MCS Suspension on the TA

[Nambo]

Since Bruce asked I'll start a new thread on the MCS suspension installed on my TA. Mark drove the car as well and he is definitely more skilled than I am so he can post up some of his impressions also. I know that Mark installs and sells the MCS equipment but I know him well enough to know that he will give you the straight scoop.

First off the only complaints I ever really had with the TA's suspension was the rear end dancing around under very hard braking prior to corner entry. It never stepped out or did anything that scared me it was just a little unnerving until I had enough seat time in the car to become comfortable with the feeling.

We put 550/900 springs on the car with the install, set the shocks fairly neutral (Mark can comment on exact clicker settings) and with a fresh set of R6's went to COTA. I changed jobs and moved states so I didn't get a chance to even drive the car on the street before COTA so the track is basically my only experience with the shocks. What little I did drive the car on the street it felt marginally firmer than the stock suspension, maybe on the order of 10%.

First 2 sessions were spent learning the track but by the third Andy and I got to hook up out front and get some good clean laps in. The MCS really shined through the S's, you could bounce from curb to curb straightening out the track with absolutely no unsettling of the car and much less body roll than before. There was still some rear end wiggle during hard braking but it was nowhere near the level of the stock suspension. We added three clicks of rebound and I went out for the 4th session to see the effect of that change. Unfortunately in the back stretch was where I went into limp mode and I cut the day short.

I have no regrets changing over to the MCS suspension but this car is primarily a track car that sees occasional street use. The ability to adjust for individual track conditions is worth it alone not to mention the ability to change spring rate and ride height.

[FLATOUT]

Great watching you work that TA around the track and glad to hear that you feel like the MCS's are an upgrade. I think between adjusting brake bias via a big brake kit upfront and the MCS suspension that hard braking shimmy will dissapear.

[Nemesis]

Nambo, what caused you to go into limp mode?

[Nambo]

Level 2 torque management. Factory ecu did not like the great results of the tune. I guess it recorded data during the earlier sessions that contradicted its internal code that led to limp mode every time you went wide open in 4th.

[FrgMstr]

MCS singles on my Gen IV. They did an incredible job at CoTA. The car could not have been much more planted. The suspension did not fail me one time in my three sessions. I have have had mine set about in the middle. Before leaving for CoTA I set the backs to -2 from full and the fronts -4 from full. Had I known that the car was still going to ride this good and stay so planted without being uncomfortable on the street I would have set the MCS like this a long time ago.

[allans]

MCS singles on my Gen IV. They did an incredible job at CoTA. The car could not have been much more planted. The suspension did not fail me one time in my three sessions. I have have had mine set about in the middle. Before leaving for CoTA I set the backs to -2 from full and the fronts -4 from full. Had I known that the car was still going to ride this good and stay so planted without being uncomfortable on the street I would have set the MCS like this a long time ago.

Do you mean 2/4 clicks from FULL (Stiffest) compression? Thanks, Allan

[FrgMstr]

Do you mean 2/4 clicks from FULL (Stiffest) compression? Thanks, Allan

Yes. You never go "full stiff" according to Mark. (insert joke here)

[Bruce H.]

What a great idea for a thread...thanks!

We put 550/900 springs on the car with the install, set the shocks fairly neutral (Mark can comment on exact clicker settings) and with a fresh set of R6's went to COTA. I changed jobs and moved states so I didn't get a chance to even drive the car on the street before COTA so the track is basically my only experience with the shocks. What little I did drive the car on the street it felt marginally firmer than the stock suspension, maybe on the order of 10%.

The original TA spring rates are 240/600, so your increase to 550/900 represents an increase of 129% front and 50% rear. It looks like you and Mark decided to change the ratio of spring rates, perhaps in an effort to dial in a bit of under-steer, or dial out over-steer? Had you tracked it much before installing the adjustable suspension, and did changing the ratio achieve your handling goals? I've found mine to be very neutral in cornering, but loose under throttle on exit, which you may have improved. Is the feeling of 10% stiffer compared to the Street or Race setting? If you had it to do again, what spring rates would you try next?

First 2 sessions were spent learning the track but by the third Andy and I got to hook up out front and get some good clean laps in. The MCS really shined through the S's, you could bounce from curb to curb straightening out the track with absolutely no unsettling of the car and much less body roll than before. There was still some rear end wiggle during hard braking but it was nowhere near the level of the stock suspension. We added three clicks of rebound and I went out for the 4th session to see the effect of that change. Unfortunately in the back stretch was where I went into limp mode and I cut the day short.

While the car turns in well, with very controllable body roll, I've felt there were gains to be had in fast transitions like esses. I particularly find that putting power down there is a bit challenging. I gather you feel you can carry more speed through them now, but how has rear grip changed, assuming it has? I had thought I'd be able to accomplish what I needed by keeping the front to rear ratio the same as stock so your impressions are interesting.

I have no regrets changing over to the MCS suspension but this car is primarily a track car that sees occasional street use. The ability to adjust for individual track conditions is worth it alone not to mention the ability to change spring rate and ride height.

Have you changed your ride height much, and have you corner balanced it?

Thanks for your feed-back!

[Nambo]

I had tracked the car before several times and while the car did handle neutrally, for me there was too much weight transfer to the front during hard braking/cornering that led to oversteer and a light back end on exit. The thought was to stiffen up the springs to carry the weight of the car and let the shocks do the work of dealing with the road. Objective was accomplished. Less oversteer while the rear stays planted and you can get on the gas much harder much sooner on corner exit. It's 10% stiffer than the street setting, nowhere near as harsh as the race setting and much more compliant than the race setting in the track. If we can't eliminate the rear dancing with clicker settings we may try a 600 front spring.

The car handles like a dream in the esses now, that was so much fun in the track. Rear grip is tremendous no problem carrying as much speed as my brain (balls) would let me. I don't think rear grip is a problem at all now, the car flat hooks up when asked.

We lowered the car 3/4" and corner balanced the car with me in the drivers seat.

[Bruce H.]

Excellent feedback...it sounds like you've completely addressed the areas of handling that I would like to take to the next level. I was thinking along the lines of a significant spring rate increase that kept the front to rear ratio about the same, expecting that would be enough to transform rear grip without introducing under-steer, but it doesn't sound like that is an issue with your rates and driving technique.

This discussion leads straight into one about brake bias. Ever since I heard the suggestion of changing the front to rear bias I've been critically analyzing mine under different and extreme track conditions. That experience suggests that I would not want to shift bias forward. I can adjust my line going in to corners well with brake and lifting of throttle, and harder braking for tighter corners is already on the edge of inducing under-steer which would be worse with more front brake bias. Front tire temps are also being pushed much harder than the rears, and brake load is the key factor to those temps. I'm wondering if you have any comments on tire temps with your spring rate changes, and whether you feel increasing front brake bias with pads or larger brake rotors would work better with your setup.

The rear squirm is a strange one, but not something I experience all the time, and not something I hardly notice now that I'm used to the sensation and know it isn't causing a handling issue. I've suspected mine was somewhat affected by hot tire temps, with 30 feeling better than 34. Then I thought it seemed better as my tires wore and there was less tread to squirm on, or the tires became a bit harder. I thought maybe the Hoosiers lack of tread would solve it but you still have it. Venom V just noted in another COTA thread that his has disappeared for some reason. I thought stiffening the springs would do it, and while you find yours is better, it's still there. The 911 GT3RS has the same squirm under braking and it's completely eliminated by replacing the rear suspension bushings with solids, and they claim that doesn't affect the ride quality. I wonder if that's the real issue as SRT has obviously set up the TA to maintain a decent ride quality, and diddling with other aspects of the car doesn't address the real cause. Just guessing here.

[Nambo]

The simplest way to describe the results of the suspension install is that the car does everything better than stock with substantially more rear grip everywhere, especially mid corner out. I started out with 31 psi front and 30 psi rear in the Hoosiers and would end up the 35 minute session with 37 psi all around. Before the MCS install I would usually end up 2 to 3 psi higher in the front.

I am in now way even close to being in the same league as Ben and others that have indicated brake bias as an issue for the rear end antics but for my speeds and abilities I don't believe that to be the case. I would think that given the stock suspension more front brake would lighten the rear even more and potentially make it worse. The new suspension reduced the wiggle by 75% and I am hoping with further clicker adjustments will completely eliminate it. Keep in mind this is only really noticed during HEAVY braking.

[FrgMstr]

I have the "stock" 500/800 springs in mine, and I was very careful to have the car's rake set appropriately according to Mark J. 4.5" between contact patches, 5.25" at rear as you can see in this picture. The car was corner weighted by Vorshlag, and aligned (-2.5 camber front -1.7 back) by Cobb here in Dallas. I was not running race brake pads on the car this weekend at CoTA (I will next time for sure), but at least a couple times during the session I would push deep in the corner before breaking. Coming into turn 12 at around 155mph, getting heavy on the brakes, the rear of the car would get a little loose, but nothing that concerned me, but it was certainly there. In my mind I contributed this to the rake of the car, not sure if that is right or not. But the suspension setup with the correct rake I know allows me to put a lot more power down mid-corner than anything I could do with it in the past.

[Bruce H.]

The simplest way to describe the results of the suspension install is that the car does everything better than stock with substantially more rear grip everywhere, especially mid corner out. I started out with 31 psi front and 30 psi rear in the Hoosiers and would end up the 35 minute session with 37 psi all around. Before the MCS install I would usually end up 2 to 3 psi higher in the front.

Thank you for all your feedback. I feel gains with this more track focused suspension would be the way to go for me if I need an upgrade before getting into an ACR, and that will get the most out of whatever streetable tire I use. Thanks again.

[mjorgensen]

Do you mean 2/4 clicks from FULL (Stiffest) compression? Thanks, Allan

The singles are rebound adjustment only, so that is the adjustment he's referring to. I never like to go heavy with compression settings on the doubles or triples, I think it makes the car skate to much, if you need more rate, just up the spring rate and keep the mechanical grip.

[mjorgensen]

The spring rates I choose are based on MY driving style and what has worked in the past. On my 08' I tried 500,550,600,650 and 700 fronts and 650,700,750,800,900,950,1000 and 1100 rears in almost every configuration LOL, got very good with alignments and doing corner weights ;-) I also experimented with all kinds of rake to adjust how the car transitions and responds to corner exit grip.

I had never thought the Viper put down power well and I like to attack a corner and be able to fully power at the apex. I ended up with (non aero car) liking 550/900 the best for autocross and track. The car was great at the autocross and just loose enough at the track I could control slip angle with throttle at any time. The TA with more rear down force seemed to be logical that the 900 would provide more neutral power on attitude so that is what I stuck with for JD's track only TA.

That is all about spring rates though, the MCS are the real star here and 75% of the traction equasion. Their ability to easily deal with track imperfections whether brake zones, mid corner or jumping the gators (great fun!) is where the added mechanical grip comes from. The shock lets the tire roll over these imperfections instead of bouncing over them with un needed stiffness in the shock during the event of impact even when spring rates are higher than stock. The stiffness in compression of the stock shocks to me are also contributing to the uneasy feeling in the rear under braking especially when the brake zone is rough.

I also think that part of the braking issue is caused by bias, BUT I think that can be addressed with the Carbotech pads. You can mix compounds to increase or decrease rear bias, the stock pads are the same front to rear on the Viper and even though there is bias built into the car with different piston size, changing to a slightly more aggressive front pad or to a slightly less aggressive rear will not only help the squirmy feeling, but prevent early ABS intervention because of possible rear lock up under hard braking. I can help you find what's right for your style of driving and track conditions.

I liked JD's car everywhere but the brake zone going into 12 at well over 160, I wish I would have had a chance to check it out with the increased rebound adjustment we made, I know it would have been much better. Through the S's and the double triple apex corners I could commit to the turn and use throttle slightly to skim the curbing at each apex and the car never lost grip, hardly even noticed that I had been clipping them hard even at 105+ exiting 17,18,19 complex.

[VENOM V]

What I'm learning from you guys is that near-perfection can be improved on. I don't feel the need to change anything on the V, but it can clearly it can be tweaked to improve.

What would be interesting are before/after lap times as a measure.

We are going to have a big Viper-only track day at Buttonwillow in January, and Chrysler will be showing up with a couple of cars. I'm hoping to get a chance to track a TA 2.0, if they bring one. Over 60 Vipers. Better yet, hoping I could throw my Hoosiers on the TA and compare lap times with my GTS. I can only imagine what an MCS set up would be like.

[mjorgensen]

What I'm learning from you guys is that near-perfection can be improved on. I don't feel the need to change anything on the V, but it can clearly it can be tweaked to improve.

What would be interesting are before/after lap times as a measure.

We are going to have a big Viper-only track day at Buttonwillow in January, and Chrysler will be showing up with a couple of cars. I'm hoping to get a chance to track a TA 2.0, if they bring one. Over 60 Vipers. Better yet, hoping I could throw my Hoosiers on the TA and compare lap times with my GTS. I can only imagine what an MCS set up would be like.

Would be cool to be able to have identical cars with just different suspension and see which one you were faster in. I have an ACRX client that switched over to the MCS and his first response to me when we were at the track was "WOW this thing is so much faster than I am now, I'll have to reset my abilities!" LOL. He was part of the first 2 seasons of the ACRX Challenge and is an incredibly talented driver already so that comment meant a lot to me personally after setting up the car for him. I know he would be willing to talk with anyone wanting to get his take on the change if you would rather not take my word for it.

[VENOM V]

Would be cool to be able to have identical cars with just different suspension and see which one you were faster in. I have an ACRX client that switched over to the MCS and his first response to me when we were at the track was "WOW this thing is so much faster than I am now, I'll have to reset my abilities!" LOL. He was part of the first 2 seasons of the ACRX Challenge and is an incredibly talented driver already so that comment meant a lot to me personally after setting up the car for him. I know he would be willing to talk with anyone wanting to get his take on the change if you would rather not take my word for it.

Mark, this is a little off topic, but if you were to set up the ultimate weekend track car to best the rumored upcoming Gen V ACR, what would you build? Would you start with a Gen IV ACR or a Gen V SRT? Something reliable and that wouldn't require trailering to the track and back. You could call it an WMD 2.0, LOL. Perhaps an WMD with some sort of an ACR style aero package? What else?

[mjorgensen]

Mark, this is a little off topic, but if you were to set up the ultimate weekend track car to best the rumored upcoming Gen V ACR, what would you build? Would you start with a Gen IV ACR or a Gen V SRT? Something reliable and that wouldn't require trailering to the track and back. You could call it an WMD 2.0, LOL. Perhaps an WMD with some sort of an ACR style aero package? What else?

LOL we already have a WMD version, just seems to be the best kept secret in Viperdom LOL.

It really all depends on what they are going to sell the ACR for if it comes out, I mean we can build anything you want with a blank check ;-)

You would of course want the aero bits to make it stick in the high speed stuff, and ride height adjustable for people that have to compromise. If the ACR came with the same shocks that the GenIV one did I still say switching them would give you the best bang for your buck. I would love to build a no holds barred track GenV, I would want the ACR aero though and not an un tested knock off. You would want adjustable links, maybe low friction bushings and ball joints, a BALANCED front BBK and supporting hardware. Race buckets would be nice, but would be a challenge to fit and still be street friendly but with harnesses would make you a lot faster with the added support so you are not "clutching" the wheel. Many more Ideas, nothing ground breaking really unless you want overkill for a dual purpose car, if track only then anything can be built.

BTW another great thing about our MCS set up is that it also shaves about 16# off the weight!

[VENOM V]

LOL we already have a WMD version, just seems to be the best kept secret in Viperdom LOL.

It really all depends on what they are going to sell the ACR for if it comes out, I mean we can build anything you want with a blank check ;-)

You would of course want the aero bits to make it stick in the high speed stuff, and ride height adjustable for people that have to compromise. If the ACR came with the same shocks that the GenIV one did I still say switching them would give you the best bang for your buck. I would love to build a no holds barred track GenV, I would want the ACR aero though and not an un tested knock off. You would want adjustable links, maybe low friction bushings and ball joints, a BALANCED front BBK and supporting hardware. Race buckets would be nice, but would be a challenge to fit and still be street friendly but with harnesses would make you a lot faster with the added support so you are not "clutching" the wheel. Many more Ideas, nothing ground breaking really unless you want overkill for a dual purpose car, if track only then anything can be built.

BTW another great thing about our MCS set up is that it also shaves about 16# off the weight!

Man it's tempting to give you that opportunity. If they make a Gen V ACR I may spring for that. Or maybe I'll find a used Gen V at an insanely low price and have you WMD 2.0 it. I'm in no hurry, but am starting to plan for the future. Tracking with other makes and seeing their woes, plus having my Camaro constantly in the shop has led to a new appreciation of the reliability and performance of the Gen V platform. It's likely that my garage will have another Viper in the next year or two. The Stryker Red for weekend getaways, the other as a track beast

[Shooter]

Man it's tempting to give you that opportunity. If they make a Gen V ACR I may spring for that. Or maybe I'll find a used Gen V at an insanely low price and have you WMD 2.0 it. I'm in no hurry, but am starting to plan for the future. Tracking with other makes and seeing their woes, plus having my Camaro constantly in the shop has led to a new appreciation of the reliability and performance of the Gen V platform. It's likely that my garage will have another Viper in the next year or two. The Stryker Red for weekend getaways, the other as a track beast

You can't go wrong having a Viper for a track duty car. I have a question though. Is it that you don't have room for it (trailer), or is there another reason you don't want to trailer the car to the track.?

btw, like you, I am interested to hear about the MCS suspension. I could see one finding it's way onto my car.

[J TNT]

I've seen a big difference with MCS suspension on my Gen 3 , the wavetrac also helped on corner exit !

[VENOM V]

You can't go wrong having a Viper for a track duty car. I have a question though. Is it that you don't have room for it (trailer), or is there another reason you don't want to trailer the car to the track.?

btw, like you, I am interested to hear about the MCS suspension. I could see one finding it's way onto my car.

Yes, no room for a trailer and my mid-sized SUV is borderline to pull one, so I'd have to upgrade that too. I may end up getting a trailer one day, but it'd be nice to have the option to drive it to the local tracks too.

[Jack B]

Mark set my G5 with MCS set up. I had the Penskes on my G2, I like the MCS'S more, now that I have used both. This set up is one of those things you buy, then think they are worth more than the buy price.

Man it's tempting to give you that opportunity. If they make a Gen V ACR I may spring for that. Or maybe I'll find a used Gen V at an insanely low price and have you WMD 2.0 it. I'm in no hurry, but am starting to plan for the future. Tracking with other makes and seeing their woes, plus having my Camaro constantly in the shop has led to a new appreciation of the reliability and performance of the Gen V platform. It's likely that my garage will have another Viper in the next year or two. The Stryker Red for weekend getaways, the other as a track beast

[Bruce H.]

Thanks for all the information and feedback, Mark...definitely sounds like the way to go. I know the performance is all in the shock's valving, and the Bilstein Damptronics have their limitations. With the right low and high speed valving you can increase spring rates significantly and improve ride quality and performance, and it sounds like that's what distinguishes the MCS shocks. Do the shocks have a standard valving that is suitable for a wide range of spring rates, or are they valved for specific ranges? Is a shock dyno available? Are they rebuildable, and if so, what is the recommended rebuild interval?