Subaru WRX Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,539 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi guys,

I've been trying to research spring rates and got some kinda wacky numbers from Vivid on the Tein springs. I want to run these by you guys to see if anyone has different info as thee don't seem to be correct.

I asked them for rates on Hi-Techs and S-Techs. They came back asking me if I have a wagon or a sedan. I said wagon and they quoted me a set of S-Techs at:

241 ft/lbs :eek: front and 163 rear.

That's 50% stiffer than stock front and only 22% stiffer rear. According to my personal experience as well as the suspension tweak guide in the Tech. Reference Thread at the top of this forum, this setup would make the car understeer horribly.

So I wrote back asking for Sedan rates and they quoted me Hi-Techs at:

201 ft/lbs front, 140 rear.

That's almost 40 ft/lbs (25%) stiffer front and only 8 (6%) stiffer in the rear, and actually 4 ft/lbs softer than the wagon rear. Again, understeer city.

So what gives? Are those numbers incorrect? Am I missing something? On a percentage basis, the other springs available either stiffen front and rear equally, or stiffen the rear more. Are the Teins designed for drag racing or something??

I'd like to hear from people running the Teins as to the balance of the car. AutoXJunkie recently pointed out to me that people frequently say "I have spring X and they're great" without saying why. I'm now asking "why?".

I'm really hoping to dial the understeer out of my car and am planning on mating new springs with new struts - probably Konis.

Chris
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,750 Posts
I'm running Tein Hi-Techs on stock struts...those spring rates don't sound right to me. Combined with my rear sway bar, my understeer is all but gone (in fact I have quite a bit of oversteer now if I really push it), and it doesn't feel THAT much stiffer than stock. In fact, my parents complimented me on how smooth the ride of my car was (before I put my 18s on) even though it was lowered a little. The ride honestly does not feel much different from stock...so those numbers don't make much sense to me. This is all based on how my ride feels to me though...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,213 Posts
Apparently, there are 3 types of S-tech springs for the WRX. I couldn't find anything on the soft besides "20% stiffer than stock".

Medium: progressive @ 235/218 ft/lbs f/r (approx 43/64% stiffer f/r)
Hard: Linear @ 307/279 ft/lbs f/r (approx 91/109% stiffer f/r)

I couldn't find anything on the Hi-techs, but I didn't look too hard. Based on the numbers I did find, though, it would appear that Vivid is blowing steam up your ass about those springs rates. I highly doubt that Tein would design springs that would make the car understeer even more.

I'm riding on the H&Rs in my wagon. They look good, but I think they can overwhelm the stock struts on large bumps. I have no idea what the spring rates are, but car balance feels about the same as far as oversteer/understeer goes. I have the 20mm sedan rear sway bar and the rear end now steps out more easily than the front. I plan on getting some nice coilovers anyway, so the springs were just to keep me happy for a while.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,212 Posts
Here is what I found on http://www.ravensblade-impreza.com/modifications/suspension/spring/spring.html

All spring rates are listed in pounds per inch. Any spring rate with a "range" of rates is a progressive-wound spring.

Stock 2002 WRX Wagon (MT/AT) F 163/163 R 132/144
Tein Soft F 67.2-179.18 R 61.59-179.18
Tein Medium F 67.2-235.18 R 61.59-218.38
Tein Hard F 307.98 R 279.98


Talk to God (Dan), he sells Tein coilovers, maybe he can get some info on their springs.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,539 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Yeah, that spring rate chart is in the Tech. Ref. sticky.

I exchanged e-mail with Tein. Those are indeed the correct rates. I think the ones in the Sticky might be for Tein coilovers.

All they gave as an explanation was that those rates worked best on their test car. I asked for an explanation of why that didn't result in massive understeer but I haven't heard back. I'll up date you if/when they reply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,212 Posts
Sorry, I didn't realize that chart is in the sticky.

Anyways, the only reason I can think of for the big difference in spring rate between F&R is because of the difference the car is lowered F&R. Those springs lower the car 1.6" F and 1.0" R. That difference in drop should affect the weight transfer and overall balance of the car.

I don't know, maybe my thinking is off. I'm not really a suspension guru, I only know the basics.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,539 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
That's a good thought, but everbody else's springs are similar drop wise. But of course not rate wise.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top