legacycentral bbs

does anyone know>?

The info I have says this.....it also doesn't differentiate betwen turbo & non-turbo....just FWD & AWD

AWD

Sedan Front spring cefficient - 23.5 N/mm or 134 lb/in
Wagon Front spring cefficient - 23.5 N/mm or 134 lb/in

Sedan Rear spring cefficient - 23.5 N/mm or 134 lb/in
Wagon Rear spring cefficient - 33.3 N/mm or 190 lb/in

That's the info I have out of the FSM's........I would assume it's correct.....but ya never know

that cannot be right, cause i remember that the turbo models had slightly higher spring rates. i want to know if i can use 2.5rs springs, specifically the eibach prokits?

thanks legacy777.

See....I don't think it's correct either......but that's what it says in the FSM's.

You have the first year that has the non-tapered springs in the rear. So you can get impreza springs and they will physically fit and pop right in there.

You need to look at spring rates & also what the initial length is. The impreza is lighter so the springs may be slightly shorter (I can't think of the correct terminology) then say a set for the legacy......because the legacy is heavier.

But there have been people that have done it, and like it.

So if you're set on getting those, they should work for you.

hey legacy777, i appreciate your help cause honestly no one else really will give the answer i want to hear. i don't want more than a 1inch drop and i want the spring rates to correct for the weight of my car. you say the new legacy springs fit my car?

I don't see any physical fitmant issues with the new legacy springs. The weight will be different.

Personally.......I'd just get a set of Whitelines....or H&R's....if you don't whiteline.

I've got whitelines sitting in my dining room waiting to be put in. I'm waiting for sti top mounts.....then they go in.

So depending on what sort of time table you're looking at, I can give you feedback from my install.

An aftermarket spring will have higher spring rates in the front rather then rear.

well, before i buy my springs, i have to find out he factory spring rates, that is what will make my decision.

btw, legacy777, what do you think is a better bang for buck:
kyb gr2 for $275 or kyb agx for $400? i heard the agx's are basically just adjustable gr2's, is this true?

i was thinking kyb gr2 + eibach springs, sti top mounts and whiteline fr/rr endlinks.

thanks,
-aaron.

You're correct about the fact that the AGX is basically an adjustable GR2. However you can adjust the damping to be stiffer then the GR2's.

If you can hack the extra money.....I'd say try and get the AGX's, as they will give you more adjustability and fine tuning.

Josh

OK, here's what I found but how it relates to the USDM Legacy's I don't know.....

For the BC5 Legacy/Liberty RS (EJ20T) AWD sedan & wagon vs "standard" non-turbo Legacy: springs are 18% stiffer at front & 3% softer at rear, front dampers are 190% up on bump & 45% up on rebound, rear dampers are up 190% on bump & 125% on rebound.

Hope this helps...

so in other words, the turbo had stiffer springs and stiffer sway bars, correct? I've got a 91 LS, could I get the springs and sway bars (or the whole struts) out of a Legacy Turbo and have them bolt in, or should I just get a sport spring kit?

and heres me, thinking that ~2800 lbs in an impreza was the same ~2800 lbs in a legacy. Silly, silly silly

well, a 3100lb legacy will definately react differently to suspension made for a 2800lb impreza.

the number is the weight in pounds

fwd
base manual automatic
........2720......2820

L......manual automatic
.......2735.......2835

LS....manual automatic
.......2825......2925

LS2 manual automatic
......2830......2950

4wd
L.....manual automatic
......2925.......3005

LS...manual automatic
......3015.......2095

LS2..manual automatic
......3040........3120


These figures are straight from the 1990 fsm, which does not include the turbo model. I would guess a turbo model would be ~40 lbs heavier.

Model........................................ Front.... Rear
Stock 2002 WRX Sedan (MT/AT) 163/163 119/132
Stock 2002 WRX Wagon (MT/AT) 163/163 132/144

the fact that the legacy sedan has equal spring rates and really darn close shock rates is strange, on these well balanced cars, it seems like it would have some pretty trucklike handling, no oversteer or understeer. so is 4wd suspension tuning really as easy as "make it so its balanced evenly?"

seems to me you could retune it by using WRX front springs in the rear and WRX AT wagon springs in the front, giving it some oversteer. reversed would give understeer.

I am assuming that legacies and imprezas have 50/50 weight distribution, and that they can be swapped fore and aft, and that they haven't changed the design where doing something like this would screw up the ride height. Of course this will only work if you dont have the conical rear springs.

Maybe someone with more parts lying around than me wants to experiment with this, and im sure someone wants to call me an idiot but maybe I'm on to something...?

scottzg wrote: I am assuming that legacies and imprezas have 50/50 weight distribution, and that they can be swapped fore and aft, and that they haven't changed the design where doing something like this would screw up the ride height.

This is far from being true. I'll work up the numbers for ya.

A legacy wagon might be near 45/55. A sedan isnt even close.

For the sedans (all models, including turbo)

Using curb weights, the split is anywhere from 55/45 to 58/42

Using gross weights, the split goes from 51/49 to 53/47

For the wagons (all models, does not include touring wagon)

Using curb weights, the range was from 52/48 to 56/44

Using gross weights, came out to be 49/51

For the 2002 WRX

Using curb weight, split is 60/40

Using gross weight, split is 54/46

For the 2002 2.5 RS

Using curb weight, split is 58/42 to 59/41

Using gross weight, split is 51/49 to 53/47

we have better weight distribution then the impreza

I dont have my FSM's with me at the moment, but what information would allow you to calculate it?

Makes perfect sense! I always assumed these cars had a higher front weight bias, but I never bothered to check. Now I kmow why this car seems to be better balanced than my 240 and 260Zs.

Steve

the weight thing is great and all, but you're missing the point. I only mentioned the weight thing because it *might* mess up my spring swapping ideas. What we really ought to do is let someone with both cars take some spring measurements. Tuning suspension is really not that hard.