-
***AVOID MARKETPLACE SCAMS!!***
Scammers are using compromised Prime member accounts to pose as a trusted seller in the marketplace. Before you enter into a deal with any seller, follow these tips to keep yourself safe. If you encounter one of these scammers, please report them immediately and we will lock their account.
Caveat Emptor!
Group Buy Variable Manual Rack - Feel a little F1 tech in your hands
- Thread starter liftnot
- Start date
I just drove a 570S and 650S (drool)...emphasized to me the usefulness of this proposed mod. Happen to know what 650/570 ratios are? Might be a good benchmark if we are going for a modern feel/design.
latzke:
Drove a 12C, a 650S, not in anger but its very communicative, not like some other cars feel like playing a video game:frown: but that seems to be the trend feeling the need for speed going straight but no love for feeling the winding road.
Drove a 4C...we know its 15.7 and man:biggrin: and at 40/60 similar to our NSX, the steering is "telepathic" like a formula car....we likey. That is the car on our bucket list. Its the epitome of driving a slow car fast and what a blast it was. Though you must focus and pay attention so some may not like that as texting while driving in this car certainly is a great danger.
Not many folks are steering experts and the math to get there is fuzzy to us. We will propose a ratio between high 15s and low 16s and see what MVO has to say. They are the SME, not us. Just a wild guess, this new rack will transform the car in many ways. Along with lowering the polar moment and CG and the weight, we can make this car dance:wink:
btw, we would like to see this product as a "must" upgrade not a mod. Too many mods and not enough upgrades in the AM industry. Should we add your name to the list?
Drove a 12C, a 650S, not in anger but its very communicative, not like some other cars feel like playing a video game:frown: but that seems to be the trend feeling the need for speed going straight but no love for feeling the winding road.
Drove a 4C...we know its 15.7 and man:biggrin: and at 40/60 similar to our NSX, the steering is "telepathic" like a formula car....we likey. That is the car on our bucket list. Its the epitome of driving a slow car fast and what a blast it was. Though you must focus and pay attention so some may not like that as texting while driving in this car certainly is a great danger.
Not many folks are steering experts and the math to get there is fuzzy to us. We will propose a ratio between high 15s and low 16s and see what MVO has to say. They are the SME, not us. Just a wild guess, this new rack will transform the car in many ways. Along with lowering the polar moment and CG and the weight, we can make this car dance:wink:
btw, we would like to see this product as a "must" upgrade not a mod. Too many mods and not enough upgrades in the AM industry. Should we add your name to the list?
Already on the list.
What is a 4C?
Attached what I know about 650 steering.
- - - Updated - - -
15s-16s seems still pretty slow. New NSX for reference...
"Variable progressive; Range: 12.9:1 (on center) to 11.07:1"
Even older S2000 was in the 13s.
Last edited:
S2000 had VERY direct steering - ~2 turns lock-to-lock. Given the NSX is mid-engine'd and (as stock) rolls more, I'd advise strongly against something that pointy - it's got the potential to unsettle the back-end, and we're not all driving gods...
New NSX (alongside most other new supercars, e.g. the very-pointy 458) has advanced stability control systems...we don't. So with these cars the computers are dealing with the incipient instability generated by the chassis set-up (think F22/F35 vs F14/15 era fighters), leaving the "turn everything off" mode to the pros.
...which is a very long way of saying 15s-16s sounds pretty sensible - feedback and progression are arguably far more important as an 'upgrade'.
New NSX (alongside most other new supercars, e.g. the very-pointy 458) has advanced stability control systems...we don't. So with these cars the computers are dealing with the incipient instability generated by the chassis set-up (think F22/F35 vs F14/15 era fighters), leaving the "turn everything off" mode to the pros.
...which is a very long way of saying 15s-16s sounds pretty sensible - feedback and progression are arguably far more important as an 'upgrade'.
I still fear that 15s-16s will mean the upgrade is behind the times (and in need of another upgrade) right out of the box. But I'll hold out and see what the pros say. I have heard that limbo owners are surprised by the McLaren ratios when they first get in the cars...but I also suspect McLaren know a ton more about making a great drivers' car than Lamborghini and this is just an example of how far they are ahead of their competition.
We read it recently about the Alfa Romeo 4C rack ratio but can't recalled where but in any case, common sense tells us the weight distribution(our car shares similar wt. dist. but @ much longer wheel base which may take less ratio and still be fine?) has a lot to do with the ratio and steering feel. Simply mimic the S2K ratio may not be the best option for a mid-engine car, as easy as it maybe. Does the S2K have P/S? That makes a difference too. We believe there is some logic involved.
Our cars are very analog(like the 4C steering) so to have a very quick ratio will unsettle the car easier ie. snap oversteer especially for those with bolt-on dampers that are not properly valved specifically for your set up but thats for another discussion. No computer is going to save our oops so WE are on our own.
We do know this for fact, wherever ratio we come up, some will say its too much and some will say its not enough so its not an upgrade for everybody. Some prefer Mother Honda so its fine with us, besides, there isn't anything "wrong" with the oem ratio but definitely has room for improvement. We believe more/quicker feedback will "transform" this car and your driving habit and suspension set up "should" change accordingly.
We are getting into the area of sports car design (not just another mod) that takes more expertise and know how than most of us here thus we are dealing with the best vendor who is WILLING to help us. We don't want to screw around so we need to close the 1st step by the end of June to show MVO we are serious about this. Our guess is no matter the turn out, we will learn a thing or two about our car wrt the steering ratio which is not sexy but critically important for a proper sports car. Its up to you to decide how good a chassis you think our NSX is in today's standard and where can it improve to make it better.
- - - Updated - - -
That is a "peculiar" comment of their 1st encounter about the steering ratio of all things.
15s-16s is not final. Just a wag. knowing how Ron Dennis works, I won't be surprised McLaren went to MVO for advise. You are spot on on making a great driver's car is much more than HP, carbon fiber and boost. We WILL ask MVO about the McLaren ratio and see if they " let the cat out of the bag":wink:
Our cars are very analog(like the 4C steering) so to have a very quick ratio will unsettle the car easier ie. snap oversteer especially for those with bolt-on dampers that are not properly valved specifically for your set up but thats for another discussion. No computer is going to save our oops so WE are on our own.
We do know this for fact, wherever ratio we come up, some will say its too much and some will say its not enough so its not an upgrade for everybody. Some prefer Mother Honda so its fine with us, besides, there isn't anything "wrong" with the oem ratio but definitely has room for improvement. We believe more/quicker feedback will "transform" this car and your driving habit and suspension set up "should" change accordingly.
We are getting into the area of sports car design (not just another mod) that takes more expertise and know how than most of us here thus we are dealing with the best vendor who is WILLING to help us. We don't want to screw around so we need to close the 1st step by the end of June to show MVO we are serious about this. Our guess is no matter the turn out, we will learn a thing or two about our car wrt the steering ratio which is not sexy but critically important for a proper sports car. Its up to you to decide how good a chassis you think our NSX is in today's standard and where can it improve to make it better.
- - - Updated - - -
That is a "peculiar" comment of their 1st encounter about the steering ratio of all things.
15s-16s is not final. Just a wag. knowing how Ron Dennis works, I won't be surprised McLaren went to MVO for advise. You are spot on on making a great driver's car is much more than HP, carbon fiber and boost. We WILL ask MVO about the McLaren ratio and see if they " let the cat out of the bag":wink:
Last edited:
It can be a dumb question... or just simplifying too much... but i prefer to ask and be educated than to remain uninformed...
When changing the steering rack ratio we are talking about changing the two parts circled in red bellow correct?
So why can't the rack be modified and the rest of the steering shaft be replicated from the OEM part so that if we replicated the OEM steering shafts and redesigned the rack this could also be fitted on the EPS unit and allow the change in ratio but keeping the EPS on EPS cars?
Developing a new EPS unit would cost a fortune... but i think it is not about a new EPS unit, aren't we are talking about new steering shafts and rack to retrofit on the OEM unit?... would it involve a much more dificult task than producing this parts for the non EPS cars?
I would prefer not to loose EPS.
When changing the steering rack ratio we are talking about changing the two parts circled in red bellow correct?
So why can't the rack be modified and the rest of the steering shaft be replicated from the OEM part so that if we replicated the OEM steering shafts and redesigned the rack this could also be fitted on the EPS unit and allow the change in ratio but keeping the EPS on EPS cars?
Developing a new EPS unit would cost a fortune... but i think it is not about a new EPS unit, aren't we are talking about new steering shafts and rack to retrofit on the OEM unit?... would it involve a much more dificult task than producing this parts for the non EPS cars?
I would prefer not to loose EPS.
not a dumb Q at all BBV. Its a LOT more involved making a steering rack than just machining a different ratio and retro fit into the existing rack. If you are really interested, please visit all the posts and attachments so you can be more informed.
You can certainly choose to do that but that is blacksmith not engineering. Besides, which vendor would bother to take on this small project? Woodward? Quaife?
This is NOT an area you want to make short cut or to make it "more affordable" and we choose to go with the best, not saying Woodward or Quaife product don't work.
We prefer doing things right the 1st time because its cheaper in the long run or don't do it at all.
In our opinion, @ $5000 USD from design to prototype a specialized product such as this, its very reasonable especially from a world class vendor that makes racks exclusively for high end racing series. This is our path of choice for the solution of a better rack and its not the only one. The innovate circle has completed and race proven, the replicate circles will be assessed by MVO so becomes a direct bolt-on w/ alignment needed afterward. Its not something another vendor can easily copy of the Bishop VR technology. There are reasons why they won the award back in '08.
A new EPS is not on the bucket list as our cars don't produce enough downforce at speed to warrant an EPS and the cost to develop that would be astronomical.
This new rack is not for folks who don't want to loose EPS but we know the manual rack feels/works fine in 91-94 cars so if folks with 95-05 cars want to have better road feel like the 91-94 manual rack, this is one option.
What we posted in thread #1 as far as the cost, is for the internal VR mechanism that IS retrofit-able to the existing oem housing. Which would be cheaper than a new complete rack from MVO because a new housing would be needed. But the logistic of shipping your old rack to us and we remove the old parts and replace the new VR components and ship it back to you would be a nightmare cuz too many variables involved. So we'll wait and see if a completely new rack that is affordable and at what qty of people we need to have is possible.
Another POV is the manual rack is discontinued and its safe to say the EPS is not far behind. You can certainly have your EPS rebuild by Matt if needed but its back to the oem specs. We suspect this new rack is not just a little better but a lot better for a more connected driving experience(our preference). Otherwise, there is no reason to go with the better technology as this upgrade makes zero HP gain.
This is one of those things that "you see it then you believe it" not "I believe it when I see it". So far there are almost 50 early adopters/risk takers see it and the later adopters will pay a higher price...thats all. Its not a big risk so its not a big deal to wait.
- - - Updated - - -
the 4C folks have steering geometry, instability problems but the solution has been taken care of using custom made blocks for the frt and rear and a new alignment settings. Its not the same as us. Spot on, Short ratio will make the car hard to turn especially during parking. We want to avoid that as much as possible.
You can certainly choose to do that but that is blacksmith not engineering. Besides, which vendor would bother to take on this small project? Woodward? Quaife?
This is NOT an area you want to make short cut or to make it "more affordable" and we choose to go with the best, not saying Woodward or Quaife product don't work.
We prefer doing things right the 1st time because its cheaper in the long run or don't do it at all.
In our opinion, @ $5000 USD from design to prototype a specialized product such as this, its very reasonable especially from a world class vendor that makes racks exclusively for high end racing series. This is our path of choice for the solution of a better rack and its not the only one. The innovate circle has completed and race proven, the replicate circles will be assessed by MVO so becomes a direct bolt-on w/ alignment needed afterward. Its not something another vendor can easily copy of the Bishop VR technology. There are reasons why they won the award back in '08.
A new EPS is not on the bucket list as our cars don't produce enough downforce at speed to warrant an EPS and the cost to develop that would be astronomical.
This new rack is not for folks who don't want to loose EPS but we know the manual rack feels/works fine in 91-94 cars so if folks with 95-05 cars want to have better road feel like the 91-94 manual rack, this is one option.
What we posted in thread #1 as far as the cost, is for the internal VR mechanism that IS retrofit-able to the existing oem housing. Which would be cheaper than a new complete rack from MVO because a new housing would be needed. But the logistic of shipping your old rack to us and we remove the old parts and replace the new VR components and ship it back to you would be a nightmare cuz too many variables involved. So we'll wait and see if a completely new rack that is affordable and at what qty of people we need to have is possible.
Another POV is the manual rack is discontinued and its safe to say the EPS is not far behind. You can certainly have your EPS rebuild by Matt if needed but its back to the oem specs. We suspect this new rack is not just a little better but a lot better for a more connected driving experience(our preference). Otherwise, there is no reason to go with the better technology as this upgrade makes zero HP gain.
This is one of those things that "you see it then you believe it" not "I believe it when I see it". So far there are almost 50 early adopters/risk takers see it and the later adopters will pay a higher price...thats all. Its not a big risk so its not a big deal to wait.
- - - Updated - - -
the 4C folks have steering geometry, instability problems but the solution has been taken care of using custom made blocks for the frt and rear and a new alignment settings. Its not the same as us. Spot on, Short ratio will make the car hard to turn especially during parking. We want to avoid that as much as possible.
Roman,
Yes, that was the original "budget" plan to keep the cost low but that method leaves room for making mistakes during R&R the oem and the condition of each oem rack will vary which means the internal oem parts will be hard/impossible to source thus turn this nice effort to a disaster....we take no pleasure to keep track all the old/new parts and keeping the owner record straight all for the sake of saving a few bucks. That will be a never ending circular nightmare and all the negative feedback on P2F. we rather focus our effort on the next project.
To ask MVO to make just the internals to retro fit the oem rack w/o the Honda blueprint, is a slap in their face. This is a high precision part. All the stack ups, clearances, dimensions, GD&T won't be perfect and it will be a combination of Honda/Bishop add-on design. MVO has a high precision MMC machine and that is the best we can expect. We rather have them make a rack that is 100% their design to be proper.
Its not big money we are talking about and this is only for people who cares about the feeling of the road which is hard to describe and quantify so its not for everyone for a reason. We are at 50 people roughly and its a very low number so all this may not pan out in the end but we'll see.
Its either you see it or you don't kinda thing. We think all the NSX should be replaced with a proper ratio manual rack to bring out the purity of the NSX driving experience, as already good as it is, but thats JMO.
If people sign up now,(w/o knowing the final new rack price), they are NOT committed to buy. This is for assessment and design only so at $50@ 100 people or $25 @ 200 people, its not a lot of money. The people who sign up for Step 1 & 2 will pay less than people who never sign up and wanted one later.
Yes, that was the original "budget" plan to keep the cost low but that method leaves room for making mistakes during R&R the oem and the condition of each oem rack will vary which means the internal oem parts will be hard/impossible to source thus turn this nice effort to a disaster....we take no pleasure to keep track all the old/new parts and keeping the owner record straight all for the sake of saving a few bucks. That will be a never ending circular nightmare and all the negative feedback on P2F. we rather focus our effort on the next project.
To ask MVO to make just the internals to retro fit the oem rack w/o the Honda blueprint, is a slap in their face. This is a high precision part. All the stack ups, clearances, dimensions, GD&T won't be perfect and it will be a combination of Honda/Bishop add-on design. MVO has a high precision MMC machine and that is the best we can expect. We rather have them make a rack that is 100% their design to be proper.
Its not big money we are talking about and this is only for people who cares about the feeling of the road which is hard to describe and quantify so its not for everyone for a reason. We are at 50 people roughly and its a very low number so all this may not pan out in the end but we'll see.
Its either you see it or you don't kinda thing. We think all the NSX should be replaced with a proper ratio manual rack to bring out the purity of the NSX driving experience, as already good as it is, but thats JMO.
If people sign up now,(w/o knowing the final new rack price), they are NOT committed to buy. This is for assessment and design only so at $50@ 100 people or $25 @ 200 people, its not a lot of money. The people who sign up for Step 1 & 2 will pay less than people who never sign up and wanted one later.
count me in for $25 ... hoping it eventually leads to a RHD version
- Joined
- 9 October 2012
- Messages
- 1,954
I agree that housing should not be resto modded with different internals. It should be whole new rack that meets target design requirements. Also most of the racks on the high mileage cars especially used on the city streets with rough roads etc will be out of spec and will cause more headache than benefit. I'm curious to see what MVO comes up with. For nsx there are less concerns about space limitations in overall external shape for the rack. It will come down to the calibration of the internals etc. Hope to drive nsx with it in one day just to feel the diff. Good luck.
In for $25 to support P2F again!
Hi Folks, more updates:
We will close the GB for the Assessment portion in Step 1 & start collecting money on June 27 to get this project going. Please don't send any money prior. We are not ready to count yet. With all the support we've received from MVO so far, we are expecting a great product from them that 'just might' transform this car.
A few more PM questions you have but afraid to ask. Here are the answers and feedback from MVO that should put some of your concerns at ease.
1)Can other rack maker copy this design?
While it is possible for another company to manufacture a VR rack, it is highly unlikely they would attempt to copy this design. We use complex, internally-developed software to design and program the VR machine tool paths. Software that few companies have access to and those that may have access to this type of software do not traditionally compete in this low of a volume as they are mostly OEM/Tier 1 suppliers.
2)Would MVO supply pictures/graphs of the assessment process to keep us updated?
Yes, we can provide some documentation of the ongoing assessment for market purposes.
3) A comprehensive side by side comparison of the oem rack vs Bishop rack of Pros and Cons and what can we expect from your rack as far as driver feel, road feed back, etc.
After the initial engineering assessment, we will be able to provide you with the technical specifications of the OEM rack and the proposed specifications for the VR rack. Until we are able to collect the existing geometry we cannot calculate exactly how much of a change we can make while still fitting within the OEM design envelope. Our goal is to develop the rack to fit your application. There are always tradeoffs in design of the gear teeth geometry and if you have specific steering characteristics in mind, we can work to achieve that goal. In addition to the change in rack gain, we will be using high grade materials and machine the product to a high standard. The steering dynamics of the vehicle will change within the overall vehicle setup (suspension, tie rod angles, camber, etc.) With steering being subjective to the driver, it's hard to pinpoint how each person will perceive this change but our understanding is that the gear is to be as sporty or racing oriented as safely allowable within the existing OEM constraints.
We will close the GB for the Assessment portion in Step 1 & start collecting money on June 27 to get this project going. Please don't send any money prior. We are not ready to count yet. With all the support we've received from MVO so far, we are expecting a great product from them that 'just might' transform this car.
A few more PM questions you have but afraid to ask. Here are the answers and feedback from MVO that should put some of your concerns at ease.
1)Can other rack maker copy this design?
While it is possible for another company to manufacture a VR rack, it is highly unlikely they would attempt to copy this design. We use complex, internally-developed software to design and program the VR machine tool paths. Software that few companies have access to and those that may have access to this type of software do not traditionally compete in this low of a volume as they are mostly OEM/Tier 1 suppliers.
2)Would MVO supply pictures/graphs of the assessment process to keep us updated?
Yes, we can provide some documentation of the ongoing assessment for market purposes.
3) A comprehensive side by side comparison of the oem rack vs Bishop rack of Pros and Cons and what can we expect from your rack as far as driver feel, road feed back, etc.
After the initial engineering assessment, we will be able to provide you with the technical specifications of the OEM rack and the proposed specifications for the VR rack. Until we are able to collect the existing geometry we cannot calculate exactly how much of a change we can make while still fitting within the OEM design envelope. Our goal is to develop the rack to fit your application. There are always tradeoffs in design of the gear teeth geometry and if you have specific steering characteristics in mind, we can work to achieve that goal. In addition to the change in rack gain, we will be using high grade materials and machine the product to a high standard. The steering dynamics of the vehicle will change within the overall vehicle setup (suspension, tie rod angles, camber, etc.) With steering being subjective to the driver, it's hard to pinpoint how each person will perceive this change but our understanding is that the gear is to be as sporty or racing oriented as safely allowable within the existing OEM constraints.
I spent a lot of time in the NSX this weekend. A 30min canyon run turned into 2hrs. I love the feel of a new OEM rack. I was reminded again how slow it was BUT I was also reminded how heavy it can get. I'm only on 225 front tires too. I can see why the original engineers choose to sacrifice a quick ratio rack to keep it as light as possible.
Basic rules of physics dictate that the quicker the rack, the heavier the effort required to turn the wheel. Does MV have any thoughts on how heavy or light the new rack should be? Is to keep the steer feel light and manageable part of the design criteria?
We all love the feel of a go-cart but after 20mins i'm pretty sure half of us hate the steering effort.
Basic rules of physics dictate that the quicker the rack, the heavier the effort required to turn the wheel. Does MV have any thoughts on how heavy or light the new rack should be? Is to keep the steer feel light and manageable part of the design criteria?
We all love the feel of a go-cart but after 20mins i'm pretty sure half of us hate the steering effort.
See Thread #116 , answer #3 .
Short ans. is, yes, but this is not for everyone. The lighter the front, the easier the steering will feel. When we first removed the spare tire, steel bumper beam and the ABS many years ago, it was a night and day difference. but now, we like to feel more. IF it feels too heavy after the VR rack, we will think about doing the '02 frt end conversion. Good thing is we also have the Tilton P-valve to help to balance the car under braking.
Note, this is for assessment only. You still have plenty of time not to buy after the assessment.
Short ans. is, yes, but this is not for everyone. The lighter the front, the easier the steering will feel. When we first removed the spare tire, steel bumper beam and the ABS many years ago, it was a night and day difference. but now, we like to feel more. IF it feels too heavy after the VR rack, we will think about doing the '02 frt end conversion. Good thing is we also have the Tilton P-valve to help to balance the car under braking.
Note, this is for assessment only. You still have plenty of time not to buy after the assessment.
ah whoops! looking forward to this
For the EPS guy worried about parking lot effort, I find it takes just a little forward or backward movement of the car. It's become so second nature I don't think I've tried to turn the steering wheel with cat stopped in over a decade. Don't even think of it...just habit...and I never find myself thinking "this steering is heavy." That said, modern EPS vehicles are indeed very easy to turn...even stopped with low RPMs (RPMs made s difference with hydraulic ones back in the day).
I'm in for $25.
- Joined
- 15 October 2004
- Messages
- 5
In for $25
Hola Gents,
The time has come to collect $ for the Research-phase to get this project moving. To keep it simple, Please Paypal to [email protected] & note your Prime name & real name & your contact info to help us keep track of it all. Please remember this is a non-refundable contribution; pending the assessment of the oem rack from MVO, we then shall move forward to the Design phase. The min. contribution is $25 in USD to avoid fees please!. Since we did not reach the ideal 100 people, any extra contribution is appreciated and P2F will pony up the rest to get this going.
Note: Its not too late to sign up. When this project comes to fruition, the early adopters will receive the best pricing for helping bring this project to completion.
Thx for signing up.
Tim
Pole 2 Flag Racing
The time has come to collect $ for the Research-phase to get this project moving. To keep it simple, Please Paypal to [email protected] & note your Prime name & real name & your contact info to help us keep track of it all. Please remember this is a non-refundable contribution; pending the assessment of the oem rack from MVO, we then shall move forward to the Design phase. The min. contribution is $25 in USD to avoid fees please!. Since we did not reach the ideal 100 people, any extra contribution is appreciated and P2F will pony up the rest to get this going.
Note: Its not too late to sign up. When this project comes to fruition, the early adopters will receive the best pricing for helping bring this project to completion.
Thx for signing up.
Tim
Pole 2 Flag Racing
Last edited:
