Eibach Multi Pro R2

steve13gt

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Posts
266
Reaction score
0
I am going to just ask for the older spring rates, since many have had good luck with them.

350 front
250 rear

but I want to know if I should swap from a helper to a 150 lb/in tender in front, like what came with the 350 fronts before
 

Department Of Boost

Alpha Geek
Joined
May 26, 2010
Posts
8,808
Reaction score
31
The mistake you're making is to ASSUME that there was a valid, viable reason behind the final form of the kit. It's also very easy to see a host of small changes (from personnel moving around, coming/going, simple error, etc.) that stack up to be a major issue. If you think "well, that just CAN'T happen," realize that Earls has been selling stainless braided brake hose kits for the S197 for going on a decade now, with the brackets installed backwards from the factory...

Radial/thrust bearing: It's entirely possible that they initially designed the CC plates to work with the stock strut mount (radial bearing) and the stock replacement struts. Now, they do a coilover kit, and the "engineer" putting it together goes to the shelf, grabs a CC plate, and calls it good. OR somebody in accounting or marketing decides that they need to hit a particular price point, and redesigning a "perfectly good" CC plate would be the go/no-go decision on production of the part.

Spring rates: Some yahoo, who may have come from the BMW camp, looks at the weight numbers after reading on the interwebz that the "new" chassis is lighter, and decides that a rate change is needed. Remebering that the M3 runs heavier springs in the rear, he just swaps them around and calls it good. OR the GED-less people packaging the kits from parts bins just grabbed the wrong stuff... Then, the tech support genius looks at the catalog and/or engineering parts list, and says "Yup, you've got the right stuff."

Understand, I'm not saying that the above IS what happened, I'm saying it COULD BE what happened. This may be a case of having a niche product built to a competitive price point. Think about it for a moment: double-adjustable monotube dampers with a remote reservoir, "USA made," and they're cheaper (by more than a few hundred!) than my AST single-adjustable non-remotes... OR to put it a different way: Your whole kit cost less (at list price!) than the rear dampers on the FR500S... The problem with niche products is that the volume is comparatively low. I would be willing to bet that Koni has sold more sets of Sport dampers for the S197 in one year, than Moton, AST, Eibach, and JRZ combined have sold over the last eight. To keep costs down to compete (price point) with the Chinese junk coming over, that means something has to give. Usually, that means either component quality, or R&D in some form. I did an install on a HIGH-END set of dampers (brand-name redacted!) and the spacers for the rear Heim joint were a full 1/4" wider than the shock bracket on the axle... Oops. It happens. High-volume parts are generally simple, bolt-on, with no issues. Niche parts usually need a bit of fiddling to get them 100% right.

This^^^^^^^^^:thumb2:
 

Department Of Boost

Alpha Geek
Joined
May 26, 2010
Posts
8,808
Reaction score
31
but I want to know if I should swap from a helper to a 150 lb/in tender in front, like what came with the 350 fronts before

Probably doesn't matter. But wouldn't hurt either. If it were my car I wouldn't care either way. Both "secondary" springs are glorified spacers. I don't think anyone could make an argument that they will effect the way the car performs.
 

Norm Peterson

corner barstool sitter
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Posts
3,615
Reaction score
326
Location
RIP - You will be missed
And now it's 225 front and 250 rear
I don't recall any mention of whether there were were any rear sta-bar recommendations to go along with that spring package. It could be a do-able solution with a lighter or perhaps no rear bar, or a slightly firmer front bar.

Of course (and mainly for the street driving side of it) the basic pitch behavior will still be wrong.


Norm
 

Powered by Ford

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Posts
1,143
Reaction score
1
I don't recall any mention of whether there were were any rear sta-bar recommendations to go along with that spring package. It could be a do-able solution with a lighter or perhaps no rear bar, or a slightly firmer front bar.

Of course (and mainly for the street driving side of it) the basic pitch behavior will still be wrong.


Norm

You make a good point about additional rate the stabilizer bars add to the suspension rate - however like you said the pitching moment would be all wrong.
 

Powered by Ford

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Posts
1,143
Reaction score
1
I actually emailed JRZ the other day to see if they have anything in the works for the 2011+ GT's. Haven't heard back yet but I know Paul Brown ran a JRZ set up on his Boss 302S so I'd think there'd be a few options.

I had never heard of JRZ until recently and then I looked up the price for those guys. Double adjustable kit $5000 and Triple adjustable $7000.

:dunce:
 

Sam Strano

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Posts
918
Reaction score
6
I don't recall any mention of whether there were were any rear sta-bar recommendations to go along with that spring package. It could be a do-able solution with a lighter or perhaps no rear bar, or a slightly firmer front bar.

Of course (and mainly for the street driving side of it) the basic pitch behavior will still be wrong.


Norm

This has nothing to do with it. The rear bar stock and from Eibach for the 2011+ car is BIGGER than it was for the old car, so adding more spring isn't they way to go.

Simply put, the poor guy fell into the pit of buying what should have been figured out, and isn't. Let's say he put it on, didn't have the rubbing issue in front. Then drove it and proclaimed "It's great" like many do when they put new mods on a car, but had the very same spring rates we know to be the case. This happens all the time, which is why I can't stand unsupported claims.

I think very simply they goofed and the springs were swapped (if they are the same length). Fine, put that down to a moron building the kit. But it seems that nobody really knows. I think 250 front 225 rear is reasonable and completely acceptable, though MUCH softer than many coil-over kits, and frankly not stiff enough considering that you could drop the car a long way. But those rates are ok down to about 1.5" from stock.
 

steve13gt

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Posts
266
Reaction score
0
I have the car as low as possible ATM.. I asked eibach to supply me with 350 front, 250 rear. hopefully that is a good set up.
 

Department Of Boost

Alpha Geek
Joined
May 26, 2010
Posts
8,808
Reaction score
31
FRONT:
OE rate: 22 N/mm (125 lbs/in)
Multi-Pro-R2 Main spring rate: 39 N/mm (225 lbs/in)


REAR:
OE rate: 27 N/mm (154 lbs/in)
Multi-Pro-R2 Main spring rate: 44 N/mm (250 lbs/in)

I think very simply they goofed and the springs were swapped (if they are the same length). Fine, put that down to a moron building the kit. But it seems that nobody really knows.

Eibach has it screwed up from the start. Whomever put the kit together spec'd it out "correctly". Take a look at the info above from Eibach. Not only do they have their springs "backward" (and IMO too light) they didn't even get the stock spring rates right, those are backward too.

Eibach had a cock up right from the beginning, probably based on the incorrectly published spring rate numbers Ford released when the 2011's came out.

I've seen this same type of mistake from the best suspension manufacturers out there. It's not uncommon.
 

Department Of Boost

Alpha Geek
Joined
May 26, 2010
Posts
8,808
Reaction score
31
I have the car as low as possible ATM.. I asked eibach to supply me with 350 front, 250 rear. hopefully that is a good set up.

I found that combo to be fantastic. It works well on the street (rides fine) and there is enough rate there to get around the track pretty well without sitting on the bump stops all the time. I ran that combo and thought it was great. And then put the same springs on a friends car and they worked great for him too, he loves them.
 

LS1EATINPONY

The Banker
Joined
Jan 25, 2011
Posts
1,554
Reaction score
0
Simply put, the poor guy fell into the pit of buying what should have been figured out, and isn't. Let's say he put it on, didn't have the rubbing issue in front. Then drove it and proclaimed "It's great" like many do when they put new mods on a car, but had the very same spring rates we know to be the case. This happens all the time, which is why I can't stand unsupported claims.
The rubbing issue that youre talking about I assume is with the front wheels rubbing the coilovers? If so I have that problem. I had to slide the knuckle all the way out and my camber all the way in to prevent it.
 

steve13gt

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Posts
266
Reaction score
0
Does eibach offer springs in half inch incriments. 8", 7.5", 7" ? If so, a 7.5" would allow me to make up some adjustment, which a smaller bump stop
 

DILYSI Dave

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Posts
721
Reaction score
0
Location
Braselton, GA
What are you driving and where'd you purchase the JRZ kit from?

What I'm driving - Nothing yet. :) Building a 2008 for CP Autox.
Where did I get them - Bought them used from Sam Mammano. I'm at least the third owner. They spent time on a Touring RR car. Not sure where else.
 

Department Of Boost

Alpha Geek
Joined
May 26, 2010
Posts
8,808
Reaction score
31
Does eibach offer springs in half inch incriments. 8", 7.5", 7" ? If so, a 7.5" would allow me to make up some adjustment, which a smaller bump stop

Can you maybe re-post that in english?:roflmao:

What does' "which a smaller bump stop" mean?

I doubt they come in anything but inch increments. What are you trying to accomplish?
 

Latest posts

Support us!

Support Us - Become A Supporting Member Today!

Click Here For Details

Back
Top