My 205 Handles Like Poo.

[Tom Fenton 1,542]

So I've come to the conclusion that my extremely messed about with 205 handles like turd at present.

 

The main factor to this has been driving our lasses recently acquired MINI Cooper S about today. It probably weighs half as much again as a 205, but by george the bloody thing doesn't half turn in, corner, change direction. In comparison my 205 feels understeery, nervous, slow to change direction. Granted the 205 when on song will absolutely whack it in a straight line, but at the moment its also missing about 1 bar of boost so not only it is like a greased pig on roller skates in the handling dept, it is well down on go to boot.

 

Now there is an issue I've been chasing for a while which I now think is probably an ovalled hub on the NSF, but even without that in the mix, it is nowhere near what the MINI can do.

Another planned mod which it is crying out for is a Xsara VTS rack which I have and just needs fitting.

 

So aside from finding my boost, and sorting out as above, why does the bloody thing seem so poor in the handling stakes?

 

Brief spec is.

 

Gaz coilovers 225lb springs

309 wishbones

309 rear beam with 23mm rear bars, 24mm ARB

Xsara VTS trailing arms (toe in, negative camber)

SL299 (1900 wheels) with either Michelin or Yoko tyres.

Ride height roughly 30mm lower than std.

Thoughts welcomed.

[stuart 31 3 Cars]

Could it be to do with the castor angle? I always seem to find that the ride height front / back can affect turn in. I usually have my car slightly lower at the back and this seems to be best.

 

Also the toe-in on your rear arms will make it more prone to understeer wouldn't it?

[pug_ham 244 3 Cars]

Could it be you've got the back too stiff so its not allowing the front a little bit of lean to enhance the turn in?

 

Another thing I've thought about, the camber & toe from the Xsara arms is only valid when sat at the correct height & position on the Xsara, lowered & on a 205 will give different settings than planned so it might not help with the way you have things set now as an overall package.

 

Graham.

[stefan 4]

So aside from finding my boost, and sorting out as above, why does the bloody thing seem so poor in the handling stakes?

 

Because you can't make a girl out of an old gal.

[swordfish210 20]

Maybe try some softer settings front and rear as it may be a bit stiff for the road, what rear dampers do you have?

[Tom Fenton 1,542]

Cheers chaps, to answer a couple of points the rear dampers are Gaz that came with the front coilovers in the group buy off here.

 

I think I'm going to sort out the "lurch" that hopefully is nothing more than a dodgy hub, then get a faster ratio rack fitted, and then see what it is like then. The 309 beam looks great with the wide rear stance but I'm not convinced it helps the handling of the car if I'm honest.

[Bigtimmy 1]

From my somewhat limited knowledge, I'd say the front is set too soft.

 

I guess the "cheapest" option would perhaps be to put some 250 - 275lb springs on the front and see if that makes a difference.

 

I'm running a similar setup to you with 300lb on the front and some 24mm torsion bars on the back and it's all nice and lovely.

 

Good luck

[dino20vt 3]

If it's the red one you've got with the split rims, maybe the poor handling is caused by the rear end being too high?

[Henry Yorke 269 3 Cars]

Is the handling poor compared to your track one Tom. If so, what are the differences in spec? Is it too stiff for the road in that spec which degrades the handling? My old 205 XS was too stiff for the road and drove much better when I took all the Spax suspension off it.

 

At a risk of stating the obvious, is it all tracked up right and the chassis is all straight? Is it equally poor round both left and right hand corners? Do you find it is just not balanced when compared to the Mini?

[Anthony 1,003]

Double check the rear anti-roll bar - if the bolts that secure it to the trailing arms snap or come out, or in the ARB itself snapped or rounds off the splines, then you lose turn in and it feels like an understeering wallowy pig.

 

An ovalled hub really won't help matters though, and alot of the nervousness (and certainly a mid-corner lurch) I could easily put down to that. Fix what's known to be broken first, and then see whether there's still an issue.

[brumster 135 1 Cars]

My suspects would be either too stiff, too low or too wide at the rear compared to the front (or obviously a combination of them all contributing a little, the total effect being significant).

 

Things I've discovered over the years of various setups on the rally car :-

1) I'm not sold on stiff front ends or thick front ARBs

2) I'm sold on solid rear beam mounts

3) I am yet to be convinced that a wide-track rear end doesn't ruin the balance of the Pug, but I guess it depends if you like the oversteer or not

4) Lower does not equal better

5) A proper chassis setup by an ex-ralliart technician who knows what he's doing, while expensive, was the best money I ever spent

6) A proper chassis setup by an ex-ralliart technician who knows what he's doing, while expensive, was the best money I ever spent. Worth mentioning twice because it was sooo worth while.

 

Now that's obviously rally-biased, but I hasten to add it's probably more relevant to road use than something focused purely for track work. Plus, the car has the adjustability on it that points 5 and 6 are workable; obviously if you had no coilover setup, adjustable arms or top mounts, etc. then there's less he can achieve.

 

If the car was coming to Curborough you could have a drive, but the shell is only coming back later this week so there 'aint a cat in hells chance it'll be ready but hey, take me for a spin so I can see what you mean !!!

[Tom Fenton 1,542]

Again thanks for the comments.

 

I'm having a bit of a downer in 205 ownership just at the moment, and the Mrs' new acquisition of a bog standand girly hot hatch that can run rings round the supposedly fast road modified 80's GTI just about takes the biscuit. Having said that it was parked outside on the road in the sun today, and did _look_ fricking cool I have to say.

 

I think my course of action will be as so,

 

1) Sort the lurch, it started doing it not long after I replaced the long driveshaft, so I had it down to the OSF hub being ovalled. Changed this and its no better. So I'm now hoping the shaft replacement was a coincidence and it is actually the NSF hub ovalled. The annoying thing is that with it in the air and giving all the joints the good news with the 36" Snap On prybar, there is no movement to be found, even had my mate yanking the wheel about whilst I felt the joints for play, nothing.

 

2) Faster ratio steering rack, I've come to the conclusion the standard rack is a massive shortcoming, my old Xsara VTS had really pointy steering, and going back to the analogy of the MINI this also has something like 2.5 turns lock to lock. So with the Xsara rack fitted hopefully that will make it all a bit keener to react to changes in direction.

 

3) Rear ride height- it has been too high in the past and I'm gradually working my way down to a sensible level, the 23mm bars make it difficult to set the ride height, as a sensible reduction in dummy damper setting gives seemingly nob all reduction in ride height.

 

4) Solid rear beam mounts. I should really have done this when I fitted the beam to the car, but at the time I was nearing the end of the turbo conversion and had spent more than enough already at that point.

 

I don't think I'll be running it at Curborough, but I may come down to watch. Passenger rides up the road available just ask, although I'll definitely have to track down the missing boost before then!

Edited October 25, 2010 by Tom Fenton

[swordfish210 20]

As far as Point 3 goes i'm using a 292mm dummy shock height with my 24mm bars.

[Batfink 201]

Firstly I think a full health check is needed as Anthony has mentioned. Make sure tracking is right, etc...

 

The wider rear will dial in understeer as well as lowering it a lot so I would first look at the front. I personally think about 180lb springs are about right for road use and a softer front end will get the car turning into corners better. If its got too little travel or the car is too stiff its going to feel nervous so I would be looking at wishbone angle at the front and whether it needs raising a tad.

 

At the rear if too low its going to ride the bumpstops and if too stiff it will be skittish on our s*it roads

[Henry 1.9GTi 36]

Having driven new minis for a year or so they are very soft without the sports suspension and even then are still alot softer than 225lb/in springs. I say this as my 205 has 250lbs/in and barely moves when bouncing the car with my weight, and the minis suspension would compress alot. Baring in mind they weight 350-400Kgs more than a 205. Unlike a 205 they have very good camber compensation on the rear. Look at the lower rear wishbone, its pointing up from the upright to the body at quite an angle so in bump the rear wheels gain alot of camber to compensate for roll. Generally speaking I imagine they are toe in at rear and front to give that stability feeling, cars without the sports pack will definately understeer and not move around at all at the back. Found this out at the Millbrook handling circuit (passenger, not allowed to drive ) but yeh they do turn in well.

 

I would say the wider rear wont help at all unless you widen the front to get back to the same front to rear track ratio.

Could well be overdamped as well making the car sketchy over undulations, try running the gaz at softest and see if you can feel any difference.

Soften it up and maybe raise the front a little, alot easier than lowering the rear.

Solid mounts on the beam are a god send for progressive controlable LOO rather than, snap, snap, ditch.

[TT205 42]

There are some peculiar things being said here

 

Lets get one thing immediately straight, the new mini has totally different rear suspension to the 205 and is superior in this respect, if the mini was as light as a 205 it would trounce it, there is no 'independence' to a rear beam type suspension

 

but by george the bloody thing doesn't half turn in, corner, change direction. In comparison my 205 feels understeery, nervous, slow to change direction

 

By this I take it your 205 is understeery more than anything

 

I'm no suspension genius but looking at the basics

If we pretend that oversteer and good turn in are similar concepts

 

Stiffen front - promote understeer, soften rear - promote understeer

Stiffen rear - promote oversteer, soften front - promote oversteer

Raise rear promote oversteer

 

So....

It would make sense not to stiffen front as you already have understeer

Your rear sounds pretty stiff as it is

The bit i don't understand is that your rear is high (if it still is) and yet it's understeery

If front is too low your wishbone angle won't be helping and you'll understeer until you get on the power (probably find your locking front wheels too under heavy braking)

 

Something sounds peculiar

 

What are your camber/castor/toe settings?

 

I certainly would get some solid rear beam mounts on

[Batfink 201]

The only thing making a rear beam not independent would be the rear anti roll bar no? Admittedly the whole thing can move in unison if the sandwich mounts are not solid...

[Tom Fenton 1,542]

Thanks for the inputs guys.

 

Prompted by this thread I've just been outside brandishing a tape measure and laying on the floor.

 

First of all the car I am on about is my red 205 turbo. My white Mi16 track car certainly does handle and I am happy with it. The red car suspension spec wise isn't that far off the white car so I was hoping it would be somewhere near in the handling dept, but it does not seem to be I have to say. I had this down to the white one being a touch lighter, and a fair bit stiffer as it has a cage which is tied into the pillars, roof and rear beam mounts.

 

So, measuring from wheel centre to arch centre at the rear, the white car is 300mm, the red car 315mm.

 

Doing the same at the front, the white car is 310mm, the red car 300mm.

 

Crawling on the floor the red car clearly shows that the wishbone is angled down from the hub to the subframe attachment points, I know enough to know that this is certainly not helping things.

 

So in addition to my plan of attack as listed earlier, I think point 1A is going to be raising the front ride height at least 10 or 15mm.

 

Camber at the front is 0.8 deg negative, caster I currently cannot alter, toe is set to 10' toe in as its a road car, I do set the white track car to between 10-20' out, but this does make it a touch annoyingly nervous for the road.

[Rippthrough 98]

Lets get one thing immediately straight, the new mini has totally different rear suspension to the 205 and is superior in this respect, if the mini was as light as a 205 it would trounce it, there is no 'independence' to a rear beam type suspension

 

It is independent.

It's a torsion bar rear suspension, not a torsion beam.

 

Could well be a case of not enough trail on the front wheels due to the rake you've got the body at - mine used to be the same as the rears quite high due to it still being on soft bars, so I wound some castor on the front to sort it out.

Edited October 26, 2010 by Rippthrough

[jackherer 543]

Crawling on the floor the red car clearly shows that the wishbone is angled down from the hub to the subframe attachment points, I know enough to know that this is certainly not helping things.

 

That makes a massive difference, you'll be getting loads of bump steer. Just get the wishbones level and you'll transform it.

 

If you think there is some movement on a balljoint that can make it hard to set the toe accurately which then exacerbates things further.

[TT205 42]

It is independent.

It's a torsion bar rear suspension, not a torsion beam.

 

OK my point is both sides are still attached to each other - I'm sure you would not disagree that the arrangement on the mini is far superior eh Phil

[steve@cornwall 100]

Not too helpful, but is it just too heavy at the front end?

[Rippthrough 98]

OK my point is both sides are still attached to each other - I'm sure you would not disagree that the arrangement on the mini is far superior eh Phil

 

 

Well no, but both sides on the mini are attached to each other too, 's called the chassis

[Anthony 1,003]

Not too helpful, but is it just too heavy at the front end?

I'd imagine that an alloy block 1.6, even with the turbo related parts, is still a fair bit lighter than a GTi-6 or similar iron block.

[Batfink 201]

OK my point is both sides are still attached to each other - I'm sure you would not disagree that the arrangement on the mini is far superior eh Phil

 

On paper certainly, but to be honest I'd have to try it to agree. The main gripe with the 205 setup is the dampers 1:4 movement which can be resolved with turreted suspension. This puts it on par then with rather a lot of cars. The mini's multilink suspension helps keep better camber control, but I dont know how important that is at the rear of a FWD car as you tend to pull the rear along with you as you corner on the power..

Anyone want to lend me a Mini

Edited October 26, 2010 by Batfink