Standard ride height for 182

[banhama]

As per title can anyone tell me the factory ride height, wheel centre to arch, front and rear on a 182 (with factory suspension)

I would also welcome thoughts and experience on optimum ride height to aim for when upgrading to coilovers, purely for circuit racing., Andy

Many thanks

 

[White16valver]

182?

Or 182 Cup?

Or 182 Trophy?

The Cup Racers looked like this:
https://www.classicandsportscar.com...ecar-original-condition-price-reduced/8565696

 

[banhama]

Definitely not a Trophy, not sure how you tell the difference between a plain old 182 and a Cup.....although it doesn't have any mention of Cup on the car or log book.
So I guess just 182

Might be difficult to match the Cup Racer set up as I am told the front suspension would work with a standard sub-frame, even if I could get hold of it.
I would love ASTs but may be budget restricted to something else

 

[White16valver]

There is a thread / wiki somewhere with the model differences, but I can't find it now.

 

[Usr117063]

Definitely not a Trophy, not sure how you tell the difference between a plain old 182 and a Cup.....although it doesn't have any mention of Cup on the car or log book.
So I guess just 182

Might be difficult to match the Cup Racer set up as I am told the front suspension would work with a standard sub-frame, even if I could get hold of it.
I would love ASTs but may be budget restricted to something else

Asts pop up for sale on here every so often, well worth it..

 

[Jon46]

Hi,

I measured my arch to top of tyre last week, for another member, Osspoop on here.

I’ve got a standard Full Fat 182 with both cup packs, and 205/45/16 tyres.

Front: Top of tyre to arch = 70mm

Rear: Top of tyre to arch = 40mm

I’d calculate standard (Cup) ride height, from wheel centre to arch to be as follows.

16 inch rim, divided by 2 = 203.2mm + 92.25mm (45% of 205) side wall = 295.45

So Front = 365.45 (295.45 + 70) wheel centre to arch

Rear = 335.45 (295.45 + 40) wheel centre to arch.

I hope this helps ??

 

[banhama]

Many thanks, I'll have a measure in the morning and report back. I'm expecting in the region of plus 30mm at the front, maybe more at the back

 

[STEVE.M]

Many thanks, I'll have a measure in the morning and report back. I'm expecting in the region of plus 30mm at the front, maybe more at the back

Suspension set up.

Once you work out what H1/2/4 & 5 are, you will have your answer, or wish you had never asked.

 

[banhama]

Many thanks for this.
I think I'll wish I never asked as the complexities of suspension set-up made my tiny brain hurt with the Subaru.......and I can feel it happening again!

I found this in the manual, should have looked there first!
Seems a strange way to measure height, I assume subtracting the two measurements removes the effect of tyre inflation, but using hub centre to arch does that with a single measurement. Although the position on the arch is always a bit random.

 

[banhama]

Very useful information thanks @STEVE.M the only thing I can't tell for sure from the chart is the rear H5-H4 value for the 182 it could be either 0mm as per 172 Mk1 or 5mm.
It seems to work out at 5mm, and it appears my car despite the weight loss is pretty much spot on at the rear, but needs lowering at the front.

I now appreciate the measuring method as it gives 'rake' as well as ride heights.

H1 is front ground to hub. Mine is 282mm. This is obviously a fixed value with correctly inflated tyres.
H2 is front ground to subframe. Mine is 180mm. This is the value that varies with ride height setting.
H4 is rear ground to hub. Mine is 287mm
H5 is rear ground to centre of swinging arm bush. Mine is 282mm

There are 3 relevant values:
H1-H2 front height indicator..............should be 118mm..................actual is 102mm
H5-H2 rake indicator...........................should be 118mm..................actual is 102mm
H4-H5 rear height indicator................should be 5mm......................actual is 5mm

So if I lower the front by 16mm H2 will become 164mm, which means:
H1-H2 front height indicator..............should be 118mm..................actual is 118mm
H5-H2 rake indicator...........................should be 118mm..................actual is 118mm
H4-H5 rear height indicator................should be 5mm......................actual is 5mm

Spot on!

So now I just need the new suspension!
I must admit I am leaning towards the BC DS for a three reasons:
They offer height adjustment without pre-loading the springs.
Despite trying 5 different types of coilvers on the Subaru, ranging to over£3K, the BCs were fitted when I did my quickest lap times at Lydden Hill.
Budget is limited!

 

[STEVE.M]

@banhama If you set the eight based on these measurements, it will be interesting to see where it ends up if you have it corner weighted.

Congratulations on unravelling the measurement points.

 

[banhama]

Very true, we will definitely have it corner weighted at some point, and given the weight of the driver compared to the spring rate and car weight it will probably result in an odd stance without driver.

This discussion has also made me realise that our biggest issue last race was the lack of an LSD.
Lydden only has 4 real corners, 3 right 1 left.

In the tightest right (hairpin) and tightest left (elbow) I had revs rising rapidly, no traction and understeer. But it was way worse in the left hander???
Being an FWD newbie I initially put this down to the inner rear lifting about a foot off the road, but this didn't really make practical sense, and I've raced against loads of really quick FWDs that lift the unloaded rear for most of the circuit.

I can only surmise that it's the lifting unloaded front that's sapping all the torque and the loaded outer wheel isn't getting any useful power, due to the standard or open diff.
The reason it's way worse in the left hander is that my weight is on the loaded side where it's no use, in the right handers it's at least helping give the unloaded front a bit more traction.

Any comments or advice on LSD conversion will be welcome

 

[flebay]

The reason it's way worse in the left hander is that my weight is on the loaded side where it's no use, in the right handers it's at least helping give the unloaded front a bit more traction.

They sit 5mm lower at the front on the standard springs due to the position of the engine being towards the drivers side so even worse.

 

[STEVE.M]

Very true, we will definitely have it corner weighted at some point, and given the weight of the driver compared to the spring rate and car weight it will probably result in an odd stance without driver.

This discussion has also made me realise that our biggest issue last race was the lack of an LSD.
Lydden only has 4 real corners, 3 right 1 left.

In the tightest right (hairpin) and tightest left (elbow) I had revs rising rapidly, no traction and understeer. But it was way worse in the left hander???
Being an FWD newbie I initially put this down to the inner rear lifting about a foot off the road, but this didn't really make practical sense, and I've raced against loads of really quick FWDs that lift the unloaded rear for most of the circuit.

I can only surmise that it's the lifting unloaded front that's sapping all the torque and the loaded outer wheel isn't getting any useful power, due to the standard or open diff.
The reason it's way worse in the left hander is that my weight is on the loaded side where it's no use, in the right handers it's at least helping give the unloaded front a bit more traction.

Any comments or advice on LSD conversion will be welcome

@NorthloopCup is your man.

 

[NorthloopCup]

I can supply and fit grippers or Quaife’s @banhama

 

[banhama]

Many thanks for the replies, very useful.
I've just got to wait for CMMC Southern and LHMC 2019 technical regulations to be published to see how any modifications will affect our class, and then I can make some plans.