EMart11b

iTrader: (5)

One of the advertised upgrades is an improved rear suspension geometry.

Orthonormal

Was the spring seat shape ever resolved?

I understand that there is a new rear Koni (8240-1280) for the series 2. I assume that it corrected the spring seat height, but was the ramp profile fixed, too? The ramp in the photos in this thread is clearly wrong for the series 2.

Has anyone gotten a set since the new 1280 rear shock was released, and compared the spring seats to the stock shocks?

Do the 1280 shocks have an external adjuster? The Koni application guide shows the **** icon next to the 1280 part number.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

You don't have to assume anything. Just pick up the phone and call Koni on Monday. They can answer all your questions.

Orthonormal

Lee has been out of the office at least since I called Koni two+ weeks ago. Friday or today is his first day back. I didn't really want to pester him before he had a chance to catch up on his backlog, so I'm doing some research on the side to see if anyone else has the answer to my questions.

(I also left a voice mail in the Koni general tech support box, but received no contact from that).

Orthonormal

I just talked to Lee. According to the current build sheets, the 1227 and 1280 rear shocks both use the same spring seat. He does not have any documentation about whether the spring seat was changed at some time in the past.

He also indicated that the tooling for a new spring seat is very expensive, and that there's a point where they decide it's close enough for practical purposes. I'm starting to think that the Stock requirement that the spring seat be exactly the same profile is impractical. Manufacturers of OE-replacement shocks (which is nominally what the shock allowance is intended for) don't exist solely to provide shocks that meet the exacting standards of the SCCA Solo rules, they exist to build a product that fits and functions like the stock (ahem, "standard") part.

Either Isley and everyone else missed the difference between the original Koni spring seat profile and the original stock spring seat profile back in 2004/5, or else Mazda or Koni made a change in the spring seat profile between 2005 and 2009, when the photos in this thread were taken. I'm curious which shock Jason was referring to when he said "that looks like the MX-5 perch". I remember the mess in 2006 with Koni using the RX-8 seat on the MX-5 shock, but I don't remember which stock shock had the steeper ramp on the spring seat, RX-8 or MX-5.

Orthonormal

I'm tempted to punt on the Konis and just buy a used set of the R3 Bilsteins. I'm just a punk local autocrosser these days anyway.

Chris_Bangle

iTrader: (2)

^ I have a set I was thinking of selling. PM if interested.

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

You can have the OE perches refitted to the Koni shocks. In doing so you might as well buy a used set of S1 shocks, at least for the rear, because they will need to be disassembled and rebuilt in the process. My recommendation is Truechoice, but Pro Parts can likely offer it as well.

Orthonormal

If I have to destroy a set of stock shocks, then have a set of Konis rebuilt with custom welding work (and rebuilds are up to $140 for labor on these not including parts or other work), and still end up with non-adjustable rear shocks, tell me again why I should go with the Konis?

I thought it was because they were the easy & cheap solution.

Orthonormal

I confirmed with Lee that the current builds on the RX-8 rear shocks (both 1227 and 1280) and the MX-5 rear shocks (1244) all use the same spring seat.

Orthonormal

On the Solo rules end of things, the clarification I thought I remembered about the spring seat profile isn't very clear on that issue, but indicates that vertical height that's equal to or greater than stock is acceptable. So the ramp doesn't have to be exact, it just has to be as high or higher at every point. Maybe. It's clear as mud.

"Just buy the damn Konis already", right BH?

TeamRX8

iTrader: (25)

because the RX-8 factory shocks suck for autox performance, but go ahead and reinvent the wheel if you must, you already bought the wrong version to start with

Orthonormal

Not for RTR. Will be ordering the Konis as soon as the vendor gets back to me.

dmitrik4

iTrader: (5)

Just curious: why do you think the S2 is a better choice for RTR?

Orthonormal

Gearing is shorter but not too short for the available street tires. Weight is not appreciably greater. Maybe a tiny bit better power. I'm not saying it's certainly better, but it's certainly not "wrong". Any advantage or disadvantage is nearly negligible.

Other benefits (much more reliable engine, newer car) make it worth it for me to buy a non-Sipe-approved car.