Adjusting Koni's

[autxr]

I know we have coverd this, but I'm a bit slow...

Please tell me if my general assessment is correct:

With single adjustable (rebound) Konis, turning the knob in the "Firm" direction should INCREASE grip at that corner.

Let's keep it simple here, if the car is loose and I set the rears to "FIRM" should the car tighten up?

Scott

[preparedcivic]

Typically, exactly the oppposite will happen. Twisting the knob "higher" increases rebound damping, keeping the rear stiffer, which usually makes things looser with more oversteer.

YMMV

[autxr]

You see, that's what I'm trying to figure out.

Does stiffening rebound have that effect.

My feeble mind sees stiffer rebound (meaning SLOWER rebound) means you get weight transferred and keep it there longer.

OK, here it is from Koni...

"It should be noted that too much rebound on either end of the vehicle will cause an initial loss of lateral acceleration (cornering power) at that end which will cause the vehicle to oversteer or understeer excessively when entering a turn. "

I'm still having a hard time reconciling this in my head.
When I see "Firm" on the Koni knob that means to me the rebound vavling of the shock will be firmer when adjusted that way.

To me, firmer rebound means SLOWER rebound- the resistence to the spring returning to its extended state is greater.

Thus, I think of firmer as doing the same ting as softening the spring rate.

Where am I going wrong here, or do I have the scenario right and just an imporper understanding of the dynamics involved?

Scott

[preparedcivic]

What you're doing is effectively making the rear of the car stiffer by tightening the shocks. Stiffening one end relative to the other will make the newly stiff end loose grip. Got that?

Slower rebound IS stiffer, but the car will "skate" more easily at that end. I would think setting Koni's to full stiff in the back of a Celica would make it super assy. But then again maybe not, as there would be minimal toe change, which is what normally gives us problems. I've never been inclined to try it. I'm happy barely up off of full soft.

[autxr]

What you're doing is effectively making the rear of the car stiffer by tightening the shocks. Stiffening one end relative to the other will make the newly stiff end loose grip. Got that?

Yup, I got that part down OK (fortunately for us I do understand that much).

Slower rebound IS stiffer

This is the part that I'm struggling with (in my mind), but for now knowing that this is the case is enough for me.

So, what would setting the shocks at full firm up front get me? More understeer, better transitional response in slaloms, theoretically, what is it doing for me.

I really need a good test and tune day to fool with these things...

Scott

[preparedcivic]

So, what would setting the shocks at full firm up front get me? More understeer, better transitional response in slaloms, theoretically, what is it doing for me.
------------------------------------------------

Doing exactly that. FYI I've got my fronts set stiffer than the rears. Slows down the Celica happy butt syndrome.

Out of the 6 front drive cars I've had, this is the only one that ended up with the shocks set stiffer in the front than the rear. Never had one that consistently oversteered like this one either though.

[afghan]

I set fronts +3 and rears +1.25approx.

I had to back off the rears (they were set at +2)
I am trying to remember if I was understeering or ass whiggling!?

I had to stiffen the fronts up to +3 because I was understeering and that helped.