Koni FSD shock, strut, damper install

[Ploppity Drown]

It was broken into two pieces. So we just duct taped it back together and reinstalled the stock strut.

I'll give this another go when I've got two new OEM bumpstops. I don't mind running the stock struts with a compromised bumpstop, but not on my precious Konis.

BTW do you guys know of an online parts catalog/diagram for our cars? The number on the bumpstop was 4N51-3K100-AC (FoMoCo), but that didn't yield any hits.

Word to the wise... before you tear into the front suspension, have two new bumpstops on hand if there's any suspicion yours might be busted.

[FreeFlyFreak]

Originally Posted by Ploppity Drown BTW do you guys know of an online parts catalog/diagram for our cars? The number on the bumpstop was 4N51-3K100-AC (FoMoCo), but that didn't yield any hits.

Only one I know is

http://www.tonkinpartsonline.com

Listed for $15.37 (MSRP 19.21) under:

2008 Mazda Mazda 3
Front suspension
Suspension components
Bumper
W/turbo

[kwsmithphoto]

I think there's plenty of surface area in the knuckle they join in that I wouldn't worry about using anti-seize. Engine builders use it on head bolts which are subject to quite a bit of pressure and vibration, yet aren't known to come loose very often. Mostly, I just don't want the struts to corrode themselves to the knuckle so I can get them off in the future without too much trouble.

In any case, a lot of that coating WILL come off during the install, so it just made sense to me to take all of it off.

BTW, they're powdercoated with a clear coat. The clear coat will come off with paint stripper but not the power coat (we tried it, before reverting to the drill brush). Anyway, I still think it's best to just to go to bare metal for best fit.

Yes, you're right about the double nut setup in the back. Like I said, I didn't do the actual work, I just supervised.

And ya, I'm sure Stretch is right about the damper shaft not being an issue. Apparently Mazda uses a thicker top out bumper inside strut which limits unloaded rebound travel.

But, then, why does is the car sit higher in front and take time to settle? Bilsteins lift cars, because they're pressurized with nitrogen. Maybe it's just the friction seal on the fronts, maybe they need a bit of time and wear in to settle? Mystery...

The only truly accurate way to measure chassis drop (or lift) is to put it on a frame alignment jig. It's how race teams do it. Anything else is a compromise, but a dead flat concrete floor and taking measurements from hard points on the chassis to the floor is a lot more accurate then measuring fender well gap in a driveway is.

Bummer about your bump stops. That's why I always try to work on cars on Saturday, when you can usually a find a dealer parts counter open somewhere. Enjoy the bus tomorrow morning!

[kwsmithphoto]

BTW, I took the car on some of my favorite backroads with my wife as a passenger for the first time. Weekends aren't good up there, got held up by a lot of motorcycles, and classic cars clubs out for a Sunday drive. But she found it "exhilarating, yet slightly nauseating."

Geez, I was just cruising. 60-75% at the most, just a sporting little drive in the countryside. OK, I did pass a few packs of bikes at full clip (safely though!), I just think I need to break her into it a bit more. She just doesn't know what a good car with a pretty good driver can do on public roads without being dangerous in the least. Sometime this summer I'll take her along on a track day to re-calibrate the laws of physics for her which might help. And slip her a Marazene beforehand so I don't need to steam clean the interior.

The odd thing is though - well maybe this isn't so odd - but, uh, well, how do I say this. Every good girl has a little dormant part of her that likes skimming the danger zone. There's a psychological thing that happens which can trigger a response that can often be beneficial to the relationship, at least for a a couple hours. A primordial response of some kind that changes their brain chemistry temporarily.

It goes away fast though, but if you time it just right, and convince her that a little tequila actually helps car sickness, well... Then again it can also go the other way and you ain't getting laid for weeks, ha ha!

[florindi]

So has everyone's front end settle down like KWSmith's? I want to pull the trigger on these, but I want to make sure that they are going to be better on the track too. Anyone tested them on the track yet? It's either going to be these FSD's or Bilsteins sports.

[FreeFlyFreak]

Originally Posted by florindi So has everyone's front end settle down like KWSmith's? I want to pull the trigger on these, but I want to make sure that they are going to be better on the track too. Anyone tested them on the track yet? It's either going to be these FSD's or Bilsteins sports.

Regarding track. I am going to Laguna Seca next week and will be able to compare them to stock damper performance then.

But on the road, they are so much better than stock there is no comparison.
I think I mentioned in this thread or another that it feels like you are going 40 mph slower with the FSD's. ie 120 now feels like 80 stock. Its that good

I'll keep you posted after Laguna.

[florindi]

Thanks Freeflyfreak! I'll be waiting for your response.

[mouse0330]

hey, I just found this thread, was looking to replace my stock and decided this three..
koni fsd, bc racing coilover, h&r coilover

[mouse0330]

sorry, I'll start a new thread

[kwsmithphoto]

I don't know how well they'd perform on a track, they're designed to be road shocks for daily driver's. I suspect that on a bumpy track, or one where you're hitting the curbs every corner, that they might have an advantage over a stiffer, fixed rate damper. Maybe.

But tracks are wider and smoother than the back roads I drive, so a stiffer spring and damper combo should be faster than stock springs with FSD's. Most likely, depends on the combo, but the whole point of the FSD is to provide daily driving comfort with a performance improvement thrown in. IMHO, the whole point of track days is to have fun and work on your driving skills. I think the FSD's are plenty good for that, even if they aren't the ultimate track solution for the car.

Then again, that hasn't stopped McClaren from using the technology in their F1 cars. Of course they use a tunable setup on a car that has nothing common with a road car except 4 tires, I'm just saying.

Anyway, 99.5% of my driving is on the road, where they work great for me. But I value comfort more than ultimate handling these days. If I were a real track junkie I'd probably be running Mazdaspeed coil over's (and have a set of wheels with R-comp's in the garage).

FreeFly, your car is actually changing it's ride height? That is so bizarre. My car still looks like it did in that picture - level.

[MadOzodi]

Would Koni FSDs be a good match with the Eibach Pro-Kits?

[kwsmithphoto]

Only on the regular 3's Eibachs, not the newer ones specific to the MS3.

The OEM springs on the MS3 are stiffer than the Pro Kit's for the regular 3's, so what's the point? Also, the FSD's are apparently quite sensitive to ride height, so they probably would not be a good match for any spring that lowers an MS3 even more than it already is from the factory. A Koni guy in another thread said so much a while back.

[florindi]

Don't you mean springs?

[FreeFlyFreak]

Originally Posted by florindi Thanks Freeflyfreak! I'll be waiting for your response.

OK, first thing, I removed my comments regarding varying ride height.
I measured again after driving to work, but after reading my notes from months ago I realized that I had measured them differently this time than before hence the difference. (duh)
So I will need to measure them again, and I will be able to give you an accurate comparison, of stock, a couple of days after install, and now 2-3000 miles after install.
I wont be able to do that till Sunday or Monday as I am away from home.

But to give you something to chew on, my previous measurements were these:

Initial measurements (top of center cap to fender, measured twice OEM and once with Konis in cm)
...OEM.!OEM!.KON
.....O.....O.....K....Av Diff
FR 34.5 34.5 35.4 +9mm
FL 34.7 34.7 35.4 +7mm
RR 34.4 33.7 33.4 -6mm
RL 33.0 33.0 32.5 -5mm

The one constant is the rear left is always way less than the RR. Cant be the shock I just changed it, must be something else, the spring is seated right, I just looked.
Wonder if it was tied down too tight on the left rear on the boat from japan.

[kwsmithphoto]

Originally Posted by florindi Don't you mean springs?

Yes. Edited. Thanks.

[kwsmithphoto]

The one constant is the rear left is always way less than the RR. Cant be the shock I just changed it, must be something else, the spring is seated right, I just looked. Wonder if it was tied down too tight on the left rear on the boat from japan.

Or more likely, that the rear quarter panels were mounted about 1.5mm different from each other. This is why we shouldn't trust absolute measurements from body panels, they're only useful for before/after's.

If your car is still visibly nose high it this point, I'd take it to a frame shop and have them put it on a jig, then measure where the chassis is compared to OEM specs. That's how I fixed a camber problem on my last car - the LR camber was always about 1 degrees more negative than the right, and wasn't adjustable. Something in the rear end either got bent or it was built that way. It wasn't inexpensive but they fixed it, but I can't remember what they did. In any case, it shouldn't cost too much just to see. Tell them what you did and what you're looking for.

[FreeFlyFreak]

Originally Posted by florindi Thanks Freeflyfreak! I'll be waiting for your response.

Measured again and they are basically the same as I listed before.

The car looks just like it does in the pics kw posted.

The chassis is level.
But the raw numbers show it gained about 7mm up front and lost about 5mm in back, compared to stock.

Handles fine though, I gained almost 3secs at Laguna Seca, in much worse driving conditions. However in addition to the FSD's an Intake was added and tune was changed from AP Stage 1 to Stage 1+

Laguna Thread here:
http://www.mazdaspeedforum.org/forum/foru...ca-2009-a.html

[FreeFlyFreak]

Originally Posted by Ploppity Drown I'll give this another go when I've got two new OEM bumpstops. I don't mind running the stock struts with a compromised bumpstop, but not on my precious Konis.

Ploppity, did you get your bumpstops and fronts on yet?

[Ploppity Drown]

I did. In fact, I just wrapped up the installation this weekend. I had actually done the fronts the previous weekend, but I screwed up by re-using the OEM bump plate--the plastic ring that sits between the bumpstop and the top of the strut. The yellow OEM bump plate is wider, which is good, because its width matches the width of the dust boot; but also taller, which is bad, because it subtracts about 1/2" of free suspension travel. Basically it was a choice between a cleanly secured dust boot or an extra 1/2" of travel, and I chose wrong. It was easy enough to fix, though. Gotta love plastic.

Running the fronts with 1/2" less suspension travel did illustrate the consequences of the FSDs prematurely engaging the bump stops. I felt like I was getting launched off of high amplitude, low frequency bumps, and the ride was generally rougher--basically it didn't feel like an improvement over stock. This begs the question "Do the Konis ride/handle better than the OEMs simply because of the added 1/2" of free travel due to the shorter bump plate?" I don't think so, but I'm sure the added free travel accounts for part of the improvement. (And I take no responsibility if you destroy your stock struts by modifying your bump plates--though I would like to see the results.)

I exchanged a couple emails with Lee at Koni, and he provided some interesting info about the FSDs. I had concerns that my issues were with using the FSD vs the Sports:

The FSD does make as much or more force when it is non low frequency mode as does a normal KONI Sport. Because it discerns frequency (essentially time or duration), the FSD does take a little bit of initial time and movement to occur so it is not super quick go-kart like steering response but generally when given a little chance to move, it will build a considerable amount of rebound damping force. Although the FSD feature works on rebound, bump rubber impact will work on compression as a high frequency spike and the FSD mechanism may not be able to close and react quickly enough after the bump rubber strike to catch the overshoot and oscillation.

After replacing the stock bump plate with the Koni part, I noticed a big improvement in ride quality: more comfort, more control. I also feel more comfortable at higher speeds on the roads I travel--which may not be the best thing for me. It's not a perfect solution, though, and sometimes I wish the suspension would settle faster after low frequency bumps. Maybe those Cobb rears would help...

Also I'm not thrilled with the kludgey method I had to use to secure the bottom of the dust boot. I just zip-tied it to the strut, but the boot is so wide it had to kink and fold onto itself.

Sanding most of the paint off of the bottom of the struts helped ease the process of forcing them into the spindles--still wasn't easy, though.

We'll see how I feel after some more testing, but so far I'm happy in spite of the installation niggles.

Oh, and I'll get some more ride height measurements soon.

[FreeFlyFreak]

Originally Posted by Ploppity Drown This begs the question "Do the Konis ride/handle better than the OEMs simply because of the added 1/2" of free travel due to the shorter bump plate?" I don't think so, but I'm sure the added free travel accounts for part of the improvement. (And I take no responsibility if you destroy your stock struts by modifying your bump plates--though I would like to see the results.)

Now there is something I would like to try, but cant.

Take a stock vehicle, cut the yellow plastic bump plates off the front struts and see if there is an improvement, just with that.
Talk about a free, quick, easy mod.......

Anyone??
Come on, some one must be about to put coilovers, yellows or FSD's on, try removing the yellow plates off the stock fronts first and let us know if it helps any.

Glad to hear you got it sorted Ploppity, I got in touch with Mazdasteve3 when I was doing mine and asked him if he had reused the yellow part, when he installed the yellows. He said no so I omitted them, it looked like they wouldn't fit right anyway. I should have put that in my write up specifically, in fact I will edit it now so no one else makes the same mistake.

[MadOzodi]

I will if you tell me how much you got your FSDs for... In a PM of course.

Actually, what's the potential danger doing this?

[Ploppity Drown]

My concern would be that the strut piston might bottom out in the cylinder, since the bumpstop wouldn't engage soon enough.

The bump plate (at least the Koni version) is just there to prevent the bumpstop from pushing air/dirt into the damper seal, as Lee explains here:

The white ring on your KONIs is called the "bump plate" and is a surface for your bump rubber to impact into that will keep it from pushing an air pocket or road dirt into the damper seal. Although a simple little piece, it is helpful to provide a little added protection for the top seal.

Why Mazda made their bump plate 5/8" tall (vs the Koni's ~1/8" tall) I don't know. It could be the strut internals are designed differently, in that the rod+piston might be longer and need another 1/2" of protection from bottoming out. Considering that this is a FoMoCo multi-platform part, it seems possible that the bump plate design was a provision for running lower ride height (vs. the regular Mazda3, for example. How much is the MS3's suspension lowered relative to the regular 3? I recall them quoting a number in millimeters.) Of course, since the Koni dampers were designed for the regular 3, and they work on the MS3, maybe it doesn't matter. By my measurements, the body of the stock strut--bump plate removed--is a little shorter than the FSD, by 1/4" at most.

I certainly wouldn't run the stock dampers without a bump plate, but it might be instructive to remove 1/4" - 3/8" worth of bump plate--whether by modifying the stock bump plates or replacing them. Again, proceed at your own risk.

BTW if you're looking for a good price on the FSD's, PM Ken at Protege Garage (CaptainKRM).

***

I also wanted to add that the 19mm deep offset wrench was not necessary for the install. It is only necessary to torque the strut top nut when the coilover is installed in the car... not if you torque the nut on the bench--which is easy enough with a 19mm offset wrench on the nut and locking pliers to extend the lever arm of the allen wrench. The FSM calls for 42-56.3 ft-lb. Although, the FSD's came with their own torque spec chart, so you might want to go by that. I didn't use a torque wrench for the shock/strut nuts, anyway. You would need a special service tool--a crows foot won't work either.

Here's the torque specs for the front:



And the rear:



On the rear, a single 1/16" thick stainless fender washer was enough to take up the slack in the mount. Mine were 1 1/8" OD by 1/2" ID.

[florindi]

Ploppity,

Flying Freak and KWSmithphoto both seem happy with their purchase. How about you? Are you satisfied with the shocks? You mention possibly trying the Cobb rears. What is your reason?

[FreeFlyFreak]

Originally Posted by florindi Flying Freak and KWSmithphoto both seem happy with their purchase. How about you? Are you satisfied with the shocks? You mention possibly trying the Cobb rears. What is your reason?

It is true I am happy enough, but they do not fix the car 100% in my eyes, close but no cigar, I did say that earlier in the thread.
It is close enough that I am done experimenting, and will leave the car as it is, unless there is a proven, simple, cheap change that would give me the last 25%.
If someone tries the FSD's with the stock springs and then tries them with another type of spring and claims a big improvement I would probably change also.
If that makes sense. They are close enough that I dont want to randomly buy and change stuff, hoping I'll stumble on a fix for the 25% remaining problem area. At this point I am more likely to make it worse than better. If someone I trust posts proven improvement keeping the FSD's and using a different spring I would probably try it. The difference is Ploppity already has the Cobb springs, and so it involves no dollars going out the door for him to try it, "just" his labor.

Ploppity, if you decide try those Cobbs in the rear be sure to post the comparison results here, I would be VERY interested in the results, including any change in ride height (hopefully none). Thanks.

[Ploppity Drown]

Originally Posted by florindi Ploppity, Flying Freak and KWSmithphoto both seem happy with their purchase. How about you? Are you satisfied with the shocks? You mention possibly trying the Cobb rears. What is your reason?

As I said, yes I'm happy with the FSDs in spite of the imperfect fitment/installation. They are a huge improvement over stock. I could do with a little more low frequency rebound damping in the rear, but that wouldn't necessarily improve performance--that's just my preference for road feel/suspension response. This was why I was initially thinking the Koni Sports might be a better choice, with their adjustable rebound damping. However, without making a back to back comparison, there's no telling whether the Sports would be better in this regard and/or worse in others.

Running the Cobb rear springs would increase the frequency of spring/damper oscillation over a given bump, perhaps by enough to the exceed the FSD cutoff, and therefore get me more rebound damping over these lower frequency bumps. At least that's my theory. Does that make sense?

The other reason for using the Cobb springs is that it will get me higher spring frequencies in the rear than the front, which is desirable for flat ride quality in a sports car. From the factory, the spring frequencies are higher in the front than the rear. This has been discussed at length by Stretch in his "Possible track spring..." thread.

That being said, I'm weary of increasing any spring frequencies as this is my daily driver and most days I value comfort over performance. Plus here in L.A. the roads are pretty jacked up so driving a stiffly sprung car around isn't much fun. In fact, on my post-install test drive my car was full of passengers (which has the effect of lowering all the spring frequencies) and I really enjoyed the plush ride. I was driving my parents around so I was taking it easy anyway.. later on as I was ripping through freeway onramps in light, weekend traffic (sadly my only opportunity to really enjoy my sport-tuned suspension) I was glad to have the higher frequencies back.

You can't have it all. But I'd agree with FreeFlyFreak that these are as good a damping solution as one could expect, given the circumstances.

I'll definitely keep you guys updated on my setup.

[kwsmithphoto]

Interesting. The yellow part that the OEM dust cover seats on wouldn't fit on the FSD, not even close, so we didn't use it. A call to Koni confirmed that they don't fit. So I'm real curious how you got it on there.

They also said that the OEM dust boots weren't needed anyway, but would still fit at the top, they just won't seal to the bottom of the strut housing. The zip ties included were far too small to do anything useful, also confirmed by Koni, so my dust covers just set on the lower spring perch, essentially unsealed. Koni also told me they weren't needed anyway. Besides, not even Mazda uses them on the rears, so what are they good for? The Koni's shaft seals are far better, most cars don't even have dust boots, so Koni designed their seals to work just fine without them. But we mounted mine at the top mount only, I figured it couldn't hurt.

As for ride and handling, I'm 100% happy with mine. Massive improvement over stock. There are sportier solutions but they can't possibly ride as well. It's firm but compliant, like a well tuned road car should be. I don't mind a bit of body movement as long as it's controlled, and it is now. Tightening it up even more would require higher rate springs and more rebound damping. And since the FSD is non adjustable, you'd have to use a conventional damper design and the result will be a rougher ride - and less traction over rough road surfaces, which is most of Los Angeles.

Anyway, it's a road car, not a race car. Like I said earlier, if I was going to build a car just for track days, I wouldn't start with an MS3. Or any wrong wheel drive car for that matter.

[Ploppity Drown]

We had to scrape out some of the plastic on the inside of the stock bump plates to get them to slip onto the FSD. Seemed like a good idea at the time...

Lee@Koni told me something similar about the dust boots--that they weren't necessary. But I'd like to protect this investment as much as possible. And keeping dust away from the damper rod/seal is a good idea in my book. I used my own zip ties.

[kwsmithphoto]

I could do with a little more low frequency rebound damping in the rear, but that wouldn't necessarily improve performance--that's just my preference for road feel/suspension response.

Ya, me too, probably a consequence of them being valved for the MZ3 spring rates.

Running the Cobb rear springs would increase the frequency of spring/damper oscillation over a given bump, perhaps by enough to the exceed the FSD cutoff, and therefore get me more rebound damping over these lower frequency bumps. At least that's my theory. Does that make sense?

Not really. A better solution IMO, though a less comfortable one, would be to run something like a Cobb spring with an adjustable perch to level the car, and a Koni Yellow to tune the rebound damping. An ideal solution would be a stiffer rear spring of the same length and a tigher valved damper to match.

That quote from Lee at Koni is a little cryptic. Basically, the FSD is a mechanically variable damper valve, as opposed to a single circuit damper valve, dual circuit damper valve, electronically variable damper valve, or the super cool GM magnetic-rheological dampers.

Basically, the FSD valve can tell the difference between a very high frequency input, like you'd get from a pothole or choppy road surface, and a low frequency input, like you'd get from road undulations and control inputs.

Similar to a dual circuit damper, which has separate orifices for high and low speed (damper shaft velocity) damping, the FSD valve allows more fluid through which makes it softer when you hit, well let's just use potholes for example. A single circuit damper, as found in most road cars, can't tell the difference and simply lets a fixed amount of fluid to pass through the valve under any shaft velocity, or frequency as Koni phrases it. A good dual circuit damper will allow more fluid to pass through the valve during a high shaft velocity condition, which lets the spring drop the tire down into the pothole, maintaining contact with the surface. IOW, it reacts faster because the valving softened up. Dual circuit valves are commonly used in off road applications, but also on some road cars.

The FSD valve does essentially the same thing but better, because they made it continuously variable. The idea is that when you're driving the car quickly, relatively low frequency control inputs like steering and braking are damped a bit more firmly so the car handles more responsively. Also, if you go an undulating but otherwise fairly smooth road surface, you're still in low frequency mode so the valve stays tight and body motions are controlled much better.

But no road is perfect. If the car hits that pothole, the valve will open up very quickly to soften the damper, increasing both traction and control, then quickly change it back towards low frequency mode once it senses that the damper shaft slowed down. Again, very similar to a dual circuit valve, but it only has one circuit that varies itself depending on what the damper shaft speed and amplitude is telling it. That's pretty slick - you get just the right amount of damping for a wide range of conditions.

But there's a conundrum. If you bottom out the car and smack the bump stops, the FSD valve simply thinks you hit a pothole, and softens the shock. Which is exactly what you DON'T want it to do when you hit the bump stop, which essentially multiplies the spring rate by an order of magnitude. So, for some amount of time, you have a seriously underdamped suspension. The shock will figure that out, but how quickly? According to Koni, not quickly enough sometimes. This is why they tell you to avoid using them on significantly lowered cars - they need a lot of travel to keep you off the bump stops, so the damper works properly.

They could, of course, come out with a high performance, shorter shaft design that are tuned for stiffer springs. The same basic design is used in F1 cars, after all, which have very little travel and extremely stiff springs. But those are built for specific cars, with different valves that the teams can change to match a given spring rate. One of those dampers probably costs more than your car did though!

It would be nice to have an adjustable version, but I don't think the FSD valve can accommodate that. You'd either have to open the damper and switch out the valve, use a higher viscosity fluid, or some combination of both.

[kwsmithphoto]

Even though that was a very long message, I forgot to mention why:

I was trying explain how running the Cobb springs in the back wouldn't trick the FSD valve. All you'd get is an even more under damped rear suspension. FSD is smarter than you think it is. Remember, the faster the damper shaft moves, the looser the valving gets to keep the tires on the ground, and the fillings in your teeth.

[Ploppity Drown]

Okay, I get it... higher frequency = less damping, not more

Although, it could be that the difference in rebound frequency you'd get with a stiffer spring isn't significant enough to really affect the way the oscillation is damped. I'm sure that the size/shape of the road imperfection is what matters most.

So maybe, just maybe, the stiffer rear springs would get me a more flat ride quality/less oscillation without over-working the dampers.

[kwsmithphoto]

Although, it could be that the difference in rebound frequency you'd get with a stiffer spring isn't significant enough to really affect the way the oscillation is damped. I'm sure that the size/shape of the road imperfection is what matters most. So maybe, just maybe, the stiffer rear springs would get me a more flat ride quality/less oscillation without over-working the dampers.

Flat ride quality, as in roll stiffness, or pitch resistance?

Either way, I'm not sure what you'd accomplish. But remember, the stiffer springs will increase the rebound amplitude, which might overwhelm the rebound valving (which is borderline already).

Still, it shouldn't be particularly expensive or difficult, all you need are 2 springs and adjustable perches, so give it a try! If it works I'll do it myself. I was already toying with the idea of doing the same thing with Koni Yellows on the back.

Oh, and sorry for the verbiage, it wasn't entirely directed at you. I just haven't read a thorough explanation of how the FSD works so I thought I'd write my own.

[Ploppity Drown]

I'm talking about pitch resistance here.. the notion that the rear spring frequencies should be higher than the fronts so that the rear can catch up to the front when you drive over a bump. The front sees the bump first, so it has a head start. Where I get lost is that these are damped spring frequencies, and I don't understand how to factor damping into the analysis. As you say, it might do more harm than good.

And no worries about the verbiage. I'm as verbose as anyone. It's all in the spirit of fruitful discussion.

[FreeFlyFreak]

If I were an experimenting man, with money, I would try this........

I would bet the perfect solution is in an "off the shelf" FSD for a different vehicle that would fit the MS3. Who knows maybe the Mazda 5, or the Volvo S40 (the bilstiens are a direct swap on the S40 so the Konis should be too). Maybe worth calling Koni and having a chat with them.

I wasn't willing to take the risk, but someone might be, so I thought I would throw it out there, some future experimenter may catch it and run with it.

[Ploppity Drown]

I like experimenting.. but I don't have the money for it. Hell I'm already in for about $850 with a set of springs and a set of dampers. Now I'm talking about adding another set of dampers and only using half of everything. Stock Front springs, Cobb rears. Koni FSD front struts, Koni Sport rears. I don't think I'd have much luck selling my cast-off parts, either. You could probably get a fully-customized Billstein setup for less.

[FreeFlyFreak]

Originally Posted by Ploppity Drown I like experimenting.. but I don't have the money for it. Hell I'm already in for about $850 with a set of springs and a set of dampers. Now I'm talking about adding another set of dampers and only using half of everything. Stock Front springs, Cobb rears. Koni FSD front struts, Koni Sport rears. I don't think I'd have much luck selling my cast-off parts, either. You could probably get a fully-customized Billstein setup for less.

Well actually, the yellows dont come as a set of four, you can just buy the rears separately...
But seriously, just do what I did and call it a day.
Try the Cobbs back there though before you sell them, not much labor involved with the rear springs, and you never know...

[kwsmithphoto]

Originally Posted by Ploppity Drown I'm talking about pitch resistance here.. the notion that the rear spring frequencies should be higher than the fronts so that the rear can catch up to the front when you drive over a bump. The front sees the bump first, so it has a head start. Where I get lost is that these are damped spring frequencies, and I don't understand how to factor damping into the analysis. As you say, it might do more harm than good. And no worries about the verbiage. I'm as verbose as anyone. It's all in the spirit of fruitful discussion.

I don't know very much about spring rates and their relationship to spring frequency . I'm not an expert in this area by any means. The math gets very complicated, especially when you're dealing with progressive rate springs that the chassis was designed to work with.

Unfortunately, I have other priorities right know than to experiment with alternatives. I hope that changes but for now, the MZ3 FSD's are doing an admirable job of controlling my MS3 on stock springs. If I came into some big cash tomorrow, I'd probably try the AWR valved Bilsteins and Vogtland spring combo.

It probably performs better but ride quality is bound to suffer. Same with the MS and other coil overs - I suspect the more aggressive setups are quicker on a track but like I said, this is my road car, not my race car. I just wanted better road manners, with minimal impact on daily driver ride comfort. Koni delivered, in spite of the installation issues. It just does everything better now, and cost less than a grand.

Next stop: tires! The stocker's are OK but they can't keep even keep up with a simple damper change. And there's a world of alternatives out there that should perform better in roughly the same price range. They will tell me what to do to the chassis next (if anything) because it's an interactive relationship.

[Crossbow]

Try some hankook ventus Z212's.
Hankook Ventus R-S2

[blaggah]

Originally Posted by Ploppity Drown I like experimenting.. but I don't have the money for it. Hell I'm already in for about $850 with a set of springs and a set of dampers. Now I'm talking about adding another set of dampers and only using half of everything. Stock Front springs, Cobb rears. Koni FSD front struts, Koni Sport rears. I don't think I'd have much luck selling my cast-off parts, either. You could probably get a fully-customized Billstein setup for less.

I have koni sports on cobb springs and just cant quite get it the way i want it. I've recently been thinking about swapping the OEM front springs back in. But the i remember what a pain in the ass i is to get the konis into the front perches. It's almost like they measured the OEM struts, made them the exact same size and painted them afterwards. I had to sand them a little to get them to drop in.

[Ploppity Drown]

I sanded most of the paint off before I even tried dropping (more like "coercing") the struts into the spindle clamps. One side went in really easy, the other side was still a bitch.

Could you elaborate on your issue? What is it about specifically about your setup that you don't like, in terms of road feel, handling, etc?

[thanotosq]

Originally Posted by kwsmithphoto Only on the regular 3's Eibachs, not the newer ones specific to the MS3. The OEM springs on the MS3 are stiffer than the Pro Kit's for the regular 3's, so what's the point? Also, the FSD's are apparently quite sensitive to ride height, so they probably would not be a good match for any spring that lowers an MS3 even more than it already is from the factory. A Koni guy in another thread said so much a while back.

I've been looking into this as well and this is what i found...

"Pair with Eibach springs for 1"-1.5" lowering"

And the part numbers for the Eibach springs for the regular 3 and speed3 are different. Although, i dont know what the differences are... maybe someone could help out with that...