Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Redwood Ohlins coilovers vs KW Variant 3 coilovers

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
@BSinPDX Interesting that your MPP Sport KWs got smoother over the first few weeks, I felt the same with my Redwood Performance Sport Öhlins. Hopefully your Redwoods will too.

What damper settings did you use the most with the MPP's? What have you been using with the Redwood's so far?

Does the firmer-feeling rear spring translate into easier rotation at the limit? The setup feels pretty darn close to neutral to me (with dampers set the same front and rear). Not much understeer to speak of. For me it took a little getting used to, but now I love the balance. Feels more sports car like than what I was used to.
 
@BSinPDX Interesting that your MPP Sport KWs got smoother over the first few weeks, I felt the same with my Redwood Performance Sport Öhlins. Hopefully your Redwoods will too.

What damper settings did you use the most with the MPP's? What have you been using with the Redwood's so far?

Does the firmer-feeling rear spring translate into easier rotation at the limit? The setup feels pretty darn close to neutral to me (with dampers set the same front and rear). Not much understeer to speak of. For me it took a little getting used to, but now I love the balance. Feels more sports car like than what I was used to.
I ran my MPP Sports at 10/12 compression/rebound (unless I'm mixing it up) and tried the Redwoods at 20 front and rear, but now have them down to 16 for a bit of extra control. Love that I can adjust both ends without jacks, and also that I no longer need my makeshift ramps to even get a jack under it.

January in the PNW doesn't offer a lot of dry-weather motoring, and I needed an alignment badly so I haven't really pushed the Redwoods hard yet. Yesterday I was running them on my favorite nearby twisty/undulating road and for sure the rear end was at least as lively as it was before, and the firmer springs the more planted it feels. Felt great right up until I hit a coyote, ugh. Like I see a coyote once a year at most, how is it one runs out directly in front of me in the daytime? Didn't damage the car; less sure about the poor dude.
 
@BSinPDX Sorry to hear about the coyote. I'd be pretty shaken up after that. I was riding shotgun for a similar incident years ago, with a calf on a pitch dark road late at night that we only saw a split second before impact.

I've been keeping our M3P at 16 front / 16 rear the majority of the time. My wife seems to like that setup, and it does feel like a Goldilocks setting for daily driving in my opinion. On my own I like firmer 11/11 a lot too and I sometimes switch to that when it's just me in the car, especially if I'm really attacking the twisties.

I tried something well into the softer side, I think 22/22 or maybe 24/24, and I didn't like it. The ride got extra smooth, and basic damping control remained fine from a pure ride quality perspective, but the handling responses became a lot softer feeling. It didn't feel sporty. I'd use a setting that soft again for especially delicate passengers but otherwise I prefer firmer and sportier.

I know I should try more in-between settings. I usually just switch between 16/16 and 11/11 these days.

And welcome back to stock height! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BSinPDX
@tm1v2 on a scale of 1-10, 10 being as comfortable as factory, where are you?

Honestly, I'm at a 6 with these, and was at 8 with the less-fancy MPP Sports, but an inch too low. The adjustment on the Redwoods (particularly the 11k rears) isn't firm to comfortable, it's firm to bouncy and I can't imagine "extra smooth" being in reach. The extra firmness does improve overall handling vs the MPP's but all from rear-end stiffness.

The one time I had 4 people in the car I was expecting to be giving excuses for my extra-firm ride, but it was better... as though an extra 300 pounds in back provided some needed load for the springs. If they're the same spring rates for a Model Y they might be perfect.

I'm thinking of giving Redwood a call to see if 10k rear springs can work because 8k/10k seems like it may be what I need.
 
@tm1v2 on a scale of 1-10, 10 being as comfortable as factory, where are you?

Honestly, I'm at a 6 with these, and was at 8 with the less-fancy MPP Sports, but an inch too low. The adjustment on the Redwoods (particularly the 11k rears) isn't firm to comfortable, it's firm to bouncy and I can't imagine "extra smooth" being in reach. The extra firmness does improve overall handling vs the MPP's but all from rear-end stiffness.

The one time I had 4 people in the car I was expecting to be giving excuses for my extra-firm ride, but it was better... as though an extra 300 pounds in back provided some needed load for the springs. If they're the same spring rates for a Model Y they might be perfect.

I'm thinking of giving Redwood a call to see if 10k rear springs can work because 8k/10k seems like it may be what I need.
@BSinPDX I think you still need more miles on the new suspension. It really did smooth out for me after a bit. Still firm and sporty of course, as I wanted, but smoother in how it goes about its business. At the very beginning I remember thinking like it was even firmer than I expected or really wanted, but after some miles it really did smooth out in how it took in the smaller bumps and stuff. Now I feel like it's goldilocks perfect firmness for my taste, I wouldn't want any softer, it feels like the best ride vs handling tradeoff of any car I've owned, easily. Skewed towards handling of course :) but rides just fine while handling amazing.

[ Side note: I run 245/45R18 tires on 18x8.5" wide wheels. I switched our M3P to that ASAP while still on stock suspension. So I have similar sidewall as a base Model 3, though of course I run firm sporty performance tires (weather permitting). Personally I think that sidewall pairs really well with the sporty suspension. ]

From a pure ride perspective vs stock the Performance Sport is...different. In several ways and situations better, in two specific situations worse, but overall it's at least neutral or even an upgrade for my driving. I upgraded the suspension especially for driving fast over twisty back roads, often with pretty nasty pavement, and for that it rides better, in addition to having worlds better handling. Even my wife who's not into car modding at all called it "smoother" than our air suspension Model S after her first long drive through those roads on the new suspension.

The springs are definitely firmer than stock. Yet the ride is less bouncy and much better controlled when the going gets fast and rough. There was something a little weirdly bouncy and unsettled about the stock ride. Not too bad as long as I didn't drive really fast, the stock ride was fine to me...but nothing special.

When I ride in stock Model 3's, like Lyft and Uber especially lately, I don't feel the ride is better. It's not identical but overall no big difference. This is compared to 16/16 front/rear (halfway firm setting). For sedate driving like that either stock or this suspension is fine. If you want that kind of driving to feel extra smooth then the GT kit would be the way to go.

The firm springs make themselves known most when driving slowly over rough city roads. Like <= 30mph or thereabouts. But with the dampers at 16/16 it's not harsh, just firm sporty. The harsher the impact the better it feels vs stock. Minor stuff is not filtered as much when going slow.

The other situation it can ride worse than stock is wavy highway pavement. I don't encounter much of that, but when I do the suspension likes to just follow the waves up and down. It does keep the weight planted and is probably good for handling but doesn't make for a great ride in that situation. Stock suspension was softer sprung and softer dampened and would absorb some (not all) of the waviness, effectively reducing the amplitude.

The odd wavy road aside, the faster I drive the smoother it gets vs stock. That's when the DFV really comes into play I think. And it's also when the stock suspension was at its worst.

Similarly, the rougher the road the better the ride vs stock (except when going very slow where the firmer springs just can't compress as much). The stock suspension would get unsettled and lose control over the rough stuff especially going fast over it. Now the car just takes in the bumps while staying stable. You know the bumps and pavement under you, it is firm and sporty, not soft or floaty, but with any significant speed it's smoother than stock, less crashy and less bouncy and much better controlled.

Hitting the rear bump stops (easy on a Model 3, stock or modded) is a vastly smoother experience. Night at day. Hitting large dips and bumps at speed was pretty bad stock. I found that out even on our test drive.

Normal highway driving feels tighter. Not harsher, not smoother either, just tighter responses, and no more float or bounce from the bigger dips.

I hope this helps. If there's any more specifics you want my impressions of or for me to test, including specific damper settings, just let me know.
 
Quick update: I'd developed a front-end clunk over the last couple days so I had wheels on and off a couple times while double-checking everything's torque, with no luck. Recalling a similar experience with the MPP KW's, I tightened the front dampers from 18 to 14 and that solved it. :rolleyes:

One other note since this is technically in the Model Y forum.... I'll bet the extra 350ish pounds in a Y would feel just right if the coils are the same 8k front, 11k rear. Having 2 rear passengers seemed to engage those rear springs more effectively the one time the wife and I had another couple with us.
 
@BSinPDX Any luck getting that frontend clunk sorted?

The only frontend clunk I've had with this car so far was when I knocked an endlink loose on a REALLY big hit, followed by miles of nasty moon surface pavement. (What can I say, the road was too twisty and fun to drive slow!) Sounds like you've checked your endlinks already though.
 
@BSinPDX Any luck getting that frontend clunk sorted?

The only frontend clunk I've had with this car so far was when I knocked an endlink loose on a REALLY big hit, followed by miles of nasty moon surface pavement. (What can I say, the road was too twisty and fun to drive slow!) Sounds like you've checked your endlinks already though.
The solution was to keep them dialed more firm. I'm running 16 front and rear now just fine, except the rear springs are still too hard and I'm waiting for a call back from Redwood to talk about switching to 9k rears to get a little compliance back into my ride.
 
The solution was to keep them dialed more firm. I'm running 16 front and rear now just fine, except the rear springs are still too hard and I'm waiting for a call back from Redwood to talk about switching to 9k rears to get a little compliance back into my ride.
@BSinPDX What did you set rear free length too? If 645mm, try changing to 630mm. When I spoke with them about this last year, they said they now have confidence to recommend 630mm even for stock height, for improved rear compression travel. (If lifting above stock height I would definitely check in with them for a specific recommendation.)

Especially if you go to softer rear springs, I imagine you'll want the extra compression travel, since softer springs will bottom out easier.

I think (not 100% certain) the original 645mm suggestion in the manual is based on matching how much compression the stock rear suspension allows. And stock bottoms out in the rear very easily as you probably remember. 630mm allows a little bit more rear compression, not a big difference obviously, because maintaining battery-to-ground clearance is important too...
 
@BSinPDX What did you set rear free length too? If 645mm, try changing to 630mm. When I spoke with them about this last year, they said they now have confidence to recommend 630mm even for stock height, for improved rear compression travel. (If lifting above stock height I would definitely check in with them for a specific recommendation.)

Especially if you go to softer rear springs, I imagine you'll want the extra compression travel, since softer springs will bottom out easier.

I think (not 100% certain) the original 645mm suggestion in the manual is based on matching how much compression the stock rear suspension allows. And stock bottoms out in the rear very easily as you probably remember. 630mm allows a little bit more rear compression, not a big difference obviously, because maintaining battery-to-ground clearance is important too...
I think mine came at like 635 and I'm running just shy of stock height, 390 hub to fender. Definitely will get their advice because I'm guessing softer springs = more sag so possibly more preload to maintain my preferred height. I could be wrong.