TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

[lolachampcar] Performance Upgrade Efforts

Discussion in 'Model S: Driving Dynamics' started by lolachampcar, Apr 24, 2013.

  1. lolachampcar

    lolachampcar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,454
    Location:
    WPB Florida
    #1 lolachampcar, Apr 24, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2013
    I've been reading over some the stability control compliance documentation ( FMVSS 126 link below) and I'm getting a better feel for why Tesla may have made the decisions they did and why the P+ package took as long and costs as much as it did/does. The yaw stability test in particular goes a long way towards explaining why any manufacturer would use large amounts of negative camber at the expense of tire wear.

    I'm speaking with some other MS owners offline with the goal of putting together the ability to do a minimum of bushings and damper/springs in addition to the camber links which are already done. The key is getting enough people on board to make doing development dampers a reality. I'm sure the project will extend to sway bars as well at some point but my past experience has taught me to get compliance where you want it before considering roll control.

    I think Tesla may be limited on what they can and can not do for regulatory reasons thus my desire to work outside these restrictions.

    [Mod Note] This thread was broken out from another thread in order to isolate discussions particular to lolachampcar's efforts.
     
  2. Rodolfo Paiz

    Rodolfo Paiz P85 "Plug and Play"

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    681
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    Please count me in among the interested owners, and add me to the "offline discussion" when you can. Thanks.
     
  3. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    ^^ What he said
     
  4. Doug_G

    Doug_G Lead Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    15,853
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
  5. EMDoc

    EMDoc Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Messages:
    149
    Location:
    San Diego
    Same here. Count me in!
     
  6. pilotSteve

    pilotSteve Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    Messages:
    587
    Location:
    Vancouver WA
    same here, count me in for a parts kit!
     
  7. justaddsun

    justaddsun Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    Messages:
    403
    Location:
    DC
    Pm'd you, I'm also in!

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
     
  8. kunal

    kunal Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Location:
    Bellevue, WA
    I'm interested as well.
     
  9. 4sevens.com

    4sevens.com Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2012
    Messages:
    399
    i'm in as well
     
  10. Panacea

    Panacea TSLA Shareholder/Believer

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    231
    Location:
    NJ
    Me too please!
     
  11. lolachampcar

    lolachampcar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,454
    Location:
    WPB Florida
    Just to be clear, I'm not putting together a package to sell to people..... I'm interested in working with others to come up with a good solution as everyone has a different perspective, experience base and, best of all, contacts :)
     
  12. Blurry_Eyed

    Blurry_Eyed MS Sig #267, MX Sig # 761

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Messages:
    562
    Put me in the 'I have contacts' category and I'm available to help. I may end up getting the factory retrofit, rather than pursue a more custom solution, but if so I'd still be available to put you in touch with some top notch suspension people in the Bellevue/Seattle area who would probably be interested in this project.
     
  13. bellwilliam

    bellwilliam Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2013
    Messages:
    111
    Location:
    LA
    Lolachampcar: great idea. wanna make sure I understand what you are looking to do here:

    develop a damper / spring (coilover) package for those wanting more performance ? issue I see is most here are on active suspension (main reason I went with std suspension), it will be trickier with software integration.

    another lower cost option would have Bilstein revalve the dampers. They do it all the time, and cost minimally.

    another solution is to develop camber kit like you have done, but commercialize it. This will add adjustability to suit everyone's driving style.
     
  14. Kermit

    Kermit Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    Messages:
    39
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    Lolachamp- I'm curious about the camber change. You first made an offset bushing to test the length of the control arm. Rather than installing longer control arms, is it reasonable to put such a bushing into service? I would imagine it would require some sort of set screw to keep it from rotating.
     
  15. dennis

    dennis P85D

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,230
    Location:
    Silicon Valley CA
    A little late to the party, but I am "all in" for working toward an aftermarket solution that makes P+ handling or better available to the early adopters of the P85. It appears that we won't be able to get that from Tesla even if we spend $13K.
     
  16. brianman

    brianman Burrito Founder

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    15,487
    If this holds up, it's a serious misstep by Tesla. Pick a price that allows every customer the option to get what they want. If you have to make it $20K, then say so. Don't just not offer it, forcing people to shop aftermarket.

    IMO.
     
  17. lolachampcar

    lolachampcar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,454
    Location:
    WPB Florida
    Bill

    - - - Updated - - -

    There are a couple of things going on here. First, I learned that with modern street car suspension the angular movement between the control arm and the upright or chassis is taken up by flexing of the rubber annulus of the rubber bushing. The outer sleeve of the bushing is a press fit in the arm. The inner sleeve is clamped in the upright or chassis. Given this, I could not use the offset bushing as it would be clamped in the upright or the chassis thus causing relative movement between the offset bushing and the control arm. That would be wrong in way too many ways :) You would have aluminum to aluminum relative movement with its associated wear and the camber would change as the offset bushing rotated in the link (thus changing the effective link length).

    Oh, the second thing is that you need the bushing flex to actually get the bolt back in when putting the suspension back together again. The link is not perpendicular to the upright when the suspension is in full droop (torque link affect) which makes it a PITA to get the bolt back in. The offset bushing would have no flex thus it might not even be possible to get it back together. As was, I had to install the outside bolt first then use the link itself as a lever arm to get the inside bushing in. I can only imagine how much fun it will be doing this with less compliant performance bushings.
     
  18. trygve

    trygve New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4
    Location:
    Norway
    Oh, the second thing is that you need the bushing flex to actually get the bolt back in when putting the suspension back together again. The link is not perpendicular to the upright when the suspension is in full droop (torque link affect) which makes it a PITA to get the bolt back in. The offset bushing would have no flex thus it might not even be possible to get it back together. As was, I had to install the outside bolt first then use the link itself as a lever arm to get the inside bushing in. I can only imagine how much fun it will be doing this with less compliant performance bushings.[/QUOTE]

    I have not seen a Model S suspension in person yet, but from a performance, adjustability and non-binding perspective, without the issues with compliance I would opt for a bushing setup like this: http://scandc.com/new/node/185, but with an adjustable arm, like these: http://scandc.com/new/node/102.

    The big issue is the height sensor with such a setup of course. They will probably weigh a little more than stock too, but could equally well be made with aluminum tubing, I read a thread where an aircraft engineer created rear lower control arms with alu tubing and some kind of similar rod ends/johnny joints/spherical bearings.
     
  19. lolachampcar

    lolachampcar Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,454
    Location:
    WPB Florida
    I looked at the JohnyJoint. It was an attractive option but I suspect a custom configuration would be needed (either from currie or just build one) for a 1/2" though bolt and 1.6" OD (used on MS). These joints would be expensive in comparison to stock type MS or MS P+ bushings assuming we could locate the original manufacturer of the original equipment (OE) style bushings. I'm spending my time now finding a vendor for the OE type bushings. If I do not have any luck, perhaps these joints would be a way to go provided we were willing to make bespoke parts for each MS joint (at least two different sizes).
     
  20. jcstp

    jcstp Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,627
    Location:
    Belgium

Share This Page