-
Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features
Welcome to the #1 Fiesta ST Forum and Fiesta ST community dedicated to Fiesta ST owners and enthusiasts. Register for an account, it's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the Fiesta ST Forum today!
Mountune says their Sport springs are Linear
- Thread starter SirThomas88
- Start date
- Status
OP
Thread Starter
#23
Thread Starter
#23
I really don't think you actually need this explanation to understand what he meant, but since you keep insisting on it, here goes..
A cursory look at the photo you provided makes it readily apparent why the rear spring would appear to be progressive to Dpro, XR650R and myself whereas the front spring appears to be linear. This is because there is a very obvious difference in coil distances seen on the rear springs whereas the front springs don't have this visible difference. I am certain that you can also see this difference yourself.
Dpro was referring to this difference in coil distances on the overall spring, which do make the springs appear to be progressive rate if you look at the entire spring as a whole rather than only look at the compression coils. On the other hand, FORZDA 2 is referring specifically the compression coils portion. So Dpro said that technically both he and FORZDA 2 are "technically" correct, he meant that although yes, functionally the rear springs are linear, this visible difference between the coil distances in the spring as a whole is itself a form of progressive variance, even though functionally and practically speaking, once installed the spring will act entirely linear and should be considered as such.
Your initial comment about coil distances and linear v progressive springs was helpful, but FORZDA's followup clarification was a much more helpful to the discussion, because unlike in your comment, he described the difference between the compression coil and the dead coils, and once he provided that clarification, Dpro agreed with it right away as he should have.
So, Yes FORZDA 2 is spot on, but No, Dpro is not saying something different, for all the reasons I stated above. In fact, Dpro literally acknowledged that FORZDA 2 is correct and that he agrees with it. It's your understanding of Dpro's message that is incorrect, in which you have to completely disregard parts of Dpro comments to come to that conclusion.
No, there's no need to await a response from Dpro.. I'm certain you already understood what Dpro was trying to say just fine. It seems that rather than try to avoid an argument by simply clarifying the difference between compression coils and the dead coils as FORZDA 2 did, you're instead claiming there's a disagreement between Dpro and FORZDA 2 when its fairly clear that there isn't, and then insisting on further explanation when it's neither necessary to understand what Dpro meant nor helpful at all to contributing to the discussion at hand.
A cursory look at the photo you provided makes it readily apparent why the rear spring would appear to be progressive to Dpro, XR650R and myself whereas the front spring appears to be linear. This is because there is a very obvious difference in coil distances seen on the rear springs whereas the front springs don't have this visible difference. I am certain that you can also see this difference yourself.
Dpro was referring to this difference in coil distances on the overall spring, which do make the springs appear to be progressive rate if you look at the entire spring as a whole rather than only look at the compression coils. On the other hand, FORZDA 2 is referring specifically the compression coils portion. So Dpro said that technically both he and FORZDA 2 are "technically" correct, he meant that although yes, functionally the rear springs are linear, this visible difference between the coil distances in the spring as a whole is itself a form of progressive variance, even though functionally and practically speaking, once installed the spring will act entirely linear and should be considered as such.
Your initial comment about coil distances and linear v progressive springs was helpful, but FORZDA's followup clarification was a much more helpful to the discussion, because unlike in your comment, he described the difference between the compression coil and the dead coils, and once he provided that clarification, Dpro agreed with it right away as he should have.
So, Yes FORZDA 2 is spot on, but No, Dpro is not saying something different, for all the reasons I stated above. In fact, Dpro literally acknowledged that FORZDA 2 is correct and that he agrees with it. It's your understanding of Dpro's message that is incorrect, in which you have to completely disregard parts of Dpro comments to come to that conclusion.
No, there's no need to await a response from Dpro.. I'm certain you already understood what Dpro was trying to say just fine. It seems that rather than try to avoid an argument by simply clarifying the difference between compression coils and the dead coils as FORZDA 2 did, you're instead claiming there's a disagreement between Dpro and FORZDA 2 when its fairly clear that there isn't, and then insisting on further explanation when it's neither necessary to understand what Dpro meant nor helpful at all to contributing to the discussion at hand.
Last edited:
One might be fine on merely rough roads, and steep driveways/speed bumps, with all of these lowering springs/slamming coil over kits, but just try hitting some of the craters, compressions, washouts, ruts, and huge 'baby's heads' on rough rally stage roads, and you WILL BE doing much more actual mechanical damage than just 'scraping plastic', even with a good skid plate. ![[:(]](/images/smilies/frown.png "Frown [:(]")
One might be fine on merely rough roads, and steep driveways/speed bumps, with all of these lowering springs/slamming coil over kits, but just try hitting some of the craters, compressions, washouts, ruts, and huge 'baby's heads' on rough rally stage roads, and you WILL BE doing much more actual mechanical damage than just 'scraping plastic', even with a good skid plate.
Appearance of coil distance aside, Mountune has always listed a set single number spring rate instead of a range like Cobb and Eibach do, that was the dead giveaway. Mountune is not going to post a set number if they weren't linear, that would piss a lot of people off if they sold progressive spring with a linear/set spring rate listed. So honestly not sure how the rumor started that Mountune was progressive, as just because Eibach makes all 3, Cobb is literally a rebranded Eibach (same progressive range listed for both) the Mountune is linear (single number spring rate listed.) I trust Mountune in this case over guesses on how it looks.
Not sure if this has been put in layman's terms, but the tightly wound coils in the Mountune rear springs are only there to take up the slack when the suspension is fully unloaded. (So the spring won't fall out) When installed, they are linear rate because those coils compress completely. BTW, I love my Mountune springs as a simple way to drop the car about 1" without sacrificing ride quality, or costing much.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
No. You are wrong. While compressed they still have differing rates in the rear. Get out your caliper set and measure.
When you compress a spring to its proper loading it doesn't change internally/molecularly.
Too many people on this thread are talking with no engineering or material science background.
Mountune springs = progressive in rear and linear in front
This is not directed at you @briandee, but the internet is full of idiots spewing "wisdom"
When you compress a spring to its proper loading it doesn't change internally/molecularly.
Too many people on this thread are talking with no engineering or material science background.
Mountune springs = progressive in rear and linear in front
This is not directed at you @briandee, but the internet is full of idiots spewing "wisdom"
They are tighter wond at the top and loser wond at the bottom. You can see this in the Eibach springs which is the manufacturer of the mountune.
When compressed they look linear but if you measure the difference between each wind they are nominally different.
This would cause the materials at the bottom being closer to their yield strength than the top. This leads to the progressive spring rate because larger dips are absorbed by lower spring rate difference and the small higher frequency bumps being absorbed by the higher spring rate.
More people need to invest time into reading the valuable knowledge available on on internet, rather than relying people to feed it to them.
The USA seems to have a large problem with not solving their own problems though, so I can't blame you.
When compressed they look linear but if you measure the difference between each wind they are nominally different.
This would cause the materials at the bottom being closer to their yield strength than the top. This leads to the progressive spring rate because larger dips are absorbed by lower spring rate difference and the small higher frequency bumps being absorbed by the higher spring rate.
More people need to invest time into reading the valuable knowledge available on on internet, rather than relying people to feed it to them.
The USA seems to have a large problem with not solving their own problems though, so I can't blame you.
Nope, on FULL factory suspension/ride height until I can find an affordable/reasonable setup which lowers the car no more than a half or quarter of an inch, AT MOST, and has the travel needed to handle those gravel stage hits. ![[wink]](/images/smilies/wink.gif "Wink [wink]")
- Status
Similar threads
-
FS NJ: Mishimoto Silicone Intake Hose w/ Mountune panel filter- Started by LilPartyBox
- Replies: 2
-
-
Mountune clubsport suspension question- Started by RaulfMaulf
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
FS Whoosh crossover pipe + mountune induction hose and Vogtland springs + Koni shocks
- Started by Air drum solo
- Replies: 5
-
-
-
-
