[M3CeeSaw]

Originally Posted by m4ml

I currently have the KW V4 coil-overs and Fall-Line monoballs. Next Thursday EAS will be installing the SPL rear camber arms, rear toe links, and rear traction links.

Awesome I'm looking forward to hearing your feedback on the feel of the rear end under power and if there is a noticeable increase in NVH. Keep us posted

[m4ml]

Originally Posted by M3CeeSaw

Awesome I'm looking forward to hearing your feedback on the feel of the rear end under power and if there is a noticeable increase in NVH. Keep us posted

Bad news... I found out today that I got selected in a jury pool for a trial, so I had to cancel my appointment for tomorrow's install. Hopefully, either I don't get selected as a juror/alternate, or it's a short trial and I can get them installed next Thursday at least in time for Buttonwillow.

[OzDrives]

Tell them you can't make it because people on the internet are eagerly awaiting your feedback on an important car modification.

Originally Posted by m4ml

Bad news... I found out today that I got selected in a jury pool for a trial, so I had to cancel my appointment for tomorrow's install. Hopefully, either I don't get selected as a juror/alternate, or it's a short trial and I can get them installed next Thursday at least in time for Buttonwillow.

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by OzDrives

Tell them you can't make it because people on the internet are eagerly awaiting your feedback on an important car modification.

Priorities, right?

[M3CeeSaw]

Originally Posted by OzDrives

Tell them you can't make it because people on the internet are eagerly awaiting your feedback on an important car modification.

Exactly how inconsiderate! I'm not sure how I am going to be able to handle this. I'm writing to my local congressman to rectify this

[TselaG80]

any updates?

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by TselaG80

any updates?

We just completed installation of the SPL pieces yesterday, M4 is at alignment today. m4ml should probably be following up shortly or after his track weekend.

[TselaG80]

Originally Posted by tom @ eas

We just completed installation of the SPL pieces yesterday, M4 is at alignment today. m4ml should probably be following up shortly or after his track weekend.

hey Tom.

im interested in these arms and CS front sway bar. can you shoot me a PM

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by TselaG80

hey Tom.

im interested in these arms and CS front sway bar. can you shoot me a PM

You have PM.

[OzDrives]

m4ml - Have you had the chance to test out the rear suspension upgrades? Specifically interested if you can feel any difference when backroads/canyon driving.

[m4ml]

Originally Posted by OzDrives

m4ml - Have you had the chance to test out the rear suspension upgrades? Specifically interested if you can feel any difference when backroads/canyon driving.

I have! I haven't done any backroads/canyon driving since the upgrade, but I did have the installation done before Buttonwillow.

My point of comparison is between:

Chuckwalla
- stock rear
- -2.25° front camber, 3/16" toe-in/-2.0° rear camber 3/16" toe-in
Buttonwillow
- SPL rear upper (camber) arms w/lockout, toe links w/lockout, and traction links
- -3.2° front camber, 0" toe/-2.5° rear camber 1/8" toe-in

The SPL rear upper arms allowed for the additional camber in the rear. I already had the camber plates in the front.

The car felt better on exit after the upgrade. I felt more confident rolling into the throttle quicker and sitting the rear end down than I did at Chuckwalla. It also felt better in the longer sweepers, with more sense of what the rear was doing. Comparing something like turn 4/5 at Chuckwalla to Riverside at Buttonwillow (as best of a matchup for a long constant(ish) turn as I could find between the two); after a few laps at Buttonwillow I had more confidence in Riverside than I did in turn 4/5 at Chuckwalla all day, and I was able to throttle steer a bit better through it once I had that confidence. I also want to say that I could feel the car taking a set better in transitions, which also gave me more confidence.

Was it a HUGE improvement? No. Was it a noticeable improvement? Yes, but only slightly.

I can't think of a way to describe the rear before. I want to use the word "soft", but that's a bit hyperbolic. It wasn't soft by any stretch, it just wasn't solid and it wasn't necessarily consistent. Now the rear is solid and consistent.

With all of that said, I'm not much of an NVH kind of guy. I know what I did, and I know the consequences, so I really don't care. If you are an NVH kind of guy, I don't recommend the full upgrade. NVH has increased more so than any other upgrade that I've done.

[OzDrives]

Originally Posted by m4ml

I have! I haven't done any backroads/canyon driving since the upgrade, but I did have the installation done before Buttonwillow.

My point of comparison is between:

Chuckwalla
- stock rear
- -2.25° front camber, 3/16" toe-in/-2.0° rear camber 3/16" toe-in
Buttonwillow
- SPL rear upper (camber) arms w/lockout, toe links w/lockout, and traction links
- -3.2° front camber, 0" toe/-2.5° rear camber 1/8" toe-in

The SPL rear upper arms allowed for the additional camber in the rear. I already had the camber plates in the front.

The car felt better on exit after the upgrade. I felt more confident rolling into the throttle quicker and sitting the rear end down than I did at Chuckwalla. It also felt better in the longer sweepers, with more sense of what the rear was doing. Comparing something like turn 4/5 at Chuckwalla to Riverside at Buttonwillow (as best of a matchup for a long constant(ish) turn as I could find between the two); after a few laps at Buttonwillow I had more confidence in Riverside than I did in turn 4/5 at Chuckwalla all day, and I was able to throttle steer a bit better through it once I had that confidence. I also want to say that I could feel the car taking a set better in transitions, which also gave me more confidence.

Was it a HUGE improvement? No. Was it a noticeable improvement? Yes, but only slightly.

I can't think of a way to describe the rear before. I want to use the word "soft", but that's a bit hyperbolic. It wasn't soft by any stretch, it just wasn't solid and it wasn't necessarily consistent. Now the rear is solid and consistent.

With all of that said, I'm not much of an NVH kind of guy. I know what I did, and I know the consequences, so I really don't care. If you are an NVH kind of guy, I don't recommend the full upgrade. NVH has increased more so than any other upgrade that I've done.

Thanks for the feedback! I get you on the "soft" rear end part. I am guessing for someone not tracking their car this might be overkill...

[m4ml]

Originally Posted by OzDrives

Thanks for the feedback! I get you on the "soft" rear end part. I am guessing for someone not tracking their car this might be overkill...

Yes, it is definitely overkill if you're not tracking. And even then it's probably overkill unless you're going to track your car a lot.

[M3CeeSaw]

Originally Posted by m4ml

I have! I haven't done any backroads/canyon driving since the upgrade, but I did have the installation done before Buttonwillow.

My point of comparison is between:

Chuckwalla
- stock rear
- -2.25° front camber, 3/16" toe-in/-2.0° rear camber 3/16" toe-in
Buttonwillow
- SPL rear upper (camber) arms w/lockout, toe links w/lockout, and traction links
- -3.2° front camber, 0" toe/-2.5° rear camber 1/8" toe-in

The SPL rear upper arms allowed for the additional camber in the rear. I already had the camber plates in the front.

The car felt better on exit after the upgrade. I felt more confident rolling into the throttle quicker and sitting the rear end down than I did at Chuckwalla. It also felt better in the longer sweepers, with more sense of what the rear was doing. Comparing something like turn 4/5 at Chuckwalla to Riverside at Buttonwillow (as best of a matchup for a long constant(ish) turn as I could find between the two); after a few laps at Buttonwillow I had more confidence in Riverside than I did in turn 4/5 at Chuckwalla all day, and I was able to throttle steer a bit better through it once I had that confidence. I also want to say that I could feel the car taking a set better in transitions, which also gave me more confidence.

Was it a HUGE improvement? No. Was it a noticeable improvement? Yes, but only slightly.

I can't think of a way to describe the rear before. I want to use the word "soft", but that's a bit hyperbolic. It wasn't soft by any stretch, it just wasn't solid and it wasn't necessarily consistent. Now the rear is solid and consistent.

With all of that said, I'm not much of an NVH kind of guy. I know what I did, and I know the consequences, so I really don't care. If you are an NVH kind of guy, I don't recommend the full upgrade. NVH has increased more so than any other upgrade that I've done.

Awesome thanks for the feedback ! Sounds like it served its purpose in solidifying the rear end. I feel the same “float” in the rear when pushing the car hard. The NVH is the only thing holding me back. I wonder if just doing the toe arms will mitigate some of that NVH and provide most of the rigidity. Is it “necessary” to do both?

[GTS Daddy]

Originally Posted by OzDrives

Thanks! I feel like the rear end is a bit "soft and disconnected". I find it hard to tell what the rear tires are doing a lot of the times which does not inspire confidence. Was hoping there is away to address that. Maybe I am just too picky

100% agree. So, I did the CSL steering map, front mono balls, along with the rear toe arms from SPL. Hands down fixed the wandering and unpredictable rear end. It’s a hair more oversteer than I like so I’ll need to align that out when I get the summers back on.

There is more harshness in feeling the road through the rear end, but I wouldn’t say unbearable. I’d really prefer to swap the rubber bushings on the rear toe arms (of which there is 1 spherical and 1 rubber) for a Delrin bushing. Still working on a supplier, but the SPL’s are certainly better for more feel than the OEM.

Since mine is a daily, I would not swap ANYTHING else back there as any more harshness would be too much for my taste.

[m4ml]

Originally Posted by M3CeeSaw

Awesome thanks for the feedback ! Sounds like it served its purpose in solidifying the rear end. I feel the same “float” in the rear when pushing the car hard. The NVH is the only thing holding me back. I wonder if just doing the toe arms will mitigate some of that NVH and provide most of the rigidity. Is it “necessary” to do both?

It's hard to say. If by "both" you mean toe links and trailing arms, then of the two it's likely that the toe links would contribute less NVH during normal driving and it *should* help at least a little with the floating sensation. Most pot holes, bumps, reflectors in the road, road imperfections, etc., (the causes of NVH) under straight line driving would transmit through the toe links the least out of all of the components I suspect.

Personally, I'd have a hard time convincing myself to only do the toe links though, without also at least doing the trailing arms. And TBH, if you're not tracking it, I'd be hard pressed to recommend either, unless you're like me and you don't care about NVH.

Or if you're trying to do an aggressive alignment that exceeds the range of the rear adjustment, then (as recommended to my by Tom at EAS) start with just the upper control (camber) arms.

Note: I didn't listen to Tom, I did all three (but only because I knew I was going to be tracking it quite often and, as I've said many times, I don't care about NVH)

[tom @ eas]

Originally Posted by m4ml

It's hard to say. If by "both" you mean toe links and trailing arms, then of the two it's likely that the toe links would contribute less NVH during normal driving and it *should* help at least a little with the floating sensation. Most pot holes, bumps, reflectors in the road, road imperfections, etc., (the causes of NVH) under straight line driving would transmit through the toe links the least out of all of the components I suspect.

Personally, I'd have a hard time convincing myself to only do the toe links though, without also at least doing the trailing arms. And TBH, if you're not tracking it, I'd be hard pressed to recommend either, unless you're like me and you don't care about NVH.

Or if you're trying to do an aggressive alignment that exceeds the range of the rear adjustment, then (as recommended to my by Tom at EAS) start with just the upper control (camber) arms.

Note: I didn't listen to Tom, I did all three (but only because I knew I was going to be tracking it quite often and, as I've said many times, I don't care about NVH)

As many track days as you're doing - you'll grow into them quickly. Plus your alignment tech will be super happy with all the adjustment options you'll be able to take advantage of as your skills improve with more track time.

[M3CeeSaw]

Originally Posted by m4ml

It's hard to say. If by "both" you mean toe links and trailing arms, then of the two it's likely that the toe links would contribute less NVH during normal driving and it *should* help at least a little with the floating sensation. Most pot holes, bumps, reflectors in the road, road imperfections, etc., (the causes of NVH) under straight line driving would transmit through the toe links the least out of all of the components I suspect.

Personally, I'd have a hard time convincing myself to only do the toe links though, without also at least doing the trailing arms. And TBH, if you're not tracking it, I'd be hard pressed to recommend either, unless you're like me and you don't care about NVH.

Or if you're trying to do an aggressive alignment that exceeds the range of the rear adjustment, then (as recommended to my by Tom at EAS) start with just the upper control (camber) arms.

Note: I didn't listen to Tom, I did all three (but only because I knew I was going to be tracking it quite often and, as I've said many times, I don't care about NVH)

Yes by both I mean both toe links and trailing arms. I don't plan on tracking it much but I do push the car hard on early Sunday drives through some mountain passes. I appreciate the feedback !

I think I’m going to hold off on them for now since I am doing a few other modifications that will affect NVH and it might be hard to pinpoint what’s what. I’m going in for lowering springs, front monoballs, and CSL engine/trans mounts. I’m sure the monoballs and mounts will increase NVH some. I have a pretty high tolerance for NVH I just don’t want it to be ridiculous 🤣

[TselaG80]

Originally Posted by M3CeeSaw

Yes by both I mean both toe links and trailing arms. I don't plan on tracking it much but I do push the car hard on early Sunday drives through some mountain passes. I appreciate the feedback !

I think I’m going to hold off on them for now since I am doing a few other modifications that will affect NVH and it might be hard to pinpoint what’s what. I’m going in for lowering springs, front monoballs, and CSL engine/trans mounts. I’m sure the monoballs and mounts will increase NVH some. I have a pretty high tolerance for NVH I just don’t want it to be ridiculous 🤣

why would you do engine/trans mounts if you already have a CS as per our profile?

[docjavier]

Originally Posted by TselaG80

why would you do engine/trans mounts if you already have a CS as per our profile?

?? I want to know too.

[M3CeeSaw]

Originally Posted by TselaG80

why would you do engine/trans mounts if you already have a CS as per our profile?

So its hard to tell exactly what the difference is but the CS only has different trans mounts which look to be shared with the X3 M. The CSL has a different trans mount than the CS which I assume are even more aggressive than the CS. The engine mounts on the CS are regular G80 mounts and the CSL has more aggressive mounts. This is the information I received from Evolve who I ordered the parts from.

Also check this thread https://g80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh...1936854&page=9 post 187 - 190 on the last page