Ohlins R&T landing in the USA as soon as May

[nadkoolio]

@yjypm I appreciate these impressions you've shares. I found it very surprising that Tom@EAS felt the normal Öhlins R&T rode as smoothly as the Redwood GT kit. It's difficult to believe given how different the spring rates are supposed to be. I know Öhlins DFV adjustment range feels very wide, but stiff springs are stiff springs, in my limited experience...no damper can fully hide that.

Unless, as was suggested, the Redwood Model Y spring rates are much stiffer than their Model 3 spring rates? That's a real possibility I guess. (Whereas we all know the R&T kit is one product for either 3 or Y.)

I do recognize that Tom has vastly more experience across modified suspensions than me, so I'm not discounting his opinion, but something doesn't add up if the spring rates are as different as I thought they were.

It could be due to ride height. When I spoke with Redwood they said that at some point if you've reduced the ride height enough it's more comfortable with stiffer springs as softer springs result in the bump stop being engaged more frequently. For the Model Y they suggested that anything less than MYP ride height the Performance kit would be better than the GT kit.

 

[yjypm]

Really interesting. It sounds like the rear was not re-valved because they stayed within the 10%.

Exactly how they explained that they wouldn't touch the rears.

@yjypm I appreciate these impressions you've shares. I found it very surprising that Tom@EAS felt the normal Öhlins R&T rode as smoothly as the Redwood GT kit. It's difficult to believe given how different the spring rates are supposed to be. I know Öhlins DFV adjustment range feels very wide, but stiff springs are stiff springs, in my limited experience...no damper can fully hide that.

Unless, as was suggested, the Redwood Model Y spring rates are much stiffer than their Model 3 spring rates? That's a real possibility I guess. (Whereas we all know the R&T kit is one product for either 3 or Y.)

I do recognize that Tom has vastly more experience across modified suspensions than me, so I'm not discounting his opinion, but something doesn't add up if the spring rates are as different as I thought they were.

I saw that post and have my wonders too... I'd say it's subjective how everyone think of the term "comfort". I am 6 feet tall and I always thought my wife who's 5'5 and another friend of mine are about the same height until my wife told me that friend is a lot shorter than her. Tom has been in many aggressively modified vehicles, it's normal that both coilovers on a Model Y feel the same level of comfort to him. Not to mention the different shock body designs lead to different dampening even at same # clicks from stiff. Again I haven't sit in a car with standard RT it might be really that comfortable .

 

[Motion122]

Really interesting. It sounds like the rear was not re-valved because they stayed within the 10%.

Even at 10kg or 14kg they are still good to go!

 

[Motion122]

It could be due to ride height. When I spoke with Redwood they said that at some point if you've reduced the ride height enough it's more comfortable with stiffer springs as softer springs result in the bump stop being engaged more frequently. For the Model Y they suggested that anything less than MYP ride height the Performance kit would be better than the GT kit.

One reason you see most coilovers will bump up the rate because of reduced available compression travel.

 

[yjypm]

One reason you see most coilovers will bump up the rate because of reduced available compression travel.

Exactly. MPP has an article explaining why their coilovers are more comfy than stock: Suspension Tech - Firmer But More Comfortable? How Can That Be? - Mountain Pass Performance

 

[Motion122]

Exactly how they explained that they wouldn't touch the rears.


I saw that post and have my wonders too... I'd say it's subjective how everyone think of the term "comfort". I am 6 feet tall and I always thought my wife who's 5'5 and another friend of mine are about the same height until my wife told me that friend is a lot shorter than her. Tom has been in many aggressively modified vehicles, it's normal that both coilovers on a Model Y feel the same level of comfort to him. Not to mention the different shock body designs lead to different dampening even at same # clicks from stiff. Again I haven't sit in a car with standard RT it might be really that comfortable .

If you look at the rear 5 link and where the spring sits and its motion ratio, 12kg is relative soft for the car. Anything less with a ~200mm length spring could bind. However, with Swift you will get a big more stroke before it does.

Completely agree! Ride quality is very subjective. Stiff to one may be soft for another. Dampers have a lot to do with it. Twin tubes will naturally ride softer by design and match up with soft spring rates you will have a caddy like ride. For those who want more control a monotube is the way to go with larger piston surface, quicker response, less damper fade, and no aeration.

 

[yjypm]

If you look at the rear 5 link and where the spring sits and its motion ratio, 12kg is relative soft for the car. Anything less with a ~200mm length spring could bind. However, with Swift you will get a big more stroke before it does.

Hence why I went with Redwood Performance spring rates over standard Ohlins springs. I have no idea about the rear motion ratio on this car but telling from the geometry the rear springs should be considerably stiffer than the front, I don't get why Ohlins went for the 11/12k setup.

 

[Motion122]

Exactly. MPP has an article explaining why their coilovers are more comfy than stock: Suspension Tech - Firmer But More Comfortable? How Can That Be? - Mountain Pass Performance

Yes, you can make it super comfortable using twin tube dampers with close to factory spring rates.

Ohlins DFV can nearly achieve the same ride quality without having to give up performance through the use of the DFV and expansion needle. DFV will soak little sharp bumps like the rumble strips on the track and the expansion joints on the highway.

On your F8X M car the stock rates were around 3.3kg(comp slightly higher) front and 10kg rear(comp slightly higher), the Ohlins R&T(most recent part number) nearly double the rates(9/19) to achieve a nice balance between street and track. It still rides decently well on the street. Ohlins did offer spring rate options for those who will never see the track. 70/80 front 140/160/180 rear, but that eventually ended because those rates diminished the performance of the R&T and its intended use. Aftermarket picked up the void and offer lower rates for street only drivers.

 

[Motion122]

Hence why I went with Redwood Performance spring rates over standard Ohlins springs. I have no idea about the rear motion ratio on this car but telling from the geometry the rear springs should be considerably stiffer than the front, I don't get why Ohlins went for the 11/12k setup.

Is it 8/10?

The front of the Model 3 exhibits lots of dive and pitch and on top of that the motion ratio of the front suspension likely yield that spring rate choice by Ohlins Sweden.

 

[yjypm]

Is it 8/10?

The front of the Model 3 exhibits lots of dive and pitch and on top of that the motion ratio of the front suspension likely yield that spring rate choice by Ohlins Sweden.

8/11, I copied Redwood Performance spring rates

 

[Motion122]

8/11, I copied Redwood Performance spring rates

8/11 are their performance rates? Those rates on good dampers should ride like a Caddy.

I am on 9/12 with MCS 2WNR and on softer settings the vehicle rides like a factory M3P, but with a lot more control.

 

[yjypm]

8/11 are their performance rates? Those rates on good dampers should ride like a Caddy.

I am on 9/12 with MCS 2WNR and on softer settings the vehicle rides like a factory M3P, but with a lot more control.

I doubt 8/11 and 9/12 are much different. Your thoughts about your MCS is exactly how I feel about my Ohlins at current settings, 15 out of 20 clicks from full stiff. I changed the front settings to 12 this afternoon but wife refuses to go out for dinner tonight .

 

[Motion122]

I doubt 8/11 and 9/12 are much different. Your thoughts about your MCS is exactly how I feel about my Ohlins at current settings, 15 out of 20 clicks from full stiff. I changed the front settings to 12 this afternoon but wife refuses to go out for dinner tonight .

For the front it makes more difference than the rear because of the motion ratio of the suspension. Most of the ride quality will be in the dampers anyway.

 

[Motion122]

Really interesting. It sounds like the rear was not re-valved because they stayed within the 10%.

One more thing may help you understand it better is that the rear damper and spring are divorced. Because of the motion ratios, the damper has and advantage controlling the spring so less of a reason to revalve it as well.

For the standard rates going in either direction there is no need to revalve at all.