You clearly haven't looked into it then Joe... Have a read, then you will

A) understand
B) be impressed

Feel free to post again with an educated post. I got board of forum dribble years ago

Such an epic build this, that suspension looks awesome!
Is the car road legal or purely track?

Car is road legal mate :A:

Looking epic as always mate :y:

Car should seriously fly now.

I just can't understand how a suspension upgrade alone is enough to knock 9 seconds off a lap of a short circuit. If you said your car was 9 seconds quicker compared to a standard saxo then yeah that would make sense but what your all saying is that you can whack this on a standard saxo and it will lap Nurburgring a minute quicker thsn a car with standard suspension. If that was the case then all the people who spent thousands on turbos for their saxo's have wasted their time as a simple suspension change was what they needed...

not sure if srs...

jesus christ... :/

Lol Ross.

Joe - use your eyes, there's MUCH more than just the suspension to this kit :)

what else is done that we cant see? i tried getting hold of dean but i got a feeling hes a busy bloke... obviously the front turret braces and top mount brace, anything else under the back? wishbones are changed as well, wishbone mounting points i assume as well... steering rack height? or is that done on the legs?

Awesome build thread, i've been on here since 06 and this is the first time ive been through this, what a transformation!

Seen the pictures of that rear suspension set-up on facebook on satchells facebook, some bit of kit that! guys a genius!

Put simply joe, hell yes.

I watched colin and paul sprint their 272 bhp 205 at llandow, they were only a few seconds down on a 650 bhp 4x4 puma cosworth over a lap and a half.

I think pretty much the same as greyjasper, from all the kits I've seen it certainly looks like a good piece of kit that clearly does the job, maybe 9 seconds a lap is a bit on the hopeful side for most people but I'm not really sure that matters to be honest.

If you want to go quicker and put proper suspension on the car its the only option really. Sticking some coilovers and hefty rear bars on a standard chassis can only do so much.

Joes amazed theres no b8's :O

JP is this going to FCS this year?

Jp just get some proof asap to keep everyone happy :p

Sent from my HTC One mini using Tapatalk

It's hardly a simple suspension change though joe

I also guarantee that a turbo'd saxo with "thousands spent" would lap the ring a with more than a minutes difference to a standard saxo...

It's about having the total package if you're focused on track performance. Not JUST engine, or JUST suspension...

Actual LOL at this thread....


Lovin the work (as you already know JP)

Stu - you could charge people to look at your suspension as we all know it's just an antique now anyway

Can't wait to see finished product and get a passenger ride ;)

A quote taken directly from the thread on 106RR, written by Sandy. Its all available info youve just got to go and find it :)

"Anyone who tried to properly develop the front suspension on their 106, will know that before long you hit a number of brick walls. While the standard set up responds reasonably well to lowering and careful spring and damper choice; once you start running grippy tyres and decent power, things quickly go awry and the magic of the chassis in near standard form gives way to unruly behaviour on smooth surfaces, descending in a serious loss of overall performance on poor surfaces. The front relies on the back doing it's work well to a great extent, the chassis needs to be taken as a whole; but I'll tackle the front end here and write about the back separately.

Most serious 106/Saxos run BE boxes these days, unless rules dictate the MA must be retained, so the basis of any redesign might as well be worked with the BE and retro-adapted to MA. The location of the engine and box comes into the equation too and ordinary BE conversions, using the normal upper engine mount, will position the gearbox incorrectly in truth, slightly offset and low; so new engine mounts to correctly locate the engine/box assembly and equalise shaft length are needed with a proper torque mount location at the back, to overcome the problems common with the Peugeot Sport style rose jointed link and/or the standard mount that is weak. Also we found we needed to hollow the chassis leg slightly above the gearbox to make room for the correct location.

Being able to run the bigger shafts/CV joints from bigger PSA cars, greatly strengthens the drivetrain and likewise the bigger bearing hubs are preferable.

Getting improved damper travel is of great importance, it enables tarmac cars to run low with decent suspension travel and gives alot more absorbtion on forest rally cars. The top mount design and the availability of good, affordable damper inserts largely dictate the travel that can be achieved. Tarmac/circuit 106s usually end up running over-hard to solve the damper problem, but give away alot of grip and traction as a result; a much better compromise is sought!

Spring length is also a problem and again the top mounts have a part to play, complicated multi-way adjustable top mounts that fit under the inner wing, are popular but shot through with compromises on damper/spring length and pivot location (which affects roll centre migration), that most people seem blissfully unaware of when they buy them. The steering arm position also affects the spring length, due to being high on the strut body.

The steering arm itself is fine at normal ride height, but distorts easily with hard use (as does the rod end), the bump steer goes walkabout when it's run lower and the ackerman angle is generally accepted without question.

The hub carriers themselves aren't really a problem, but to solve alot of the broader problems and easily accommodate bigger bearings/hubs, the carrier from other models can do the job better. Being able to ditch the lower pivot pinch clamp design, greatly adds strength and enables the roll centre migration to be much improved at low ride height. Switching to a traditional two bolt strut mount, enables easy camber adjustment in situ.

The standard lower arms are too flexible, don't offer very good geometry and have a weak outer joint. We decided to replace them with a similar design to our long proven and highly developed 205 tubular fabricated lower arms, with large spherical joints, properly aligned with the forces involved, so there's no designed in weakness, from shear or bending loads on threads! It consists of a lateral arm, with a large outer bearing housing and a compression strut component, connected to the lateral arm in a clevis style. The rear mount is re-designed to widen the load base and be less inclined to tear out of the floor!

Managing the mounting point loads is very important, perfect geometry is no use if it wanders under load. Putting more strength into the mounts requires bracing at the bottom and reinforcement plates at the top. More strength can be added with vertical pillars.

We've worked out, mocked up, designed, CNC'd and laser cut most of the components already and the first complete set up should be finished soon. Once we know it's right, works and is easy to fit, it's likely to be available as a complete kit. Here are some pics from the processes so far:

CNC lathe turning top mounts:


Top mount with spherical joint and sleeves for Bilstein insert, before drilling:


Bare top mounts drilled and ready for coating:


Comparing lower brace prototype to computer our model:


Upper engine mount, designed to clear 16v belt covers easily and uses a small rubber bush for minimal movement:


Complete gearbox mount in bare form, chassis leg relief also visible:


Credit mostly to Colin Satchell and Dave Vanstone!"


And a quote from Dave

"To clarify the complete kit comes with as follows
Both wishbones with joints
Compression struts with joints
Wide washers (lower joint failsafe)
Comp strut floor clevis
Strut bodies with eccentric camber adjustment bolts
307 hubs with new bearings
Lower ball joint adaptors
Spring platforms and locking collars
Spring top caps
2 custom C-spanners
Top mounts with bearing and sleeve nuts
Strut top stiffeners with strut brace brackets
Upper strut brace
Lower strut brace
Inner wing stiffening tubes and swaged gusset webs
CDS track rods with inner and outer spherical joints and spacers for bump steer correction
Strengthening plates to go the nut side of the rear clevis (footwell)
All required spacers, fixtures fittings and bolts"

This DOESNT include the BE mounting kit^^

And a link for the full thread;

http://www.106rallyeforum.com/forum2...ad.php?t=86237

8+ seconds off lap times does sound like too good to be true ,

but when you go through all the details of this kit and what geometry settings actually do to a car and also take into account that big names like Sandy and Colin back these figures up as they where the ones testing it ... well lets just say I personally am saving up

Would have liked to have this kit now before i finish my car , but preferred to run it as is for now and upgrade to it later on !

I could be wrong but im sure iirc it was 3 seconds a lap quicker from what I had read on 106rr.