View Poll Results: Which swaybar combo eliminates most body roll?
Tanabe
4
10.00%
Racing Beat
17
42.50%
Agency Power
3
7.50%
Whiteline
9
22.50%
Mazdaspeed
6
15.00%
AutoEXE
1
2.50%
Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll
Best Swaybars?
12-19-2005, 08:38 AM
#1
Fire-Spewing Maniac
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Best Swaybars?
Hey Guys, Ive looked around using search, but I havent really found a post the summarizes what im looking for.
Basically, I'm wondering which set of swaybars (front and rear) will eliminate the MOST amount of body roll. Lets see what the poll shows!
Basically, I'm wondering which set of swaybars (front and rear) will eliminate the MOST amount of body roll. Lets see what the poll shows!
12-19-2005, 09:07 AM
#2
cry me a river...
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Syd / Melb
Posts: 4,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its going to be difficult to tell...
not many ppl will try more than one to see if the new one is better then the old one....
probably best to go by owner's review and make your own decision.
not many ppl will try more than one to see if the new one is better then the old one....
probably best to go by owner's review and make your own decision.
12-19-2005, 01:03 PM
#3
Fire-Spewing Maniac
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thata true, even if its to see which one is the most popular.
I just want to find out which one is the most agressive before I decide to buy.
right now im leaning towards either agency power or tanabe.
I just want to find out which one is the most agressive before I decide to buy.
right now im leaning towards either agency power or tanabe.
12-19-2005, 06:06 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't this sort of dependent on other suspension bits? Are you assuming stock springs and shocks when you ask this question? Or are you simply asking which is the stiffest, without regard to whether or not its suitable for anything in particular?
12-19-2005, 06:25 PM
#6
#1 Legend
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 3,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i actually had a spreadsheet comparing Stock with MS, Racing Beat, and AutoExe. I'll post it later if i can find it.
Comaprning the three of those, i found racing beat to be the best. Then again those are just numbers, the real test comes on the track to see how well they really perform.
Comaprning the three of those, i found racing beat to be the best. Then again those are just numbers, the real test comes on the track to see how well they really perform.
12-19-2005, 06:37 PM
#7
Racing Beat is the stiffest, but they sell one of the softest spring kits too
MazdaSpeed springs are quite a bit stiffer that RB, but their swaybars aren't much stiffer than the factory bars
you have to consider both springs and sways as a package, typically the higher the spring rate the less stiff bars you'll need, but tire grip/size, etc. all enter into it too, if you get the overall cornering rate too high the car will flat slide too easily, this will happen sooner on narrow low grip street tires/wheels than wide high grip race tires/wheels
The adjustability of the Power Agency bars is a nice feature if you understand how to tune them properly because they give you some flexibility in setting the stiffness instead of being stuck with a single rate combination
the combinations can be difficult to determine their comparatives rates though as the suppliers don't readily provide you with the wall thickness on their tubular bars, usually only listing the OD dimension, and if you don't actually have them in hand you're making some assumptions about the arm lengths, etc.
MazdaSpeed springs are quite a bit stiffer that RB, but their swaybars aren't much stiffer than the factory bars
you have to consider both springs and sways as a package, typically the higher the spring rate the less stiff bars you'll need, but tire grip/size, etc. all enter into it too, if you get the overall cornering rate too high the car will flat slide too easily, this will happen sooner on narrow low grip street tires/wheels than wide high grip race tires/wheels
The adjustability of the Power Agency bars is a nice feature if you understand how to tune them properly because they give you some flexibility in setting the stiffness instead of being stuck with a single rate combination
the combinations can be difficult to determine their comparatives rates though as the suppliers don't readily provide you with the wall thickness on their tubular bars, usually only listing the OD dimension, and if you don't actually have them in hand you're making some assumptions about the arm lengths, etc.
Last edited by TeamRX8; 12-19-2005 at 06:41 PM.
12-19-2005, 07:40 PM
#8
You forgot about H&R, Whiteline and I am sure there are others.
I think by far the stiffest bar out there is the SpeedSource blade front bar. Built by SS for GrandAm cup and sold by Mazda Motorsports, I think it is about $500.00 for the front.
I think by far the stiffest bar out there is the SpeedSource blade front bar. Built by SS for GrandAm cup and sold by Mazda Motorsports, I think it is about $500.00 for the front.
12-19-2005, 07:53 PM
#9
yeah, I was refering to the bars listed, I wouldn't recommend the Speedsource bar for the street though, it's pretty much a racing part only. You can adjust the stiffness on it by using different wall thickness torsion tubes though, so it can be as stiff or as soft as you could possibly want it.
IMO Whiteline is bottom of the barrel crud, I'm sure I'll get jumped for saying it because some people here think they're the best thing since sliced bread. Their bars are solid (read: too d-mn heavy) and unless they've changed the design their front bar adjustment tab is the biggest piece of crap I've ever seen. At one point they weren't supplying centering collars, which was letting the bar slam side-side during cornering, I "think" they may have finally fixed that though.
IMO Whiteline is bottom of the barrel crud, I'm sure I'll get jumped for saying it because some people here think they're the best thing since sliced bread. Their bars are solid (read: too d-mn heavy) and unless they've changed the design their front bar adjustment tab is the biggest piece of crap I've ever seen. At one point they weren't supplying centering collars, which was letting the bar slam side-side during cornering, I "think" they may have finally fixed that though.
12-19-2005, 08:11 PM
#10
Momentum Keeps Me Going
I believe the Whitelines ARE the stiffest bars out there (besides the Speedsource), BECAUSE they are solid and the rest aren't. Yea solid is a bit heavier, but what are we talking here... a couple of lbs of sprung weight at most to get the 'Flat Out" handing? No biggy IMHO. Their adjustment is simply two holes in the flatened ends of the bar the end links bolt into. Not sure how that becomes 'a piece of crap' 
TeamRX8. The only stupid thing (they have since fixed) is not using centering collars initially. Otherwise they are some of the least expensive, nice powder coated, stiff, and adjustable. What more can you ask for? Bling?
TeamRX8. The only stupid thing (they have since fixed) is not using centering collars initially. Otherwise they are some of the least expensive, nice powder coated, stiff, and adjustable. What more can you ask for? Bling?
12-19-2005, 11:06 PM
#12
Fire-Spewing Maniac
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I have Tien S.Techs which already eliminated alot or roll themselves.
I always thought racing beat was more conservative in their stuff.
Hmm. I still like the adjustability of the agency power bars though.
I always thought racing beat was more conservative in their stuff.
Hmm. I still like the adjustability of the agency power bars though.
12-20-2005, 01:16 AM
#13
Originally Posted by Spin9k
I believe the Whitelines ARE the stiffest bars out there (besides the Speedsource), BECAUSE they are solid and the rest aren't. Yea solid is a bit heavier, but what are we talking here... a couple of lbs of sprung weight at most to get the 'Flat Out" handing? No biggy IMHO. Their adjustment is simply two holes in the flatened ends of the bar the end links bolt into. Not sure how that becomes 'a piece of crap' TeamRX8. The only stupid thing (they have since fixed) is not using centering collars initially. Otherwise they are some of the least expensive, nice powder coated, stiff, and adjustable. What more can you ask for? Bling?
TeamRX8. The only stupid thing (they have since fixed) is not using centering collars initially. Otherwise they are some of the least expensive, nice powder coated, stiff, and adjustable. What more can you ask for? Bling?you tend to be one of the most nitpicky people I know when it comes to critiquing performance parts, now you suddenly about-face on Whiteline bars, LOL
Take a look at the Agency Power bars; tubular with the ends flattened and the multiple holes equally spaced in a row, a nice quality piece equal to many racing bars, Vivid has a great sale price on them in their Vendor area too (but they are getting a lot of bad press in the Good Guy/Bad Guy forum area)
I've seen planty of flattened end solid bars with adjustable holes similar to the Agency Power bars, but have never seen anything like the Whiteline end; big flattened slab with one hole over here and the other off way over there, makes no sense to me
and FWIW, stiffer does not equal better, further the weight increases a lot more than the stiffness WRT a tubular vs solid bar having the same OD, that's why tubular is preferred, it's quite a bit more than 2 or 3# too
Last edited by TeamRX8; 12-20-2005 at 01:23 AM.
12-20-2005, 07:45 AM
#14
Momentum Keeps Me Going
Well I love how the WL bars work
, I just reemed WL a new orafice originally because they were idiots and didn't engineer the lateral collars until I well after I yelled at them about it, by that time I'd made my own. Obviously a big initial mis-step IMO, but it's history at this point, the result the bar produce was never an issue.
Here's the best explaination I have for the offset holes rather than lined up holes of others...it's the stiffness aspect again. The less stiff, hollow bars need a longer torque arm adjustment distance to produce stiffness change...whereas the solid, stiffer WLs would end up too stiff with using such as distance between holes, so therefore the shortened, offset but diagonally close holes.
A good thing about this kind of hole spacing is it allows use of the stock, non-length-adjustable links, and it keeps the links in a similar to stock vertical position relative to their fixed mounting position with the suspension arm. Others with more widely spaced holes may force the use of expensive adjustable length links and position them it a offset angle relative to vertical putting add'l stress on the parts and diminishing the bar's performance or causing link breaking.
[BTW the ultimate best adjustmant mechanism is a sliding collar clamp that moves along the bar arm yet remains vertical to the suspension mount hole. I've seen this on a race-prep RX-8 BTW, the bar was about the size of your wrist ]
Granted, stiffness does not equal better, but neither does it equal worse...it's the overall design intent and balance in whole-car-setup for whatever purpose that's important. WL certainly has years of experience in doing this 4 many cars 4 street, race and rally use... but who the hell knows if they really gave a rats *** about the 8 when they developed the bar... but that could be said for others too... we just assume they engineered it right.
Also granted stiffness increase does not equal weight increase, percentage wise, for solid bars. However, in the end, to get a max stiffness bar of a similar diameter as hollow, solid is the answer. In the case of the WL vs the other hollow ones, the WL is the same diameter as the stock bar, most likely because there is precious little room to fit a bigger diameter bar in the front along with the suspension and steering rack.
In the end, as I recollect, I got the WL both for it's adjustablity, as no others at the time had that feature, plus it's solid stiff nature, figuring I could adj to softer if I wanted too. So far I've adjusted from soft to stiffest and left it there with great result.
In the end it's such a simple device, I'm sure many other bars work fine, but it would be fun to take a bunch of cars w/all the bars out on a test circuit to see who is the handling champ.
, I just reemed WL a new orafice originally because they were idiots and didn't engineer the lateral collars until I well after I yelled at them about it, by that time I'd made my own. Obviously a big initial mis-step IMO, but it's history at this point, the result the bar produce was never an issue.Here's the best explaination I have for the offset holes rather than lined up holes of others...it's the stiffness aspect again. The less stiff, hollow bars need a longer torque arm adjustment distance to produce stiffness change...whereas the solid, stiffer WLs would end up too stiff with using such as distance between holes, so therefore the shortened, offset but diagonally close holes.
A good thing about this kind of hole spacing is it allows use of the stock, non-length-adjustable links, and it keeps the links in a similar to stock vertical position relative to their fixed mounting position with the suspension arm. Others with more widely spaced holes may force the use of expensive adjustable length links and position them it a offset angle relative to vertical putting add'l stress on the parts and diminishing the bar's performance or causing link breaking.
[BTW the ultimate best adjustmant mechanism is a sliding collar clamp that moves along the bar arm yet remains vertical to the suspension mount hole. I've seen this on a race-prep RX-8 BTW, the bar was about the size of your wrist
]Granted, stiffness does not equal better, but neither does it equal worse...it's the overall design intent and balance in whole-car-setup for whatever purpose that's important. WL certainly has years of experience in doing this 4 many cars 4 street, race and rally use... but who the hell knows if they really gave a rats *** about the 8 when they developed the bar... but that could be said for others too... we just assume they engineered it right.
Also granted stiffness increase does not equal weight increase, percentage wise, for solid bars. However, in the end, to get a max stiffness bar of a similar diameter as hollow, solid is the answer. In the case of the WL vs the other hollow ones, the WL is the same diameter as the stock bar, most likely because there is precious little room to fit a bigger diameter bar in the front along with the suspension and steering rack.
In the end, as I recollect, I got the WL both for it's adjustablity, as no others at the time had that feature, plus it's solid stiff nature, figuring I could adj to softer if I wanted too. So far I've adjusted from soft to stiffest and left it there with great result.
In the end it's such a simple device, I'm sure many other bars work fine, but it would be fun to take a bunch of cars w/all the bars out on a test circuit to see who is the handling champ.
07-08-2006, 06:20 PM
#15
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Spin9k
Well I love how the WL bars work , I just reemed WL a new orafice originally because they were idiots and didn't engineer the lateral collars until I well after I yelled at them about it, by that time I'd made my own. Obviously a big initial mis-step IMO, but it's history at this point, the result the bar produce was never an issue.
Here's the best explaination I have for the offset holes rather than lined up holes of others...it's the stiffness aspect again. The less stiff, hollow bars need a longer torque arm adjustment distance to produce stiffness change...whereas the solid, stiffer WLs would end up too stiff with using such as distance between holes, so therefore the shortened, offset but diagonally close holes.
A good thing about this kind of hole spacing is it allows use of the stock, non-length-adjustable links, and it keeps the links in a similar to stock vertical position relative to their fixed mounting position with the suspension arm. Others with more widely spaced holes may force the use of expensive adjustable length links and position them it a offset angle relative to vertical putting add'l stress on the parts and diminishing the bar's performance or causing link breaking.
[BTW the ultimate best adjustmant mechanism is a sliding collar clamp that moves along the bar arm yet remains vertical to the suspension mount hole. I've seen this on a race-prep RX-8 BTW, the bar was about the size of your wrist ]
Granted, stiffness does not equal better, but neither does it equal worse...it's the overall design intent and balance in whole-car-setup for whatever purpose that's important. WL certainly has years of experience in doing this 4 many cars 4 street, race and rally use... but who the hell knows if they really gave a rats *** about the 8 when they developed the bar... but that could be said for others too... we just assume they engineered it right.
Also granted stiffness increase does not equal weight increase, percentage wise, for solid bars. However, in the end, to get a max stiffness bar of a similar diameter as hollow, solid is the answer. In the case of the WL vs the other hollow ones, the WL is the same diameter as the stock bar, most likely because there is precious little room to fit a bigger diameter bar in the front along with the suspension and steering rack.
In the end, as I recollect, I got the WL both for it's adjustablity, as no others at the time had that feature, plus it's solid stiff nature, figuring I could adj to softer if I wanted too. So far I've adjusted from soft to stiffest and left it there with great result.
In the end it's such a simple device, I'm sure many other bars work fine, but it would be fun to take a bunch of cars w/all the bars out on a test circuit to see who is the handling champ.
, I just reemed WL a new orafice originally because they were idiots and didn't engineer the lateral collars until I well after I yelled at them about it, by that time I'd made my own. Obviously a big initial mis-step IMO, but it's history at this point, the result the bar produce was never an issue.Here's the best explaination I have for the offset holes rather than lined up holes of others...it's the stiffness aspect again. The less stiff, hollow bars need a longer torque arm adjustment distance to produce stiffness change...whereas the solid, stiffer WLs would end up too stiff with using such as distance between holes, so therefore the shortened, offset but diagonally close holes.
A good thing about this kind of hole spacing is it allows use of the stock, non-length-adjustable links, and it keeps the links in a similar to stock vertical position relative to their fixed mounting position with the suspension arm. Others with more widely spaced holes may force the use of expensive adjustable length links and position them it a offset angle relative to vertical putting add'l stress on the parts and diminishing the bar's performance or causing link breaking.
[BTW the ultimate best adjustmant mechanism is a sliding collar clamp that moves along the bar arm yet remains vertical to the suspension mount hole. I've seen this on a race-prep RX-8 BTW, the bar was about the size of your wrist
]Granted, stiffness does not equal better, but neither does it equal worse...it's the overall design intent and balance in whole-car-setup for whatever purpose that's important. WL certainly has years of experience in doing this 4 many cars 4 street, race and rally use... but who the hell knows if they really gave a rats *** about the 8 when they developed the bar... but that could be said for others too... we just assume they engineered it right.
Also granted stiffness increase does not equal weight increase, percentage wise, for solid bars. However, in the end, to get a max stiffness bar of a similar diameter as hollow, solid is the answer. In the case of the WL vs the other hollow ones, the WL is the same diameter as the stock bar, most likely because there is precious little room to fit a bigger diameter bar in the front along with the suspension and steering rack.
In the end, as I recollect, I got the WL both for it's adjustablity, as no others at the time had that feature, plus it's solid stiff nature, figuring I could adj to softer if I wanted too. So far I've adjusted from soft to stiffest and left it there with great result.
In the end it's such a simple device, I'm sure many other bars work fine, but it would be fun to take a bunch of cars w/all the bars out on a test circuit to see who is the handling champ.
i was searching and found this thread, TeamRX8 seems to be quite knowledgable but so does Spin9k so i wanna know Team's or anyone's response to this lol
07-08-2006, 08:33 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went with a full mazdaspeed suspension MINUS the sway bars...
from my research it seems all the "magic" comes from the shocks and sping set... the Mazdaspeed sway bars are only 18% stiffer it seems, and that little bit doenst seem like its worth over 500 extra dollars. I'll be happy with the 1" drop and stiffer ride via the shocks and springs
from my research it seems all the "magic" comes from the shocks and sping set... the Mazdaspeed sway bars are only 18% stiffer it seems, and that little bit doenst seem like its worth over 500 extra dollars. I'll be happy with the 1" drop and stiffer ride via the shocks and springs
07-10-2006, 01:55 PM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's in another thread, but it was since determined that the Mazdaspeed was the softest, then Whiteline as kind of middle of the pack, then Racing Beat as the stiffest between the three by a wide margin. I was told recently by someone with Agency Power bars that they were ~30% stiffer than stock.
I have the Whitelines, and they are ~64% stiffer in front and ~91% stiffer in the rear.
I have the Whitelines, and they are ~64% stiffer in front and ~91% stiffer in the rear.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
tony_673
Series I Wheels, Tires, Brakes & Suspension
14
01-11-2007 10:13 AM
