Godspeed07

hey guys just wondering if anyone knows the specs on this car....ride height, power output etc....im curious is all. Thanks.

Todd00

There was a web article on it. Have you tried google?

Godspeed07

yeah i googled it and it comes up with the opak racing page....lots of great pics but nothing really as far as the specs go, im curious to know how low their car sits, due to the recent topics ive been reading about suspension on this forum....also what types of weight reduction techniques, engine build characteristics etc......and again im just curious....thanks for the reply though....ill keep searching maybe post some findings if i get any.

Godspeed07

hey guys just a little bump...ive been reading that 1.5front 1.7rear are the ideal drops for the DC5 in a few threads....however heres a pic of the spoon teg...of course im looking for as many specs on this car as i can because, like stated before im curious......however just look at the drop on this bad boy.....looks pretty low to me...correct me if im wrong guys.......http://www.opakracing.com/phot...G.htm

203_DC5

i know the spoon/opak dc5 has a fully blue printed and balanced K20A-R...stock airbox with the spoon filter and full spoon exhaust, stand alone ecu, full suspension work and spoon brakes...i beleive its a 2.0 drop front and rear but it has 17x8 wheels which are work emotion cr's...and its also FULLY stripped with jus a spoon driver seat and takata harness and a roll cage...thats basically it nothin really fancy jus a really well balanced car

Todd00

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Godspeed07 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">hey guys just a little bump...ive been reading that 1.5front 1.7rear are the ideal drops for the DC5 in a few threads....however heres a pic of the spoon teg...of course im looking for as many specs on this car as i can because, like stated before im curious......however just look at the drop on this bad boy.....looks pretty low to me...correct me if im wrong guys.......http://www.opakracing.com/phot...G.htm </TD></TR></TABLE>

There's more to a setup than just running a car at a certain ride height. I've always said that you could go lower *if* you re-engineered a few things...

http://www.vtec.net/articles/v...61798

But the average person and off-the-shelf suspension isn't going to do this. So for sake of simplicity, just stick to the original figures.

Chris.

iTrader: (4)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">But the average person and off-the-shelf suspension isn't going to do this. So for sake of simplicity, just stick to the original figures.</TD></TR></TABLE>



<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">On the chassis, fully custom adjustable Showa/Spoon struts and Swift springs combine to lower the car substantially, as you can see in the photos. Now, historically on the DC5 and EP3 chassis, that much of a drop has wreaked havoc on the handling, but Opak reversed the steering linkages to improve the toe curve. Did it work? We'll tell you in a minute. The Bridgestone DOT legal race tires run about 6 degrees negative camber in the front and about 3 degrees in the rear. We couldn't get any more out of Alan, but those camber numbers ought to tell a number of DC5 enthusiasts here in the States that their setup might need some changing.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Godspeed07

hey guys thanks for the bump, and that link was awesome Todd00.....just a quick question though....why did opak "reverse the steering linkages to improve the toe curve", what does the improved toe curve do or even mean for that matter.....also what would be involved in reversing the steering linkages?? Not planning on doing it just wondering....i do plan on keeping the 1.5 front - 1.7 in the rear drop though, im after performance over looks.

Chris.

iTrader: (4)

spoon has their car lowered more than 1.5", which lowers the center of gravity more, and also harms the handling of the car (thats what sucks about the front suspension on the rsx). notice how it says they have a custom front suspension design. the increased toe curve allows them to adjust the toe more than what you can do on the stock suspension.

Todd00

Remember the JDM ITR has different front LCAs as well, so that introduces different geometry (in a positive way).

Also, that article doesn't give all of the details, but I'm willing to bet that the suspension has been tweaked quite a bit more (then what they tell us about) in order to get the car to handle being that low to the ground.

Chris.

iTrader: (4)

i wonder if they are running a complete conversion similar to realtime racing

Todd00

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 4F CHR!S &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i wonder if they are running a complete conversion similar to realtime racing</TD></TR></TABLE>

I doubt the rules would let them do the extremes that realtime did to the rear of their cars. They completely re-engineered the entire rear setup, drastically changing the mounting points and motion ratio.

Chris.

iTrader: (4)

i was referring to the front suspension though. i wish there was some sort of fix-the-shitty-front-suspension kit out there that i could buy

Todd00

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 4F CHR!S &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i was referring to the front suspension though. i wish there was some sort of fix-the-shitty-front-suspension kit out there that i could buy </TD></TR></TABLE>

Actually, the rear causes more problems than the front--when it really comes down to it.

The front can somewhat be fixed with aftermarket parts, but the rear is pretty much as-is.

Chris.

iTrader: (4)

aha. thanks for the clarification. either way thats just another thing to add to the reason why im gonna get an s2k

Godspeed07

what would be the advantage of adjusting the toe over stock limits....what would that do?? I understand minimally about camber but what benefits would there be by having your wheels pointing in our out, front or rear???

blackdc5

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Actually, the rear causes more problems than the front--when it really comes down to it.

The front can somewhat be fixed with aftermarket parts, but the rear is pretty much as-is.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Do you have any details/input to share about the rear causing more problems in the front?

As for the front end and being too low, IMO the "too low" on the DC5 chassis has been about the roll center lowering as a result of going too low....in cases like the Spoon DC5, or RTR's previous (stock pick up point) setups, I'm sure the RC issues would have been subsided from upping the spring rates dramatically....afterall, RTR ran 2000lbs rear springs to compensate the 1000lb fronts at an early point (circa 2005ish?)

Chris.

iTrader: (4)

i remember seeing a thread in the suspension forum that some dc5 racecars were running 4000lb springs, maybe i misread

Godspeed07

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 4F CHR!S &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i remember seeing a thread in the suspension forum that some dc5 racecars were running 4000lb springs, maybe i misread</TD></TR></TABLE>

i saw the same thread, but i don't think it was the spoon dc5...4000lb spring rate or an elevated spring rate in the rear would do what??? allow the back end to swing out when your cornering just enough to get you around the corner at a faster rate??

Chris.

iTrader: (4)

i believe so

Todd00

That thread is in the FAQ.

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread/2008855

Todd00

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blackdc5 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Do you have any details/input to share about the rear causing more problems in the front?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Main issue is binding. Look in the FAQ. One of those threads I did a large write-up about why/where it binds. It really nothing you can fix. That's why you see huge spring rates on the rear (2500lb+), and why most teams ran with a forward rake. Not to mention the poor motion ratio.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

As for the front end and being too low, IMO the "too low" on the DC5 chassis has been about the roll center lowering as a result of going too low....in cases like the Spoon DC5, or RTR's previous (stock pick up point) setups, I'm sure the RC issues would have been subsided from upping the spring rates dramatically....afterall, RTR ran 2000lbs rear springs to compensate the 1000lb fronts at an early point (circa 2005ish?)</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah, it's mainly about roll center. The tierod crap can be fixed somewhat, but different LCAs will help the roll center out a bit. The front is somewhat fixable.

203_DC5

from what ive read and gathered im going to go with fully adjustable suspension(JIC-MAGIC) and the JDM ITR front LCA's for my own vehicle as i do alot of auto-x and scca solo...as for sponsored race cars its a different story, lik said before teams lik realtime racing put a lot of time and $$$$ into there cars and it isnt something the avg. joe can do plus, set ups lik that are meant for the track not the street

Todd00

I've heard nothing but poor reports with the JIC stuff for the RSX chassis.

Chris.

iTrader: (4)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I've heard nothing but poor reports with the JIC stuff for the RSX chassis. </TD></TR></TABLE>

same here, thats why i went with buddy club