Church

Well, there is also such option (warning: some car porn pics ) with way more travel & capability, but due $17K price range i suspect that it won't be considered Deacon: was Nigel's Ohlins original MI20 or MP21 with softer springrates? And just Flex A, or +EDFC? BTW, how you think of Meister-s & Motons relative to eg. stock or Teins?

BTW, question on stiffness was more regarding handling feel, not comfort. As in liked sharp turn-in of PS4, and dislike higher slip-angle, subjectively less sharp turn-in of ultracs for example, that seemed both relatively a bit lazyer to follow steering input and a bit more turned wheel. Not bad, still UHP summer tire .. but i liked feel on PS4 & wishing similar in other tires

I liked PS4 on track .. except it was not that hard to overheat them, increasing wear, reducing grip. If these are similar, but cheaper, they seem to at least compensate increased track abuse wear with cost. Still feeling bad that PS4S/GYEF1SS/CS6 are not offered in 17" in Europe :(. Anyway, adding these Maxxis to consideration list for next set (alongside well spoken of in US forum track crowd GT Radial champiro sx2). Currently have Vreds Ulrac Vorti, but liking them way less then PS4 i had before.

What was grip vs PS4? How stiff are firewalls? By chance have you also tried them in wet?

Reason for extra camber might bet not just to enable clearance for widest possible wheels/tires. On track extra static negative camber increases cornering grip & evens out wear instead of just ripping tire outer side. "Free extra grip" from same tires on track, and longer lasting. Another reason to increase front camber (relative to rear) might be to reduce understeer-ish bias of stock alignment. Of course, how much camber is optimal, may depend more from where most of tire wear happens, be it on track or from daily driving. Obviously not counting by relative mileage alone, but by extent of wear, as 5-10 trackdays can go through all the thread of new tire set. If just two trackdays per year, maybe more street oriented alignment averages as more optimal. If 5+ full trackdays, then probably tire set will last at most one season and it's "normal" driving wear relatively will be negligible, so worth align for track.

Having remote canisters or not imho has little relation to available bumpless shock travel. And, if anything, given that clubsport seems targeting more track and is stiffer sprung (imho might greatily compromising compliance/comfort for daily driving), and more lowering, i wouldn't be surprised if there had been even less travel. (no clue on actual data). External canisters main purposes are more volume, less overheat/more predictable functioning, maybe more adjustment options. Not affecting travel in any way. I'd rather expect less hardcore-ish V3 or V1 to have more travel. I'm still not too convinced that it's coilovers to blame for unwished handling specifics.

Ohlins have height adjustment independent from spring preload. See from spring perch, not from threaded cup on shock bottom, which can be bolted on deeper or for higher total coilover height, less, with no change to preload/travel/damping. Still, imho there seems something off. Seen also good spoken of reviews about even softer R&T, at least for driving on public roads. Hmm, btw, those ARBs cannot cause issues? Thicker/stiffer rollbars reduce roll, yes .. but they also make suspension less independent and reduce grip due overloading one from them on axle. And in some cases "making car faster" comes from driver feeling more subjective confidence to push more on flatter cornering car, not because aftermarket rollbars somehow magically gained grip. How about trying stock rollbars? I'd also think of trying out a bit more toe-in in rear, hence why i asked your current alignment numbers. If one drives on grip limit, sometimes also electronic nannies may introduce some unwished corrections, such as unexpected/abrupt stability control or "e-diff" interruptions with braking wheels during slip or if one wheel hops in air. Though i'm not sure it's wise to drive on very limit on public roads with many uncontrollable variables (oncoming traffic, blind corners, unpredictability of others in traffic, kids/pets) and where by road design mistakes may cost more (blind corners, kerbs, no run-off zones), but imho driving on some 7/10 should surface way less possible issues/limits.

If more suspension travel is goal, heard mentioned in that context KW (or ST, which is "budget" subbrand of KW). What is your use? Track or only those mentioned b roads? Are you absolutely sure that it's bottomed out rear shocks that make your car unstable? Have you tried adjusting shocks? Can you post your alignment numbers (i'm suspecting that rather current alignment might be culprit)? Also how exactly unstability propagates? Rear? Entering corner? Exciting corner? In straight under gas?

Well, then it just ups the statistic, that these mounts unlike whiteline com-c so far work fine for most and can be considered for those that wish more camber w/o compromising NVH.

Wheel bearings usually have different types of noise though. For example humming when under load such as when cornering fast with car leaning on that wheel heavier. Hmm, one thing is contstruction design/"type", other .. are all dimensions such as endlink attachment points/place same as stock? IIRC TRD rally suspension was 10-15mm higher and of different spring & damping rates, and of green color :), that's about all i know about them. But are attachment points placed same? Is shock travel same and thus endlinks travel about same? Check wheel arches, suspension arms and so on, if somewhere there aren't some rubbing marks. It might be missed if car is steady for maintenance, or one at most lightly can swing it, when something like that happens only during specific stage of driving (such as case above mentioned for bearings), eg. when during bump it gets fully compressed. Hmm, fully compressed .. btw, how are things with bumpstops on those struts? Sometimes source of noise might be from unexpected source and take long time to debug (especially if it was after several changes/mods done at same time and especially if it propagated after longer time). For example for me not that long ago such noise was braided brake line for rear right wheel. Lot of time was lost trying to find where/what in suspension during it's movement over bumps or when one swinged car produced noises .. it was brake line that moved around rubbing in bracket, that producing noise during compression of rear suspension on bumps. 3hours lost on test drives, checking just about anything in rear suspension, on debugging that stupid noise actual source

Hmm, from looks of those LCAs, they have also adjustment of track .. but doesn't that adjustment not only changes track, but also changes camber? And toe adjusment, doesn't it change both toe & camber? In general, by that painted line over trick over you may check everything that is adjustable in suspension, to see culprit, which had moved, not just camberbolts. Also, what struts you have? Maybe height adjustable? Do adjusting collars stay snug? In general, as many using camberbolts also auto-x or HPDE their cars including going over kerbs, and for most camberbolts stay as they were when tightened, i suspect something else at fault. If for camberbolts themselves - then eg. misused some type of grease which may reduce friction and increase chance of slip. If it's single clunk over bumps .. hmm, i'd check state of bushings and wheel bearing. Metallic clunk .. especially i'd check state of pillowball bushings, if somewhere are such, and also if some tie/endlink doesn't rub somewhere. For me source of metallic clunk over some bumps was eg. when topmounts where pillowball camberplates :), hence what i wished to fix by reverting to rubber topmounts but retaining extra camber. Seen cases in forums of eg. some aftermarket suspension/coilovers/swaybars combo, where with specific endlink length it rubbed when that corner was bottomed out.

Hmm, interesting. Can you post a link, what are those widetrack LCAs? As for camberbolts, weird. Imho something is off/wrong. They shouldn't slip, normally torqued, they don't for most, if they do, probably there had been some some heavy hit to suspension, that might aswell also bend something. Hmm, maybe you have applied some antiseize grease or alike? (which should increase torque value to provide same level of friction to not slip .. maybe even past camberbolt shearing torque). Well, regarding camberbolts usage i may add two hints i've seen in forums: 1) when adjusting alignment, at end worth to paint line over bolt head & joint, so that one can see, if it has moved or not, and one can easily turn back to orig position, 2) seen DIY ways to ensure for bolts to never slip (though they were mentioned more in context of bolt within larger, slotted strut hole, less about lobed camberbolts) - to glue it. Saw mentions of eg. blue loctite, paint or even fingernail paint , to apply under washer sides and head of the bolt and under flange of the nut. Also, can you be more specific on describing that clunking noise? I wonder if it is from topmounts at all. Issues with topmounts noises usually are when their bearing binds, so then when turning wheel lock to lock there might be noises of coil spring "skipping" in spring perch. But that binding bearing / skipping spring noise is just from turning wheel, not exactly clunking when driving over bumps, as you wrote, so makes me think if topmount is source of that at all?

To me was more actual (in track use context) total camber i could net. As in, if i could or couldn't get front camber to -3 w/o resorting to install camberplates or not. BTW, you still have option of powerflex bushings. Imho they might be safer possible issues wise. Those eccentric LCA bushings go in rearward joint, that, if i get it right, mostly moves in just one axis, unlike front LCA bushing, where eg. eccentric whiteline bushings for some fail.

Hmm, so far no complaints, "just works" and no issues to report. For about, hmm, IIRC ~ 5K miles and coincidentally also 2 trackdays. I'm now fighting with other suspension parts problems .. as in it seems that unexpectedly hard to buy bilstein B6, with most sellers inquired turning out restocking with those no sooner then in two months

I have mostly good experiences about them, but now one may experience issues i noted, covid caused shipping delays and usable/available shipping means and costs. For example - i did two orders right before japan post suspended shipping to my country, on nengun & amayama. nengun simply notified & changed shipping to dhl, with amayama i had to pay extra shipping costs difference for shipping to be done with fedex. Those are issues outside their influence though, so i wouldn't put them at fault for them.

For JDM parts i have used www.japanparts.com, www.amayama.com, www.nengun.com. For US parts (mostly aftermarket ones), usually got from ft86speedfactory.com. I usually find part number and then start googling around, as to where to get it from closest & cheapest. Not always shipping from US/JP is cheaper, as overseas shipping is costly for bigger/heavier items, and there are importing fees & VAT to add up. Sometimes for smaller/cheaper bits i even have bought at dealership, if not wishing to bother much for small saving. Mind you, these days there might be problems with many foreign stores, due all this Corona thingie affecting shipping services, making them longer and costing much more. For example, many japanese shops cannot ship anymore with "normal" JP post, so have to use eg. fedex/ups and alikes, which makes it more expensive.

Looks like almost complete OE partout of prerestyle twin that probably will become dedicated sport build, be it rally or track, don't think that for drift, as in later case probably there would be also engine/transmission swap, not just interior/suspension/brakes/steering rack/seats/lights.

There are often many cuts done one concept gets to production. In very very rare cases production looks close to concept. Compare for example looks of 2013 concept WRX (especially sides & rear) vs bland something that was made. That aside, i somewhat like looks of production prerestyle gt86 front more then of this concept. Front of this reminds me more of Peugeot RCZ.

About the only our cars should be compared to imho is mx5. Price IS among major car characteristics. It seems totally off mark to compare twins or putting at fault losses in some areas vs car costing twice as much. In that upper class alpine suddenly isn't that much heads above. If anything, imho cayman still is more desirable there. What this video shown, that Chapman's line of thought of importance of lightness is rather competitive, that A110 is nice driver's car, that it's better car then twins, that in this specific track config their performance might not be that off (and obviously there will be more where underpowered twins will loose by a lot). But i highly doubt that it would be easy to find people that will crosshop new twins vs new alpine, so pointing out areas where twins do worse vs it or in general whole try to compare them in between seems effort wasted for naught. Just yet another car in list to considered alternatives only if buying used vs new twin. There would be less controversy, if this test car had been pitted against other competitors in it's class like in most reviews/tests/roundups, not put against one from other class.

.. Old one was

Beware of bad things too. Like driving half a year, all always was fine, i can push with TC off well, some overconfidence in Hammond's "I AM DRIVING GOD" fashion .. and poof, hello kerb, hello increased insurance premiums :D. Or that it being cheap means also compromises in some areas, such as cheap rattlish interior, or it being small coupe, it has compromises in practicality/capabilities. This is not car for anyone and won't do all roles well, but most of it's owners seem happy (including me, still loving/not regretting it during owning for 5-6 years) with what/how it is and often are willing to ignore some faults of it.

"Depends". There are such that buy it purely for sportish-coupe-ish looks, there are such, that decided upon online video reviews raving about it's handling. Some that like to play around, and some that want absolute performance. Thing is .. grippy tires turn to very different type of handling, and one thing stock not that powerful/torqy engine and not exactly sport-level-stiff suspension paired with limited grip tires, and another - if you pair it with grippy & wide tires (like some do so .. interestingly often guiding in that not for grip, but for "looks"). Lot of points that were voiced in those reviews, lot of first impressions from first drives may become moot. It's not as if it will make car worse, grippy tires will make it - different. And i've seen not only threads of "i installed better tires X, car should have come as such from factory", but also threads like "what other tires would feel like primacies", and where people reverted tire change due not liking grippier/not playful change, or loosing steering sharpness and alike. To each his own. Different people may have different subjective preferences. Imho simply worth experiencing both ways so that choice is done in educated fashion, by knowing what one will like best, what changes one wishes over what has been before. I myself have had my share of fun on primacies and now moved up for more capable tires on track, but i certainly not regret of having driven on those and wouldn't write them off as something inherently bad.

Well, i'm maybe using it a bit different context, as main meaning, which can be for example googled, as "tendency of wheels to follow contours in the surface upon which it runs". I'm using more with meaning like - "car has way too much grip for it's capabilities" / "over-tyred" / "car can be driven without care floored everywhere, not dropping speed anywhere" / "always having more grip then needed, needing intentional very stupid driver inputs to overcome grip/traction". In exaggerated fashion - "mini on formula track slicks", car drives like tram on rails no matter what you do. Just that many may like for giggles some playfulness here and there, especially if those some tire chirps here and there, or small extra rear rotations, or some intentional tire spins do happen at still slow/legal speeds, and may miss with more grippier tires. With later - of course one can still loose grip .. subjective fun aside, problem being, the more grip tire has, that loosing grip now will happen eg. at higher speeds, in more abrupt manner, with less reaction time to correct. Of course i've seen also line of thought - those "prius" primacies have too little grip, i need to install grippy tires, now car drives "as it should come from factory" .. but from my experiences, when i still had primacies (for around 10-15K daily driven miles and then 4 trackdays, to "finish them off" :)), i still could drive on average a bit faster then (admittedly heavier or less powerful family) cars i drove before (if average speed in same roundabout counts), and yes, car will loose grip/traction when eg. giving gas mid turn, or when going in some turn faster then tire grip allows .. but that doesn't mean that tires are bad, that doesn't mean that right way to "fix" is not to adjust own driver inputs to not mindlessly push everywhere but adding in that much tire grip for it to be more then own wrong inputs may overcome. IIRC twins with stock primacy hp tires pulled 0.89 g on skidpad. I'm not willing to classify that as "bad tires", and one can drive with them without any grip/traction loss aswell .. imho there is misimpression that normal cars have more grip comes from them usually having softer suspension>more roll, which subjectively tells driver to ease off, while twins roll less, thus one guiding by subjective feel/habbits push more .. till grip loss, and then labels these tires as gripless. As to mention that they do bad in cold & wet .. well, they are not winter nor all-season tires. So even if UK winters are relatively warm and snow-less, i'd simply change to all-seasons from mid-autumn to mid-spring. When i drive in rain, i simply push less, drive slower/more careful - it's common sense to do so on other cars, why it should be wrong to do same on these cars/on primacy tires? It's driver duty to drive within car capabilities/available grip/road specifics, adjusting oneself, not requesting that only right way is to mod car to enable not minding how one drives. Yes, for example mentioned PS4 have fenomenal wet grip, to level that it surprised me, remembering track day soon after fitting them, where speed/laptime didn't drop that much in morning when track was still wet, yes, primacies grip less .. but that change is not required, and primacies are usuable, and there are good bits too in having less grip like on Chris Harris video, where he changed all four tires to space-saver donuts on AMG merc and took around track . So imho there is nothing wrong when buying twin to drive it on those stock primacies and they are fine for learning/familiarizing with car .. just that i wouldn't get them as next set because of price and because trackdays joined my hobby list

Oh, new car owner? Then yes, nothing wrong with stock primacies. They are often misdeservedly ill spoken of, but in reality are good normal tires. Less grip will net more playfulness/fun at slower speeds. They have relatively stiff sidewalls, good/sharp steering feel, wear well and help fuel economy. I wouldn't get them for second set because they are overpriced, but if you get "free set" with new car, imho best choice to wear them down instead of changing tires right away. Mentioned MPS4 will have higher grip .. but that will also mean less playful car, more "tramlining", at least in daily driving.

Common choice - michelin pilot sport 4.