That drop looks about right. Have you gotten the car aligned yet?

 

https://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=112

https://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=113

 

I dont get that stese links say that the shocks are longer.
As far as an alignment. Just got back. Came away with
1.8 LF. 1.7 RF
2.1 LR. 2.1 RR

 

That was in reference to the fact that the Moton Club Sport is made shorter than OE (outside of the stock legal allowance) because they are built for the MX-5.

 

Oops stupid Iphone.

 

Yes, but the first link is from the same person who's claiming the 09 Sport rear shocks are two inches longer than prior RX-8s

I'm making a wild @ss @ssumption that he knows what he's talking about if he bought Motons for his 09 Sport

 

I don't know where the 2 inch difference comes from but I can confirm that the 09 rear shocks are different from 08 and earlier. So unmodified, the current Koni rears will not work. The spring perch is ~ 0.5 inches higher for the 09 shock and the shock body is also ~ 0.5 inches longer.

Koni is now aware of the issue.

 

This is an 09' base, or an R3? Interesting how many different stories are out there - seems like a lot of the early 09' converts were saying everything was the same, now not so much.

The good news is we may actually have something to look at if they pull wheels in impound this year.

 

09 Sport/base.

I was asked to add the following clarification statement: The Koni’s rears “Fit”, but are not stock class legal.
There was a rumored change in the 09 rear suspension that no one seem to be able to track down. I think we found it now!

 

Thanks, I suspected as much, but without an actual shock to compare wasn't sure.

 

Got my fronts on last night and the info that tim posted is correct on the rears. The perch on the rear konis sits half inch lower than on the 09 shocks.

 

Did my first event on the Kumos and konis yesterday. Feels like someone hit me in the left knee with a 2X4! I might need a harness or something.
What tire pressure are people running on the 245 710s?

 

I started off around 39psi front, 37 psi rear and adjusted from there (depends on surface). I typically run front pressures in the mid 30's right now on decent grip asphalt surfaces (e.g. Fedex stadium lot in DC).

 

I ran 36 up front and 38 rear cold. Never really rose much, didn't have a codriver. Seemed to be using all of the front tire but not the rear. It was just planted, wouldn't really rotate much at all. I think I might go down on the rear camber a little.

 

Well? Was everyone on the 255 a Lincoln? Did they survive on the concrete?

 

Jason - Most were on 285's , EDJ was the only one I noticed on 255's and I did not have a chance to look at them after the Sunday AM runs.

Chris H

 

the fast guys were on 285's...

Me & GeneralDefault were on 255s.

i had less wear here than i did in Houston albeit on less run time.
i'll keep watching to see how they do over the next few events.

 

I ran 57 psig hot at Wendover on the 255s. I also ran a prior test event on asphalt trying a few other changes and at 53 psig hot the 255 front outer corners were still rolling over too much. I had good grip at Wendover, but at that pressure if you went over the limit you could really feel it bite you. Worked fine otherwise. The corner wear issue seemed to decrease some, but is still occurring. I'll probably go with 285s myself the next time.

 

285f and 255r. Someone needs to try it.

 

Someone already has .....

Works well in transition, 60 ft times were not quite as good as the 285, so Jason R and I decided to stick with the known set-up for the ProSolo. I still have some experimenting to do, but the balance change is subtle, not scary.

Chris H

 

Can't say that I noticed any difference on the 60 ft times or launch rpm

The hassle of two different size tires offsets any advantage for me, I'd rather be able to swap between front and rear before ultimately having to flip them inside out

 

I spoke with another "early adopter" of the 255 today. Different application (front drive, some camber), but same problem...they have also gone over 50psi, which just can't be within the design parameter, and still have an effect where the tires cord right at the edge, but look perfectly fine (almost untouched) less than 1/2" inside of the cording. This is after about 35 runs.

I'm still thinking there is a construction/early production issue. It makes absolutely zero sense that a more optimal section width for the 8" rim would wear so much worse, i.e. 255 vs. 285 or 295