this car, after we replaced the OEM skinny wheels and tires, was the tall stance. Again - Subaru and Toyota had to make the FT86 twins work on almost any sort of road or weather condition (think: heavy snow drifts), so they made it sit up tall and have relatively soft springs. We measured Matt's BRZ at 15" from center of wheel to fender lip on all four corners. Measuring this way will not change with tire height changes, so it's how we measure all cars that have unaltered fender lips.

One of the first and most popular suspension upgrades on many sports cars is a change to "aftermarket lowering springs". These usually lower a car 1 to 1.5 inches and stiffen up the rates 10-30%. There are several brands and options for the FT86 and we carry both Eibach and Swift. Most lowering springs have a variable rate design, where the first inch or so of travel is OEM soft, but then the coil spacing changes and they get stiffer after that amount of displacement.


Left: OEM rear spring next to Swift Lowering Spring. Right: OEM rear shock and Swift spring.

Swift heard about our BRZ build and sent us a prototype set of lowering springs for the FT86. Well, it was more like we begged them to send us their first set (after they had done their in-house testing on them) so we could at least show something going on with this car (because our coilover shocks are very late). They warned us that this set of Swifts was not the final production version and that the ride heights were not what they targeted, so I'm not giving any stats or impressions on these just yet. We were just happy to get the first test set on Matt's car and will revisit this when the revised production springs are available.


Left: Front Swift spring on OEM strut. Right: Rear OEM shock and Swift spring.

The ride height is a bit lower, but it is not dramatic. I suspect that the production kit will be closer to 1" - 1.5" below the stock 15" number. We raised the front a tick with our prototype camber plate + OEM perch solution, which I will explain below.

Vorshlag Camber Plates for OEM Spring Prototypes

We have already been selling camber plates for the FT86 for a few months, but so far we only support the coilover offerings that use a 2.25", 60mm, or 2.5" ID linear springs. This is because our Vorshlag camber plates always come with a new upper spring perch with an integral sealed radial bearing inside - it is a long story, but this is why our plates don't wear out or make noise or have funky steering feedback. Whenever we make a new camber plate design it gets the coilover perch first, then we tackle the OEM perch second. The FT86 uses many Subaru GD chassis parts and our high caster Vorshlag camber plates work perfectly on this car. But the Impreza GD's front OEM spring diameter is very different than the FT86's spring diameter, so we had to make something custom.



Making the OEM perch for our camber plates is a lot more involved than just fitting it to the factory diameter spring (which aftermarket lowering springs all match). To do it correctly it requires a lot of calculations, modeling and some testing to get the final camber plate + perch assembly to match the factory ride height. What we don't want to ever do is raise or lower the ride height in the new camber plate + perch assembly for an OEM/aftermarket lowering spring application. For a coilover car we actually try to minimize the stack-up height, to increase total stroke; ride height can be adjusted with the adjustable spring perches inherent to coilovers.



We took Matt's car apart a couple of weeks ago and measured the factory spring diameter and modeled the OEM top mount and upper perch, but have not had time to do the full 3D design work necessary to make an all new upper perch explicitly for this chassis/spring. But we had just finished all of this design work + prototypes + testing phase for the BMW 1M OEM perch and had an extra pair of early 1M prototypes sitting on the build table when the BRZ Swift lowering springs arrived. Lo and behold, they were almost perfect fit to the FT86 front spring diameter!



So when we did the Swift spring install on Matt's car we machined a custom set of BRZ upper perches in the lathe from a 1M prototype set and - viola! - we had our first BRZ OEM spring perch solution. After installing them it looks like it needs some more tweaking to be the perfect solution for the FT86, but for now it allowed Matt's BRZ to get up to -3.0° of negative camber in the front! His BRZ started out with -0.2 to -0.4° on the front end (and we verified this OEM camber setting range on a friend's FR-S also) so that is a big gain, and it can go right back to the stock setting (and a little beyond) for a big range of adjustment.


Here's how it sits with our prototype camber plate + OEM perch and prototype Swifts.

Again, please ignore the ride height of this car in the picture above. This has both prototype Swift springs and prototype Vorshlag plates with OEM perches. Both designs are not quite 100% yet - we still need to tweak the front OEM style Vorshlag perches a bit, and the lowering springs are not production lengths either. The raised front relative to the rear is from our camber plate, not the Swift springs, too. We will readdress this in a future post when both production parts are ready. Should be a matter of weeks. These Vorshlag OEM style upper perch + Camber Plates are not for sale at this time; we are only supporting coilover spring diameters for our FT86 plates right now.

Issues With The Car

Matt's BRZ has logged a tick over three thousands miles on the odometer now and two small issues have cropped up. First thing we noticed visually was the right rear taillight housing is showing water inside. This is likely from a crack in the foam rubber seal between the outer lens and the tailing housing itself, and condensation has entered. My brand new Mazda RX8 did this when it was about the same age (two months old). Matt will have the Subaru dealer replace the leaking housing under warranty.


We over-filled the blinker fluid!

The second issue is the 3rd gear synchronizer seems to be shot, and it hasn't been abused. This started happening weeks before the Whiteline transmission bushing insert was installed, which had nothing to do with the synchro failure. I drove the car when it was a week old and it shifted smoothly into each gear, with fast or slow gear changes. Matt has only been daily driving this car to work and on a couple of trips, he doesn't speed shift or drive like a maniac, and almost every car he has ever owned was a manual. I don't think it is user error. But today when I drove it with 3000 miles the synchro is snicking badly unless you shift 2-3 like a grandma. It takes a "1....2....3..." count to get it onto 3rd without crashing. It doesn't seem to occur below about 4k RPM, but above that it will grind even with the most gingerly shift. Again, I just saw this first hand and was shocked. This will be another thing to mention to the dealer for repair under warranty.

Not trying to spook anyone - these are not necessarily unexpected issues with a brand new design like this. And also I had a then brand new model 2005 RX8 showing more issues than this - a blown strut, end link fell apart, taillight housing was full of water, and it got horrible gas mileage - so just be ready if these issues pop up. We are seeing a sample set of one here, so these two problems do not necessarily mean this is a trend.

What's Next?

We have more production FT86 Whiteline parts coming right after the SEMA show next month, hopefully. We have a three track events at Eagles Canyon Raceway coming up int he next 6 weeks (NASA Oct 6-7, SCCA PDX Oct 13-14, Five Star Ford Open Track day Nov 17) but Matt is out of town for two of those. Hopefully we can get it on ECR (our main test track here in town) at the November event and get some baseline test laps in.

Thanks,

[Fonzie517]

Re: Vorshlag BRZ Project Build Thread

Brittney and I ran our first autocross in her FR-S at the Mesquite Memorial Stadium with ER today. She won the ladies PAX with a mid 39 second run and I ran a fastest time of 36.941, good enough for 22nd in Pax, while the FTD was somewhere in the 33s, maybe a hair under. The car is bone stock and riding on the Prius tires we all love to hate. It did rain a bit, though not during our heats, but the car was sliding around the course even before the rain soaked the parking lot.

Mike McShane rode with Brittney for two of her runs to help her get acquainted with autocrossing, but was unable to take it for a lap. I'm hoping somebody with a hot shoe will show us what it's really capable of. I can't wait to see what you guys develop for this thing. I know a lot of guys are excited to see how well it lives up to the hype.