Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

Noob question. Have some Bilstein height adjustable circlip shock absorbers fitted in my car. At the time of fitting, i set the circlip at preferred height and tightened the tophat to create some pre-load on the spring.

Wanted to lower the car a bit more and hence adjusted the circlip a notch down. Upon doing so, I noticed that my spring was now fully extended with no preload when car was still jacked up. ie. the spring could move up/down the shock and turn.

Obviously with the car off the jack, the spring is compressed under the weight of the car.

I just wanted to know, should I pull out the shock and screw down the top hat (im assuming to the bottom of the thread to achieve any preload on the spring (if possible?)

Or is it okay to have the spring fully extended and able to move around when car is jacked up? Should the spring always be under some load regardless if on the car?

Would like to know whether I need to pull out the shocks or just adjust the circlip height regardles of any preload on the spring.

Thank you!

unfortunately life is not that simple.

top nut first....you should always do it up tight. while a side effect may have been preloading the spring in your case, it's job is to hold the shock assembly together.

re spring height and being captive....if the spring is too short to remain captive, you can either ignore it and live with the knocking noise (lots of race cars do but I think it's too annoying in a road car), or get helper springs. The helper spring is a very light spring that stops the main spring rattling.

pat's car aint that low roy... :ermm:

its 320 on the front :ermm: and 340 on the rear. Want to lower the rear down, but when adjusting circlip it made the spring captive!

Ill pull out the shock and tighten the tophat further down! Thanks for the help

I had the bilstein's in the rear of my car before i got coilovers. I had the same problem the spring was too short so i zip tied the rear of the spring to the "seat" of the shock, just incase i went over a bump and the spring came out of its seat.

I know its not safe and a zip tie wouldnt do much but it might help if the spring was to jump out over a bump!

hahah i see....can't exactly be surprised if something isn't right at the hight :P have you calculated the roll centre and roll couple?

you referring to 320mm height for track days? I'll be adjusting back to 340-350mm for trackdays which seems to be the best height for r32's in terms of handling.

If i drop a circlip height and retighten the hat to take up some pre-load and then decide to flick the circlip back up (without re-adjusting the top hat) would this be causing any harm?

Im assuming the spring will be under more pre-load as the distance between spring seat and tophat has reduced. Would I need to unwind the tophat? How much load should be forced onto the spring?

Cheers for help again.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...