Thanks in part to Mitch (BIG part), I now have a set of
LG Super Spring. These things are hard to come by and Mitch led me to the guys post the same day.......and now the deal is done - sitting in the garage.
Can't wait to get them on; needing more spring rate up front.

Thanks again Mitch

What spring rate are we looking at for the F & R?

Steve

How much do those lower the car? Are they as low as Eibachs?

Actually they're about the same ride hight as the Pro Kit
.....from what I've been told
(and one friend's car actually sits a little higher with the LG's over the Pro Kit)

I personally have the Pro Kit on right now.

LG rates are:
Front - linear 540
Rears - progressive 140-180
.....I think the Pro Kit is 400 /80-120 respectively.

Later I may have some custom rears made if it becomes an issue.

Good deal man! Sounds like that thing will be a beast next year!

Think you will ever tool around on the road courses any next season?

Where did you find those spring rate #'s? I've seen so many conflicting numbers on the internet. I thought they were 600+ in the front and also higher in the rear. I have a set in my basement that I too will be putting on this winter. Want to get the shocks revalved to match.

Good job Drew ... glad it all worked out for you ...

If my feable mind recalls correctly, I was told by Louis that the rates were 550 front and 180-230 in the rear ...
These springs are much coveted and getting damned hard to find ....

Yeah, dropping the G2 Supers and keeping the Prokits seems like a strange choice, especially since there was always more demand than Lou could keep up with as far as I could tell.

Actually, I'd like to find a set too, though I'd probably only use the fronts.

I was thinking the fronts were 650 (maybe that's for the coilovers), but 540 would be about right for me (only slightly stiffer than I want and no coilover-on-Koni headaches). 180-230 is around what I remember for the rears too.

That sounds like the numbers for the H&R stage 2 kit that I'm running. I calculated them at 647/258 in lbs. It appears that my math was slightly off, but they are quite certainly 600+/200+ rates.

I e-mailed LG today, no better sorce to get the actual spring rates than from the supplier!

Kyle-
Yeah, I'm being "swayed" into doing at least one road course next year.....do to the likes of Mitch, Glenn and Chuck (Chuck even gave me a ride one session)

Dennis-
Those are the numbers that the seller gave me, which sounded close to what I remembered. But since I'm hearing the rears are quite a bit stiffer, I definitely will be getting an "autocross" set of rears (after confirming with LG)

Mitch-
Couldn't have done it without your help ....can't keep up with all these boards !

Strangly though, I was getting ready to drop in the rears and the part #'s weren't the same (fronts were). They both had the same preceeding letters but one read
125-00 and the other read 171-00.....did they make different rate sets ?

I talked with Louis earlier today and he is gonna double check on the rates.

I referenced this thread and he said he would find out and get back to me ... or maybe he will post up here.

A long time ago one of the Gigliotti's posted 550 front and 180-230 rear.

I think you will like the springs Drew. I definately prefer the LG springs over the Eibach's. With fat tires, Strano 35 and a 21mm 1LE rear, it is great in sweepers. It can be a little loose in a slalum, but a 19mm rear should tame that.

Grumble... I've been trying to get a set of those springs for 2 years!

This is the place to find them. I was looking for a set and luckily someone connected me with Nick on this site and I got a set a few months ago.

Good Luck!

I was cruising another board and saw the ones Drew got. I sent him a link.

He was gonna buy mine, but I decided to use them for the upcoming year on my CMC car.

........ it's nice to have friends

If anyone can tell me what/if the difference between
LG 125-00 and 171-00 ?
E-mailed LG, just seeing if anyone else might know

Drew, your best bet would be to call ...

Yeah, b/c I e-mailed on Sunday and still haven't heard back.

From Louis a loong time ago:

frt: 548 lb/sq
rear: 180-230lb/sq

At Mitch's suggestion I called.

I didn't have them clarify the rates, just my other question.

And the answer was?

Wasn't real promissing; it was something to the affect of "we believe that is a batch date" - but I detected a lack of confidence in the response.

He did have put me on hold a few times, asking questions each time, so maybe the person that he was asking was a little more sure of themselves

As long as each pair of springs appears to be matched side-to-side, I wouldn't worry about it. Check the number of coils, coil diameter, and wire diameter. If they are the same, then the springs are the same.

Thanks...

Did that right when I saw the different numbers and from what I could tell they were identical, but I'm very anal when it comes to the importance of things like this and wanted to be for certain.

Would have paid closer attn had I thought that LG produced more than one custom spring (just glanced at them)

Guys,

How are the LG Super springs for a car whose main purpose is autocrossing?

From everything I've read here, the rear rates seem a little too stiff... But, since LG is selling them right now, I thought I'd ask: Is it possible to run the LG spring set with the stock Z28 rear bar, instead of using a lower rate rear spring, such as is found in the GC coil over kit, and a larger rear bar.

It seems like, despite the fact that they're cheaper, the LG springs limit a person's options for tuning their rear suspension. Wheras the GC kit has numerous options for changing rear spring rates and with its lower starting spring rate, 150 as sold by Sam, it's also possible to add a bigger rear sway bar as another means of tuning the setup.

Just curious.

Right now my setup is a 35MM strano bar, stock springs and Koni SAs in front and stock springs/bar and Bilstein 3rd gens in rear. (T2R diff also on the way.)

Thanks,

-John

Well, the G2 front springs are fairly reasonable rates for autocross. The rear springs are arguably on the stiff side for autocross, so yes you would probably want to at least start out with a stock rear bar.

The downside of the G2 springs or any other lowering spring is that they are not adjustable for ride height or corner weighting. The upside is that they are not adjustable They do not require a tedius adjustment process on an invariably uneven floor to get the heights right, and unless you have access to corner weight scales you'll probably come closer to balanced corner weights with the G2 (or any other fixed spring), at least initially.

Also, installing coilovers with Konis can be a real pain. OTOH, if you want to experiment with spring rates, Ground Controls with be cheaper and less work in the long run. If the GC coilovers are set to the same height as any arbitrary lowering spring, the lowering springs will have a litttle more available compression travel before hitting the stops. Etc. There's advantages both ways.

I will probably use the G2 front springs with linear rear springs on adjustable perches. That seems like a reasonable compromise (especially since I already have the rear adjusters).

Thanks Sean. I was hoping you'd reply. The other alternative is to get a set of 1LE rears, which I believe are around 160??, which might also do the trick.

I'd imagine they're 1LEs are taller, but I bet that could be evened out leaving out the rear spring isolator and raising the front spring perch on the Koni SAs to even things out...

Thanks,

-John

The 1LEs are progressive (130~180?) and hard to find. The ST springs are about 160 linear, but may ride a little too low. It also doesn't really make $ense to buy two non-adjustable sets to use two springs out of each set.

If you aren't going to use the G2 rears (and I'm not saying they won't work) I'd just go straight to the [rear] GC setup plus linears.

There are several key things to keep in mind about progressive springs. One is that it's arguably harder to match the shock valving to the spring if the rate isn't linear. The other is that they get softer as they are extended (yeah, I know - duh!), which means they let the tail rise more while braking, which means more roll steer. That means the soft number DOES matter.

The soft end of the G2 rear spring rate progression is stiffer than the soft end of the 1LE springs. In other words, they don't get as soft as they extend, which may be good.

The debateable question is whether they get too stiff at the stiff end of the travel (fully compressed).

It should be noted that I have changed my rear suspension geometry, which means the best rate for me may not be the best rate for you.

If you buy the G2s and don't already have rear adjusters, you might as well try the rears and see how you like them.

Like Sean said some progressive springs can be a pain. My pro-kit rears were 80-130# and would switch to 130# at about the same time the rear axle contacted the bump stops. So you would see a sharp increase in wheel rate all of a sudden. This made my car almost snap oversteer at times. The tail was a lot easier to control with linear 125# rear springs and no other changes.

I'm convinced that switch if made earlier would've made a big difference in some events I ran this year. I know of one in fact where it helped tremendously with putting power down in turns.

BTW, it does seeem fairly safe to say that if you try the G2s and don't like them, they shouldn't be too hard to sell. I don't know if Lou will get enough for his group purchase, since surprise "now or never" deals at Christmas can be tough, but over time used sets have been hard to find and always sell quick.

So, all in all the risk is fairly low. Even if you decide to buy Ground Control rears and use the G2 fronts, the total cost will still be comparable to GCs all around.

So, you really can't go wrong either way.

Also, if you decide to go open tracking, the G2 rears seem to be popular for that and would be easy to swap in.

The trouble with any serious or semi-serious autocrosser or track guy running a set of lowering springs is just that you are stuck. You are are stuck on rate (kind of since the the springs in question are changing round about 33% from soft to hard and 1LE's about 28%). You are stuck at a ride height. Just not many options. Sean makes a good point. You could run LG fronts and buy jackers for the back, but the cost outlay will be about the same and you'd still be lacking the ability to change rates, height or really corner weight the car.

Basically with coil-over/weight jackers you are done. If you don't like the spring rates that you/me/we decide on it's not a lot of money, or hassle since you don't need a spring compressor with coil-overs to change the springs.

I've been *real* tempted to have springs made for my specs, where they'd be linear front and rear and rates I want. But, it's just not cost effective and kind of moot since people do not always want the same rate.

I'll close with this. I won all my events this year but one with 150's and my hollow 22 rear bar. The one I didn't win like that was Nationals where I had (admittedly) a 19mm rear bar on the car. That likely will not remain the case, but I was forced there by the Hoosier's and just haven't changed back yet after switching to Kumho's. My other Championship was on 150's with an 18mm rear bar (and urethane bushings). Opinions will vary to be sure, but the only two 4th gens to have ever won Nationals in ESP have used relatively softer rear springs vs. stiff ones. Pretty simply the car is a pickup truck, and solid axles with little weight on them don't deal with bumps at all well with high spring rates. High is relative, but considering the camber control issue doesn't exist I don't think it's necessary and further not warranted or wanted.


MHO.

The rear 1LE's are easier to find than the front. Gryhead.com has / had the right progressive 1LE rear springs.

Just make sure they have the black plastic wrap on the second turn of the spring. This is the progressive part of the spring, it goes to coil bind on the first turn and that is the step from 130 to 170.

The fronts are hard to find.

If you are actually looking for 1LE springs, check out my post, will the real 1LE spring please stand up.

Z28

There's no doubt about it. As Sam (and I) said, if you want to be able to change rates [with any non-adjustable lowering springs] you need coilovers, though the G2s should be easy to sell so you won't REALLY be stuck.

OTOH, right now life is complicated. I need to be able to pull the car in, get it done quick, and then live with it for at least a year. It helps that I already have a big spring compressor and an impact wrench, which makes quick work of swapping springs (just keep alternating sides on the compressor). Since my Konis are already on the car, I can't do any prep work ahead of time for the GCs, and right now that's a big deal for me (same reason I'm buying spare used LCAs just to change bushings). I've even considered buying a spare set of Konis to make swaps quicker, and HAVE bought spares of everything else that mounts to the front shocks (used).

That may beg the question of why I'm fooling around with a rear geometry change. That would be a VERY fair question (what was I thinking???), but so far I have to say I'm very impressed on wet pavement

I found a good pic of a car on G2 springs
Mitchntx 98 TA on Street Tires

I was thinking the LGs might save a little money. I'm not sure what I was thinking about the 1LE rears--just thinking out, I guess. It makes sense to go with the proven solution, GCs, even if it's more expensive. I don't have any plans for road racing or maybe that would tip the balance.

Although Sam, I don't see why you wouldn't be able to sell your own set of Strano Springs as a more ideal alternative to the Prokit (for rate and ride height) and lower a priced item than the GC coil-over kit. You can test them out on my car if you want.

As usual, some really great advice here...

Thanks again,

-John

It wouldn't be any stiffer than riding on bump stop

With a progressive rate, you approach the end of suspension travel at a slower pace than one would with a linear rate ...

Any immediate jump in effective spring rate would be lessened and therefore more controllable.

I know Sam likes soft springs, stiff shocks and big bars and they obviously work for him in the venues he runs.

But like it or not, road courses are typically smoother than parking lots and abrupt suspension transitions are less likely. So the suppleness that a soft spring gives has little need.

The question (which probably should have gone in a new thread) was specifically about autocross, not road racing.

Bumpstops and progressive springs are both intended to increase the total effective spring rate as the suspension approaches the mechanical limit of travel. The idea is to keep the spring softer (relatively speaking) around the normal operating position, but ramp up the rate near the end to avoid the abrupt stop of bottoming out.

The differences are the shape of the rate curve during compression (where and how fast the rate changes) and how much the rate curve changes during rebound due to hysteresis (primarily but not exclusively due to hysteresis in the bumpstop).

That topic (i.e. the relative merits of the differences) has been vigorously debated in other recent threads, so there's no need to repeat it here, and I'm not trying to.

I am installing G2 springs at the front. IF I didn't already have rear spring jacks, and IF I hadn't changed my rear suspension geometry, I would probably still try the G2 rears at a test-and-tune. What is there to lose? I still might try them at a fast smooth lot, though I know my right rear spring would require a shim due to GM's poor build quality (which is why I bought the spring jacks to begin with). If I ever take this car to a road course, I'd certainly take the G2 rears along to try.

Also, the reason I keep bringing up the torque arm in a spring thread is that it affects everything. In other words, it's intended as disclosure - ymmv.

I should also mention that for anyone towing a tire trailer, progressive springs have some off-track benefits. That alone may make it worthwhile to spend the time to figure out how to make it work for autocross.

BTW, my intent is to point out the oft-debated pros and cons (in response to a question), not resolve them. Think of it as a verbose list of topics to search on and draw your own conclusions.