Suspension upgrade to save my tires (SL1)

I am considering multiple suspension upgrades to reduce the excessive
wear on my tires. My 97 SL1 is stock (and yes, properly aligned) and
went through, Yokohama Avid T4 in 9,000Mi (alignment and suspension
items check before and after) and chewed 6/32" off the new V rated BF
Goodrich Traction T/A after just more than 1,500Mi (front only, the
rears are like new). Yep, quite agressive driving style.

I am considering the following upgrades (in order):
1) install rear sway bar (probably a stock SL2 sway bar from scrap
yard) but also thinking of a 16mm 3way adjustable
2) change dampers to KYB GR-2
3) change spring to H&R Sport


My objective is to transfert more weight to the back to relieve the
front tires. I am gathering the opinions on the benefit from each of
these options in terms of limiting the (front) tire wear.

The solution has to be cost effective otherwise I'd rather change the
tires every 10,000-15,000Mi.

The no brainer is to obtain the stock sway bar (and links and stuff)
from a SL2 or SC2 (cheap and guaranted to help) but I wonder if it
will help "enough".

Thanks for the opinions

Frank
97 SL1
109,000Mi

I've got Eibachs, KY Bs and the adjustable sway bar on a 97SL2 - only makes
tires wear faster because I'm buying softer tires to enjoy the stiffer
suspension. (grin)

There a couple of downsides to the lowering... the springs are a stiffer
rate which give you a choppy ride (comparatively), and some Saturn's get a
non-destructive axle shimmy (mine has it) at low speeds. Also, you drag
the air dam off on many driveways do matter how skillfully or awkwardly you
approach the driveway.

With the aftermarket rear bar and poly bushings I get a squeak - I've lubed
them a couple of times, it doesn't last.

If you're serious about the aggressive style you mentioned, then the fast
tire wear goes with it, no? And I'm thinking you SL1 is running fairly
narrow tires on 14 inch wheels...

Maybe a factory bar and rubber bushings and a wheel/tire package to start.
I've got Bridgestone Pole Positions and they wear fast and are quiet. The
previous Bridgestone's became cupped at 9,000 miles and howled at freeway
speed. Both models have been 205/55-15's. I've heard good things about
Michelin Pilots, they're just a little pricey.

Good luck.

"Frank" > wrote in message
m...
> I am considering multiple suspension upgrades to reduce the excessive
> wear on my tires. My 97 SL1 is stock (and yes, properly aligned) and
> went through, Yokohama Avid T4 in 9,000Mi (alignment and suspension
> items check before and after) and chewed 6/32" off the new V rated BF
> Goodrich Traction T/A after just more than 1,500Mi (front only, the
> rears are like new). Yep, quite agressive driving style.
>
> I am considering the following upgrades (in order):
> 1) install rear sway bar (probably a stock SL2 sway bar from scrap
> yard) but also thinking of a 16mm 3way adjustable
> 2) change dampers to KYB GR-2
> 3) change spring to H&R Sport
>
>
> My objective is to transfert more weight to the back to relieve the
> front tires. I am gathering the opinions on the benefit from each of
> these options in terms of limiting the (front) tire wear.
>
> The solution has to be cost effective otherwise I'd rather change the
> tires every 10,000-15,000Mi.
>
> The no brainer is to obtain the stock sway bar (and links and stuff)
> from a SL2 or SC2 (cheap and guaranted to help) but I wonder if it
> will help "enough".
>
> Thanks for the opinions
>
> Frank
> 97 SL1
> 109,000Mi

I would be surprised if those suspension upgrades will do anything for tire
wear.

You haven't mentioned what type of wear, or if it is even or odd. Have you
tried going to a tire with a much higher treadwear rating? How about
getting the alignment checked at a different shop, other than the one you
normally go to?

Lane [ l a n e @ p a i r . c o m ]
---
Visit my Saturn Car Audio and Performance Page at http://www57.pair.com/lane



"Frank" > wrote in message
m...
> I am considering multiple suspension upgrades to reduce the excessive
> wear on my tires. My 97 SL1 is stock (and yes, properly aligned) and
> went through, Yokohama Avid T4 in 9,000Mi (alignment and suspension
> items check before and after) and chewed 6/32" off the new V rated BF
> Goodrich Traction T/A after just more than 1,500Mi (front only, the
> rears are like new). Yep, quite agressive driving style.
>
> I am considering the following upgrades (in order):
> 1) install rear sway bar (probably a stock SL2 sway bar from scrap
> yard) but also thinking of a 16mm 3way adjustable
> 2) change dampers to KYB GR-2
> 3) change spring to H&R Sport
>
>
> My objective is to transfert more weight to the back to relieve the
> front tires. I am gathering the opinions on the benefit from each of
> these options in terms of limiting the (front) tire wear.
>
> The solution has to be cost effective otherwise I'd rather change the
> tires every 10,000-15,000Mi.
>
> The no brainer is to obtain the stock sway bar (and links and stuff)
> from a SL2 or SC2 (cheap and guaranted to help) but I wonder if it
> will help "enough".
>
> Thanks for the opinions
>
> Frank
> 97 SL1
> 109,000Mi

Nice, two replies from people I read often and whose opinions I
respect.

I agree: Agressive driving style means accelerated tire wear. Putting
1000$ of suspension upgrade to extend the life of 400$ tire sets may
not be cost effective.

I bought 15" steel rims to install 205/55R15. The BFG Traction T/A V
rated is rated for 60,000Mi. My other tires were all in 175/70R14
size:
Firestone FR-680 43,382Mi (easy driving)
Michelin MX4 Rainforce 22,278Mi (moderate at first, agressive at the
end)
Yokohama Avid T4 8,036Mi (agressive throughout)

In the case of the Michelin and the Yokohama, the thread was worn
pretty much equally inside to outside (when measured in the groves),
but the side walls were chewed and missing chunks. The tires rolled a
lot. The Yokos actually "broke", I couldn't see anything visually but
when I slapped the winters on in August, the car felt like it was on
rails in comparison.

Installing V rated tires limits tire roll but doesn't eliminate it.
The BFG have a L shape line going from the top to the side wall. That
line is gone after 1,500Mi but the wear does not go down the side wall
as much as on the other tires.

Factory bar... yep. Step 1 was 15" wheel to get wider tires and the V
(or W) rating. Step 2 is the junkyard special sway bar of an SL2.

Lowering has drawbacks... thanks for that, I had not considered it.

Alignment... Up to the moment were I replace the outer tie rods, the
car had its alignment verified 4 times, all in 3 different shops with
the numbers being very close (measurement error?) and within specs.

Thanks for the input. I will report back when its done and I have put
another 1,500Mi on the car (I'm holding off on tire rotation to start
with the fresh set at currently at the back).

Later,

Frank
97 SL1
109,000Mi





"Lane" -NOSPAM> wrote in message >...
> I would be surprised if those suspension upgrades will do anything for tire
> wear.
>
> You haven't mentioned what type of wear, or if it is even or odd. Have you
> tried going to a tire with a much higher treadwear rating? How about
> getting the alignment checked at a different shop, other than the one you
> normally go to?
>
> Lane [ l a n e @ p a i r . c o m ]
> ---
> Visit my Saturn Car Audio and Performance Page at http://www57.pair.com/lane
>
>
>
> "Frank" > wrote in message
> m...
> > I am considering multiple suspension upgrades to reduce the excessive
> > wear on my tires. My 97 SL1 is stock (and yes, properly aligned) and
> > went through, Yokohama Avid T4 in 9,000Mi (alignment and suspension
> > items check before and after) and chewed 6/32" off the new V rated BF
> > Goodrich Traction T/A after just more than 1,500Mi (front only, the
> > rears are like new). Yep, quite agressive driving style.
> >
> > I am considering the following upgrades (in order):
> > 1) install rear sway bar (probably a stock SL2 sway bar from scrap
> > yard) but also thinking of a 16mm 3way adjustable
> > 2) change dampers to KYB GR-2
> > 3) change spring to H&R Sport
> >
> >
> > My objective is to transfert more weight to the back to relieve the
> > front tires. I am gathering the opinions on the benefit from each of
> > these options in terms of limiting the (front) tire wear.
> >
> > The solution has to be cost effective otherwise I'd rather change the
> > tires every 10,000-15,000Mi.
> >
> > The no brainer is to obtain the stock sway bar (and links and stuff)
> > from a SL2 or SC2 (cheap and guaranted to help) but I wonder if it
> > will help "enough".
> >
> > Thanks for the opinions
> >
> > Frank
> > 97 SL1
> > 109,000Mi

>I would be surprised if those suspension upgrades will do anything for tire
>wear.
>
>You haven't mentioned what type of wear, or if it is even or odd. Have you
>tried going to a tire with a much higher treadwear rating? How about
>getting the alignment checked at a different shop, other than the one you
>normally go to?

I would tend to agree with Lane on all points. Why don't you just buy tires
that are rated longer? I burned up Dunlop SP Sport A2 as well as BF Goodrich
Comp TA HR4's in around ~20,000 miles. Now I got some Pirellli P400's, they're
lasting forever and they stick good too.

(Frank) wrote in message . com>...

I just bought some BF Goodrich Traction T/A H rated 195/70R14's for my
'93 Honda Accord based on the reviews I read at the TireRack.com and
decided to do a quick search to learn impressions of the tire. Hope
you don't mind my jumping in to ask a few questions and perhaps share
a comment or two.

> I bought 15" steel rims to install 205/55R15. The BFG Traction T/A V
> rated is rated for 60,000Mi. My other tires were all in 175/70R14
> size:

You meant 195 above, right? 175 to 205 would be a huge leap. I'm
curious though, why did you decide to up the rims so you could fit
205's? Stock on my car are 185's and a knowledgeable tire rep was
trying to convince me to go with them as wider tires handle worse in
rain and snow as they tend to hydroplane more easily and particularly
after wearing a bit. Second, your gas-mileage decreases. But I
wanted the wider tire because I thought it looked better, and finally
ended up going to a place that would put them on--several of the
discount merchants would not fit anything but oem spec. Was pure
asthetics the appeal for you as well?

> In the case of the Michelin and the Yokohama, the thread was worn
> pretty much equally inside to outside (when measured in the groves),
> but the side walls were chewed and missing chunks. The tires rolled a
> lot. The Yokos actually "broke", I couldn't see anything visually but
> when I slapped the winters on in August, the car felt like it was on
> rails in comparison.

Obvious maintenance, but you do check tire pressure regularly? For an
aggressive driver, correct inflation seems trebly important.

> Installing V rated tires limits tire roll but doesn't eliminate it.
> The BFG have a L shape line going from the top to the side wall. That
> line is gone after 1,500Mi but the wear does not go down the side wall
> as much as on the other tires.

How are you impressed with the tires threadwear aside, rain and dry?
Used them yet in the snow? Understand that may be their weakness, but
considering that's just a few days out of the year for me, I mostly
neglected it.

You know that these Traction T/A's are among the first which BFG is
offering a 60KMi warrenty on; that is, wear out before and you can see
a some or full recovery--check the fine print. Would you consider
getting another set based on the performance thus far, or think you'll
move on after these are through.

It's difficult to compare tires, because the thing that people
remember about their last tires are the sounds of dying bald-eagles
making a dump-truck whir down the interstate.

One last question: what should the new thread thickness measure and
how do you measure it? I'm assuming grove depth would be the same
between a 205 and a 195.

>
> Later,
>
> Frank
> 97 SL1
> 109,000Mi
>

I'm sorry to seem like a jerk, but I have to ask. Might your aggresive
driving not be appropriate for the street with other traffic who aren't
as skilled as you, and may do something stupid because they don't know
what you're doing? You might really enjoy SoloII or something along
those lines - a great way to channel the 'aggresive' energy in a
controlled and relatively safe environment: www.scca.org

> Obvious maintenance, but you do check tire pressure regularly? For an
> aggressive driver, correct inflation seems trebly important.

I'm by no means a tire expert or anything close, but over-inflating your
tires a bit will help keep the sidewalls from rolling under.
Unfortunatley, by doing so you're stressing the tires and changing the
handling characteristics signficiantly. From the SoloII handbook:

"Tires: [Before racing] ... you should put an extra 10 to 15 psi in your
tires. The reason for this is to keep your tires from rolling under
during hard cornering. But how much is too much? Put chalk on the edges
of your tire, in three places around the diameter, and you can see how
far over the tire was going during your runs. Bleed out a little if the
chalk is still showing on the tread, or add a little more if the chalk
has been worn off down the sidewall. The line of worn chalk to remaining
chalk should be right at the corner of the tread and sidewall. Keep
notes on how many psi you ran, and where the chalk line was, for your
next event."

-rj
98SL2

205 an error?... nope. I wanted to get the 195 and there were not in
stock at BFG (odd size and the production of another was not even
scheduled yet). I got he 205/55R15.

Why change rims?... My stock wheel were 14"x5". Too small for the 195s
(and 205s) says Tirerack, plus I believe I had not many choices in V
rated tires in 14".

Handling in rain... I could comment when the tires are more worn but
so far I have amazed by the cornering with these tires under yet
conditions. No hydroplaning incident yet.

Handling in snow... I will never know.

Gas mileage... like you I was concerned about it... this might
interest you (I note everything):
Firestone FR-680: 31.3mpg
Michelin MX-4 Rainforce: 28.8mpg
Yokohame Avid T-4: 31.8mpg
BF Goodrich Traction T/A V: 29.9mpg
These numbers are over the entire life of the tires (except for the
BFG... 2000Mi only).

Esthetic... not an appeal for me at all. My goal was to reduce
sidewall roll.

Tire pressure... you bet ya.

Next set... I was hesitating between the Khumos Ectas 712 and the BFG.
Next set will probably be the 712.

Tread depth... check the manufacturer website. I use a micrometer to
measure it.

Later,

Frank
97 SL1
109,000Mi












(uphilldoggie) wrote in message . com>...
> (Frank) wrote in message . com>...
>
> I just bought some BF Goodrich Traction T/A H rated 195/70R14's for my
> '93 Honda Accord based on the reviews I read at the TireRack.com and
> decided to do a quick search to learn impressions of the tire. Hope
> you don't mind my jumping in to ask a few questions and perhaps share
> a comment or two.
>
> > I bought 15" steel rims to install 205/55R15. The BFG Traction T/A V
> > rated is rated for 60,000Mi. My other tires were all in 175/70R14
> > size:
>
> You meant 195 above, right? 175 to 205 would be a huge leap. I'm
> curious though, why did you decide to up the rims so you could fit
> 205's? Stock on my car are 185's and a knowledgeable tire rep was
> trying to convince me to go with them as wider tires handle worse in
> rain and snow as they tend to hydroplane more easily and particularly
> after wearing a bit. Second, your gas-mileage decreases. But I
> wanted the wider tire because I thought it looked better, and finally
> ended up going to a place that would put them on--several of the
> discount merchants would not fit anything but oem spec. Was pure
> asthetics the appeal for you as well?
>
> > In the case of the Michelin and the Yokohama, the thread was worn
> > pretty much equally inside to outside (when measured in the groves),
> > but the side walls were chewed and missing chunks. The tires rolled a
> > lot. The Yokos actually "broke", I couldn't see anything visually but
> > when I slapped the winters on in August, the car felt like it was on
> > rails in comparison.
>
> Obvious maintenance, but you do check tire pressure regularly? For an
> aggressive driver, correct inflation seems trebly important.
>
> > Installing V rated tires limits tire roll but doesn't eliminate it.
> > The BFG have a L shape line going from the top to the side wall. That
> > line is gone after 1,500Mi but the wear does not go down the side wall
> > as much as on the other tires.
>
> How are you impressed with the tires threadwear aside, rain and dry?
> Used them yet in the snow? Understand that may be their weakness, but
> considering that's just a few days out of the year for me, I mostly
> neglected it.
>
> You know that these Traction T/A's are among the first which BFG is
> offering a 60KMi warrenty on; that is, wear out before and you can see
> a some or full recovery--check the fine print. Would you consider
> getting another set based on the performance thus far, or think you'll
> move on after these are through.
>
> It's difficult to compare tires, because the thing that people
> remember about their last tires are the sounds of dying bald-eagles
> making a dump-truck whir down the interstate.
>
> One last question: what should the new thread thickness measure and
> how do you measure it? I'm assuming grove depth would be the same
> between a 205 and a 195.
>
> >
> > Later,
> >
> > Frank
> > 97 SL1
> > 109,000Mi
> >

Richard,

Don't worry, I don't think you're a jerk, I think your concerns are
valid (based on what you read).

When I wrote "my driving style is quite agressive" I meant towards my
tires, not towards other people/drivers. I never do agressive
maneuvers towards others such a cutting off, tailgating, drag
racing/nagging. I don't even speed except for the on/off-ramps where I
have "fun" when alone (I'm the guy parked on the shoulder waiting for
traffic to clear). I have "fun" always in the same (known) places. I
drive like my grandma when the wife and kids are in.

Funny thing is that my (48Mi round trip) commute to work has:
one 80mph 90deg right turn,
one 55mph 90deg left turn,
one 35mph 90deg right turn,
one 55mph 270deg right turn
maybe 5 "starts" (no tire spin, just very close to it though)

I have a "clear track" say 4 times a week on average and I had those
tires for 8 weeks now. That's the cause for the 6/32" loss in thread.

Overinflating... it's a thought (that and changing the camber) and
although I am considering it, I don't want to affect the braking
distance (since it's still a family-mobile).

I did do SoloII activities and took my car on a race track. I just
can't shake that need for on/off-ramp fun.

Not that this post would help you at all (or change your opinion of
me), but I did want to address the commentary on my person.

Best regards,

Frank
97 SL1
109,000Mi


richard hornsby > wrote in message >...
> I'm sorry to seem like a jerk, but I have to ask. Might your aggresive
> driving not be appropriate for the street with other traffic who aren't
> as skilled as you, and may do something stupid because they don't know
> what you're doing? You might really enjoy SoloII or something along
> those lines - a great way to channel the 'aggresive' energy in a
> controlled and relatively safe environment: www.scca.org
>
> > Obvious maintenance, but you do check tire pressure regularly? For an
> > aggressive driver, correct inflation seems trebly important.
>
> I'm by no means a tire expert or anything close, but over-inflating your
> tires a bit will help keep the sidewalls from rolling under.
> Unfortunatley, by doing so you're stressing the tires and changing the
> handling characteristics signficiantly. From the SoloII handbook:
>
> "Tires: [Before racing] ... you should put an extra 10 to 15 psi in your
> tires. The reason for this is to keep your tires from rolling under
> during hard cornering. But how much is too much? Put chalk on the edges
> of your tire, in three places around the diameter, and you can see how
> far over the tire was going during your runs. Bleed out a little if the
> chalk is still showing on the tread, or add a little more if the chalk
> has been worn off down the sidewall. The line of worn chalk to remaining
> chalk should be right at the corner of the tread and sidewall. Keep
> notes on how many psi you ran, and where the chalk line was, for your
> next event."
>
> -rj
> 98SL2

(Frank) wrote in message . com>...

> 205 an error?... nope. I wanted to get the 195 and there were not in
> stock at BFG (odd size and the production of another was not even
> scheduled yet). I got he 205/55R15.

Hi- I believe you misunderstood my inquiry and possibly the
re-reading of your own initial post: I was not asking if your
interest in increasing the width of your tire to 205 mm was an error,
I was asking if your original tire was truly 175 mm as you wrote:

> > > My other tires were all in 175/70R14 size:

which prompted me to remark:

> > You meant 195 above, right? 175 to 205 would be a huge leap.

Sorry, I'm not sure how I can explain that any more clearly. Again,
please refer to your original post and my reply. Thanks.


> Why change rims?... My stock wheel were 14"x5". Too small for the 195s
> (and 205s) says Tirerack, plus I believe I had not many choices in V
> rated tires in 14".

Yes, I'm familiar with tire sizings, the BFG Traction T/A line and why
you had to change rims (though I did ask about the instrument you used
to measure your grove depth), I was merely asking why you decided to
increase the tire width to 205 mm as it was a pricey proposition--you
had to change your rims. And you answered that.


> Handling in rain... I could comment when the tires are more worn but
> so far I have amazed by the cornering with these tires under yet
> conditions. No hydroplaning incident yet.

Great. I've experienced hydroplaning on even narrower
tires--175/80R13--on an old Topaz, but it was a lighter car. I was
concerned about my decision to increase to a 195 mm from the OEM spec
and was interested in your experience. My current car, a '93 Accord,
is too light for 205 mm tires: its curb weight is 2,866 lbs. Also, I
think those tires on my car would look out of proportion to the size
of the car.


> Gas mileage... like you I was concerned about it... this might
> interest you (I note everything):
> Firestone FR-680: 31.3mpg
> Michelin MX-4 Rainforce: 28.8mpg
> Yokohame Avid T-4: 31.8mpg
> BF Goodrich Traction T/A V: 29.9mpg
> These numbers are over the entire life of the tires (except for the
> BFG... 2000Mi only).

Interesting, thanks. I've yet to keep mileage stats, but I should
consider it. I wonder how accurately such mileage charts can be
attributable to any one implementation. That is, even assuming
driving habits and patterns stay relatively the same, a car which
expended a certain gas mileage at 30 Kmi may not get the same gas
mileage at 80 Kmi five years later, even with regular oil changes.
And this assumes no other fuel altering modifications: a change in
oil/lubricant, removal/addition of luggage/sports equipment racks,
etc. And of course, the stickiness _and_ the width of a tire will
affect mileage. So many variables, that such specifically
attributable comparisons seem almost meaningless. I'll have to think
about this a bit more..

Regards.