hi folks, it has been said that the 3dr feels realy loose round corners and handles bad, compared to a 2wd saph. Why is this as they basicly use the same parts.

Is just the fact the chasis is slightly older or another reason. Surely its more arodynamic and produces more downforce due to the big spoilers. I.ve only ever driven a 2wd and handling was great.

If someone could shed some light on the situation i would be very greatfull or maybe suggest the best way to improve a 3dr's handling. Cheers luke

 

if i remember correct i think there is 2 different anti roll bars for the 3 door as the early ones had the wheel slightly further back but was a bit twitchy so another roll bar was used that pushed the wheel forward slightly helping the handling, i think they are number'd to tell what one you have.

Iv never had issues with my handling but front and rear strut braces definately helped as did the coilovers so mine probably isn't a good comparison as not alot standard anymore.

 

Stiffer shell on the Sappire versus the 3 door.

Charlie

 

What one have u got mate? Cheers for the pm btw.

 

Saff 2wd has a thicker anti roll bar 16mm where as the 3 door is only 12mm 4x4 saff and escos have even thicker anti roll bars.

Rear diff mount will most likely be shagged replace it with the MSD poly one fantastic upgrade for about 120 quid

 

you will need to changes the rear trailing arms to take the saff anti roll bar as they mount in different places.

 

Most road cars will no no longer be running exactly as per factory these days ( or will be on very tired OE springs/dampers/bushes and different tyres/wheels ) so it's a bit of a moot point nowadays.

The 3 door was developed to be a competition car - very fast responses almost to the point of being regarded as 'twitchy' for a road car. That was a common criticism of the 3-doors on the press launch and Ford reportedly made some changes to the power steering, front bush materials and settings etc to make them less 'nervous' for the average driver on heavily cambered/longitudinally ridged roads.

The later H14 ARB added about a degree of extra caster over the H13 arb as fitted to the very first 3-door cars. Some original customers had the H14 retro-fitted by the dealer under recall if they complained and I think the last of the 3-doors and the RS500s had the H14 type anyway as did the Sapphires. Think they were all 28 mm at the front on 2wders though.

When the Sapphire was released it had a 2mm thicker rear ARB ( 16mm over 14mm ). The shell was stiffer, spring rates went from 106lb/in to 118lb/in at the front and from 263 to 286lb/in at the rear. The damper rates were softer in bump but stiffer in rebound on the 4-door. Front camber was slightly more negative and the big change was the front steering knuckle where the roll centre was dropped from 144mm to 70mm above the floor.

All these changes helped rid the Sapphire of the corkscrewing motion that a standard 3-door can get in a long fast bend sometimes.

The sapphire was said to be a less 'nervous', more stable car when really pushed and this is oftten why they were timed very slightly faster round a track. On the flipside, keen drivers said the 4-door had lost some of the razor sharp turn in the 3-doors were sometimes criticized for.

Swings and roundabouts really but there's loads of bits you can get/do to make the cars handle 'better' for your use so I doubt there's much in it these days unless you wanted to compare stock factory cars ( and I doubt the OE tyres are still available anyway )

 

3dr's are mens cars... If you can drive one hard.

 

the simple fact of the matter is that the saph has a great big lump of metal along the rear parcel shelf sits whereas there is a big hole and a bit of cardboard on the 3 door

forget about the rest of the geometry and stuff as if the shell is going to flex then you are onto a looser from the off, and stiffening the suspension will just make matters worse*

*these onions are based purely on having owned both a 3 door and a saph and the saph was easily the better/nicer car to drive on a day to day basis

 

My saff is the worst handling car i have ever driven

 

does not matter to much they both dont handle very well standard

 

 

But well enough to beat the "best-handling M-car ever" with the same amount of power ( 200bhp ).
As Ford would say ....job done!

 

Nobody has mentioned centre of gravity?

 

i presume you are talking about the E30? if so there have been better handling M cars than that....

 

i would suggest its because it bears no relevance, anything of any significant weight is all in the same place

 

Reason I put it in quotes, was that it was a monthly car mag's opinion, not mine. Nevertheless, still rated quite highly although 'handling' will always be a subjective issue

 

good info mike

 

As dojj says, one of the big differences is the big hole in the back of the 3-door

 

I take it you drove 2 standard cars to make the comparisson?

 

Would a rear strut brace be enough to bring the 3-door shell up to the saphires standards as far as rigidity is concerned?

Bit of an off-shoot, but how would an XR4i shell with it's extra rear pillars compare to the Cosworth 3-door shell?

 

a strut brace only ties the strut tops together, but if these can flex then it's not doing uch in any case

the saph shell has the 2 sides stuck together with the rear screen, roof, parcel shelf and even the opening in the rear seats is smaller, plus it's got a much bigger bit of metal along the rear of the doors to help tie everything together

you would need to basicly weld in a saph rear end to the internals of the 3 door to get the same sort of rigidity, don't forget that the boot lid isn't structural on the 3 door either

the 4i shell is the same bar the extra bits of glass and strips, and they aren't really structural either as they don't tie anything together

 

I see what you mean.

 

Not many Rich, i've owned E30 M3s and the chassis are brilliant had my E36, that felt lardy as fook, E46 i never drove it in anger as it was a mates car so couldn't tell, but E30 M3s handle superbly well, better than any 3dr or saff...

 

But still coulden't beat the Ford round a track

Martin

 

Biggest problem is old tired bushes and dampers, and the rear beam geometry. If you don't sort the rear beam it will never be good.

 

Mines got adjustable arms etc, coil overs, struts F+R, wide wheels and good road tyres and i can put the power down well with very little trouble - mine kicks out hard in 3rd on full boost thats about as twitchy as it gets - that was at 35psi

Looking forward to getting a rear beam in the future to actually see what difference they make to a road car.

Struts are an absolutely must on the rear of 3dr's for obvious reasons

 

Agree with Wil - surprising how much 'steer' effect on the front end the standard beam provides even if in good nick.

To be honest, even an E36/E46 BM with a more sophisticated rear suspension set-up will feel all over the place once the RTABs have worn and the back will 'steer' the front end over cambers/longitudinal ridges etc

 

what about if you fitted a strut brace that bolts to the floor on the 3 door will that stiffen it up good enough?

 

that would triangulate the strut tops, but the shell flex would still be there

the next time you are out and about in your car, lower the window and put your hand on the gap between the door and the roof and, as you drive along, just feel how much flex there is

you may be surprised

 

Yep it will pinch your fingers
Rich

 

Adrenaline do frame connectors as well which some people recommend

http://adrenaline-race.co.uk/#/products/4531949876