unbalanced engineering Bilstein race shocks (coilovers)
09-25-2010, 03:25 PM
#41
Launching!
Ah, there's the sensitivity I've come to expect. 
Interesting that you think of me as a know-it-all. Seems to me that you might be projecting some personal inadequacies and frustrations with my refusal to cry uncle to your persistent ignorance.
Anyway.... no deflection. Cite an example and I'll answer to it. You won't because you can't.
Example:
With regard to all sides of a story....
You continually espouse SFCs as a must have to people soliciting advice. My opinion differs from yours but I provide data / experience points to back it up.
To wit.... I have run my car stock with no SFCs, stock with welded SFCs, modded with SFCs, and modded with no SFCs. In that order. How about you? Where are your other sides of the story? You know.... where you A-B-A tested the modification? So far I see only an A-B.
I'm confused. Who is it again that does not care to get all sides of the story? I could go on with other examples if you wish. Such as....
The STB thread. Someone was deflecting in there big time by citing manufacturer literature but it sure wasn't me.
Such as....
Look at this very thread. I have patiently provided data and experience from more than one car. You know... multiple sides of the story. Meanwhile, you have provided only a manufacturer's link and some mumbling about wanting to know what SLP would have to say about a decision they made more than a decade ago. Nope, no deflection there. No sirree. In fact, I'm truly awed and humbled by the depth of your critical thinking you displayed there. Bravo.
Continuously since 1987.
Haven't owned many because I keep them a long time. Three. Two bought new. First new one in 1991.
Quadruple that number of cars (at least) for family members and friend's cars I have driven, wrenched on and been around quite a bit.
Now, care to make your point?
The "beef" is that guys like you get butthurt when their own personal internet based belief system is debunked. Oh wait... we can debunk evil manufacturers but not woefully offbase members, right? Otherwise, we're big meanie heads. Gotcha. Sorry about that. Here's your gold star. I forgot. We're all winners.
Now that yet another thread has degenerated into senseless bickering I invite you to take this to PM.
Anyway.... no deflection. Cite an example and I'll answer to it. You won't because you can't.
Example:
With regard to all sides of a story....
You continually espouse SFCs as a must have to people soliciting advice. My opinion differs from yours but I provide data / experience points to back it up.
To wit.... I have run my car stock with no SFCs, stock with welded SFCs, modded with SFCs, and modded with no SFCs. In that order. How about you? Where are your other sides of the story? You know.... where you A-B-A tested the modification? So far I see only an A-B.
I'm confused. Who is it again that does not care to get all sides of the story? I could go on with other examples if you wish. Such as....
The STB thread. Someone was deflecting in there big time by citing manufacturer literature but it sure wasn't me.
Such as....
Look at this very thread. I have patiently provided data and experience from more than one car. You know... multiple sides of the story. Meanwhile, you have provided only a manufacturer's link and some mumbling about wanting to know what SLP would have to say about a decision they made more than a decade ago. Nope, no deflection there. No sirree. In fact, I'm truly awed and humbled by the depth of your critical thinking you displayed there. Bravo.
Haven't owned many because I keep them a long time. Three. Two bought new. First new one in 1991.
Quadruple that number of cars (at least) for family members and friend's cars I have driven, wrenched on and been around quite a bit.
Now, care to make your point?
Now that yet another thread has degenerated into senseless bickering I invite you to take this to PM.
Last edited by Ironhead; 09-25-2010 at 03:49 PM.
09-26-2010, 02:46 AM
#42
^ It is not worth going into your off-thread rant which belongs in different thread. On topic: I made my point about SLP explaining their bumpstop approach, and you summed up your approach when you said:
"Why do you care what they have to say? If you understand the situation and the components involved, what does it matter what they have to say?"
It just shows that you fail to take all information into perspective, and assume you know it all. I don't work that way, I will take the time to phone SLP as well, and report back what they say. It is called due diligence, maybe something you will also learn.
Even the best PhD professors at Ivy League schools learn from what others have to say.
How about you post valuable input based on the technical questions asked, instead of wasting space with dribble that provides no thread value, like your last two posts.
"Why do you care what they have to say? If you understand the situation and the components involved, what does it matter what they have to say?"
It just shows that you fail to take all information into perspective, and assume you know it all. I don't work that way, I will take the time to phone SLP as well, and report back what they say. It is called due diligence, maybe something you will also learn.
Even the best PhD professors at Ivy League schools learn from what others have to say.
How about you post valuable input based on the technical questions asked, instead of wasting space with dribble that provides no thread value, like your last two posts.
09-28-2010, 02:18 PM
#46
So I phoned SLP, and yes they did make a higher durometer rubber bumpstop to go along with the aluminum spacer on SS's. The spacer was mandated to them by GM for more clearance, and should be removed if lowered more than 3/4" per SLP. They also mentioned the stock springs are known to them to sag.
09-28-2010, 02:21 PM
#47
All SS's and WS6's got a specific bumpstop, and it is stiffer and shorter. I don't think anyone was arguing that. And the rest, is what we've been saying---for years. 
__________________
www.stranoparts.com --814-849-3450
Results matter. Talk is cheap. We are miles beyond the success anyone else has had with the 4th gens, and C5, C6, C7 Corvettes,
10 SCCA Solo National Championships, 2008 Driver of they Year, 2012 Driver of Eminence
13 SCCA Pro Solo Nationals Championships
2023 UMI King of the Mountain Champion
www.stranoparts.com --814-849-3450
Results matter. Talk is cheap. We are miles beyond the success anyone else has had with the 4th gens, and C5, C6, C7 Corvettes,
10 SCCA Solo National Championships, 2008 Driver of they Year, 2012 Driver of Eminence
13 SCCA Pro Solo Nationals Championships
2023 UMI King of the Mountain Champion
09-28-2010, 03:26 PM
#48
If I needed to know SCCA rules, I would read them for ownership.
You seem to portray yourself as a know it all, who also does not care to get all sides of a story -- when you are called out for it, you deflect. How long have you been driving F-Bodies and how many have you owned?
If a claim is made by a manufacturer, then LS1Tech is the ideal place to either prove it is accurate, or debunk it -- so where's the beef?!
You seem to portray yourself as a know it all, who also does not care to get all sides of a story -- when you are called out for it, you deflect. How long have you been driving F-Bodies and how many have you owned?
If a claim is made by a manufacturer, then LS1Tech is the ideal place to either prove it is accurate, or debunk it -- so where's the beef?!
Also, look at the spacer - what could adding it possibly allow the bump stop to "clear"? Sure doesn't look like the spacer sets the bump stop further in towards the centerline of the car, and pushing the bumpstop down isn't going to allow better tire clearance (you'll just hit a metal spacer instead of a rubber bumpstop now). To me, it looks like it was just something SLP changed in order to toss in their laundry list of "more better SS stuff" rather than being done for any actual performance reasons. I could quite well be wrong, though.
Maybe you haven't been around long enough, but most people eventually get a feel for what aftermarket manufacturers sell snake-oil bullshit, and which ones sell track-proven parts that make a difference.
09-28-2010, 11:05 PM
#49
^^^^
Exactly, just because SLP did something too it doesn't mean it's necessarily better. I know they didn't come stock on any vehicles, but look at SLP LT's compared to Kooks, ARH, etc. which are around the same price and better built plus have better clearances. Just because a company makes something, doesn't mean it's the best.
Exactly, just because SLP did something too it doesn't mean it's necessarily better. I know they didn't come stock on any vehicles, but look at SLP LT's compared to Kooks, ARH, etc. which are around the same price and better built plus have better clearances. Just because a company makes something, doesn't mean it's the best.
09-29-2010, 12:28 AM
#50
A manufacturer isn't going to claim their product is inferior or unnecessary, especially to potential customers. You got your answer from them, but it doesn't seem like they told you why they felt the need to change the bump stops - which, to me, is a more pertinent question - to a much harder material that didn't increase handling performance at all.
Also, look at the spacer - what could adding it possibly allow the bump stop to "clear"? Sure doesn't look like the spacer sets the bump stop further in towards the centerline of the car, and pushing the bumpstop down isn't going to allow better tire clearance (you'll just hit a metal spacer instead of a rubber bumpstop now). To me, it looks like it was just something SLP changed in order to toss in their laundry list of "more better SS stuff" rather than being done for any actual performance reasons. I could quite well be wrong, though.
Maybe you haven't been around long enough, but most people eventually get a feel for what aftermarket manufacturers sell snake-oil bullshit, and which ones sell track-proven parts that make a difference.
Also, look at the spacer - what could adding it possibly allow the bump stop to "clear"? Sure doesn't look like the spacer sets the bump stop further in towards the centerline of the car, and pushing the bumpstop down isn't going to allow better tire clearance (you'll just hit a metal spacer instead of a rubber bumpstop now). To me, it looks like it was just something SLP changed in order to toss in their laundry list of "more better SS stuff" rather than being done for any actual performance reasons. I could quite well be wrong, though.
Maybe you haven't been around long enough, but most people eventually get a feel for what aftermarket manufacturers sell snake-oil bullshit, and which ones sell track-proven parts that make a difference.
10-04-2010, 12:42 AM
#52
TECH Senior Member
Im pretty sure this is the correct part, its what I bought (the longer yellowish ones) but Ive seen some Z28s with the same size one in black as well (don't know if they are any different though).
10-04-2010, 11:58 AM
#54
There are different stiffness of polyurethane just like there are various stiffnesses of rubber, metal, etc.
I'm sure GM mandated it--because they were covering their asses. It's not, in reality, a problem.....
I'm sure GM mandated it--because they were covering their asses. It's not, in reality, a problem.....
__________________
www.stranoparts.com --814-849-3450
Results matter. Talk is cheap. We are miles beyond the success anyone else has had with the 4th gens, and C5, C6, C7 Corvettes,
10 SCCA Solo National Championships, 2008 Driver of they Year, 2012 Driver of Eminence
13 SCCA Pro Solo Nationals Championships
2023 UMI King of the Mountain Champion
www.stranoparts.com --814-849-3450
Results matter. Talk is cheap. We are miles beyond the success anyone else has had with the 4th gens, and C5, C6, C7 Corvettes,
10 SCCA Solo National Championships, 2008 Driver of they Year, 2012 Driver of Eminence
13 SCCA Pro Solo Nationals Championships
2023 UMI King of the Mountain Champion
