None.

Yes, it is true to say that the front end is more taut and the steering response sharper more, I would suggest, as a result of the better less flexible bushes in the WALK kit than any effect of the geometry changes. It is not as if you are fitting different springs, shocks or anti-roll bars that WILL have an effect on the ride.

Reflecting on the comments I posted last night; I feel I have to say that the WALK kit has had the most positive effect on my car, aside of Koni FSDs, of any of the tweaks I have, as it has gone a huge way of sorting the vRS TDI's significant bugbear of the relative lack of traction for the power/torque available.

I was forever having to moderate throttle application (in OE spec) for fear of breaking traction; I can now use liberal applications with impunity.

Thanks for the info. I suspect the 'anti-lift' effect you mention will be less marked on cars fitted with Eibachs, as reducing lift (and dive under braking) is one of the characteristics of the uprated springs.

Thanks for the info. I suspect the 'anti-lift' effect you mention will be less marked on cars fitted with Eibachs, as reducing lift (and dive under braking) is one of the characteristics of the uprated springs.

I'd agree with that in terms of body movement; however I'd suggest the dynamic effect of more 'weight' on the front wheels to provide more traction will be just the same. Won't it?

PS> I have OE springs (and no intention of changing).

[quote=PS> I have OE springs (and no intention of changing).

Yes I know, that's why I mentioned the point about Eibachs. And yes, you're right - Eibachs do nothing to cure the axle-tramp problems. Who fitted your WALKs by the way?

Yes I know, that's why I mentioned the point about Eibachs. And yes, you're right - Eibachs do nothing to cure the axle-tramp problems. Who fitted your WALKs by the way?

Was done by Progress Skoda in Letchworth; they had my car in for a service at the same time. I know an 'independent specialist' might have been cheaper but it was a factor of convenience and I have the comfort of knowing the the work would have been done to the correct job spec.

I have a local tyre dealer who will be doing my 4 wheel alignment in due course (front tyres will need replacing in a couple of months).

There is a remarkable lack of understanding about what the WALK kit does (not just on this forum, but on other forums such as Mk V Golf).

The WALK modification does NOT reduce front end lift on acceleration, in fact it does quite the reverse. The WALK kit SOFTENS the front suspension under acceleration and braking - so INCREASING the amount of pitching of the car. However, the overall effect of this is to increase front end grip.

A car fitted with WALK will actually pitch MORE under acceleration and braking than a standard car. This is due to the caster change which puts more of the vertically resolved component of the braking or acceleration into the springs, increasing spring deflection and giving an effective reduction in spring rate ('softer springs').

It is a remarkable testament to the 'placebo' effect that people can have this kit fitted and then claim that there is less front end lift on acceleration!

Basically, the 'anti-lift kit' is mis-named, it should be called a 'lift kit' !!

There is a remarkable lack of understanding about what the WALK kit does (not just on this forum, but on other forums such as Mk V Golf).

The WALK modification does NOT reduce front end lift on acceleration, in fact it does quite the reverse. The WALK kit SOFTENS the front suspension under acceleration and braking - so INCREASING the amount of pitching of the car. However, the overall effect of this is to increase front end grip.

A car fitted with WALK will actually pitch MORE under acceleration and braking than a standard car. This is due to the caster change which puts more of the vertically resolved component of the braking or acceleration into the springs, increasing spring deflection and giving an effective reduction in spring rate ('softer springs').

It is a remarkable testament to the 'placebo' effect that people can have this kit fitted and then claim that there is less front end lift on acceleration!

Basically, the 'anti-lift kit' is mis-named, it should be called a 'lift kit' !!

Hmmm. A case of the Emperor's New Clothes then? I'm no expert, but having watched the before and after video of the Polo GTi fitted with WALK, I'm struggling to see how fitting WALK can be said to make the suspension 'softer'...

I've always found Bahnstormer's opinions pretty objective to date - so I'm going to need a bit more convincing that WALK is just a placebo.

Edited 29 April, 200917 yr by rsbspt

No placebo on my side, guys.

I was rather skeptical on the device and I didn't even read all the leaflets. I'm also pretty trained in listening to and recognizing small differences (like in in high end), so don't tell me the whole story of double blind, ABX, and so on... But it's interesting and amusing to observe posts like this: we say that different opinions are a richness, aren't they?

I wonder whether the poster has driven a golf V based car with WALK installed, what car was and what did he experience.

Peace,

There is a remarkable lack of understanding about what the WALK kit does (not just on this forum, but on other forums such as Mk V Golf).

The WALK modification does NOT reduce front end lift on acceleration, in fact it does quite the reverse. The WALK kit SOFTENS the front suspension under acceleration and braking - so INCREASING the amount of pitching of the car. However, the overall effect of this is to increase front end grip.

A car fitted with WALK will actually pitch MORE under acceleration and braking than a standard car. This is due to the caster change which puts more of the vertically resolved component of the braking or acceleration into the springs, increasing spring deflection and giving an effective reduction in spring rate ('softer springs').

It is a remarkable testament to the 'placebo' effect that people can have this kit fitted and then claim that there is less front end lift on acceleration!

Basically, the 'anti-lift kit' is mis-named, it should be called a 'lift kit' !!

Interesting comments which, I would comment on by saying

My theory is this;-

The factor of dynamically softening the spring rate is accepted and agreed but I dispute that the car 'pitches' more (i.e. the nose rises under acceleration). Let me put it this way; consider the three (principal) physical forces 1. Spring rate of the suspension, 2. Weight of the car, and 3. Weight transfer due to acceleration.

Consider an OE spec car; power is applied to cause acceleration that results in weight transfer (to the rear) which, dictated by the spring rate of the suspension allows/causes the nose of the car to rise by a given amount.

Now consider a car with revised geometry as a result of the WALK kit; same power is applied to cause acceleration that results in weight transfer (to the rear). The nose wants to rise BUT with the dynamic changes of the springs being 'softer' (as their actual rate has not changed) the weight of the car has a greater effect and acts to make the nose fall, or at least not rise by as much as an OE car.

It is then this greater applied force or weight over the driven wheels that provides greater traction. QED.

However, having reread one of the technical papers on Whiteline's website that I originally researched as here;- http://www.whiteline.com.au/articles/Effect%20of%20WL%20ALK_b.pdf -

I have to eat some humble pie and agree with EGC that 'anti-lift kit' is perhaps a misnomer.

Finally though, what I do know is that one way or another the WALK kit has the desired effect to increase traction.

Guys, I am not saying the WALK kit doesn't work - IT DOES! - and its a worthwhile modification. However it DOES NOT reduce front end lift under acceleration, it actually increases it - this is how the traction is increased! It is just that Whiteline have misnamed it - its called an 'anti-lift kit' because it reduces the amount of 'anti-lift' in the suspension geometry to approximately zero. This is not an opinion, its a fact based on simple chassis dynamics and a bit of suspension geometry.

Incidentally, I'm not spouting this off the top of my head, I have 30+ years in the motor trade and until recently we were regularly fitting Whiteline components (inc. WALK) to Subaru Imprezas and Legacies. How the WALK kit works is pretty well understood in the Subaru community, but its a fairly new thing to VAG models, hence people going on about it reducing pitching at the front. Incidentally, you would be hard pressed to notice any difference on a video, the increase in lift under hard acceleration is probably around 10mm or so - not really observable on a video or indeed to many drivers when there are so many variables involved.

BTW, the real improvement with WALK comes not in straight-line acceleration but on acceleration in a turn, when the greater compliance encountered by the inner front wheel gives a considerable increase in traction as weight is transferred off it due to being in a turn.

I think one of the issues with suspensions modifications is that much of suspension design is 'counter intuitive', particularly in the sense that firmer suspension is not necessarily better for grip. The view that stiffer springs and greater roll resistance is better for grip is just plain wrong, especially off-track on normal roads where good wheel tracking (i.e. having the suspension soft enough to allow the wheels to maintain contact with a bumpy road surface) is very important. A car set up for a smooth track, with high spring rates and high roll stiffness, is actually quite unpleasant (not to mention dangerous) to drive on a normal road because its so skittish, the wheels spend half their time in the air. There is a compromise to be reached and often better traction and lateral grip are to be achieved through softer suspension and hence greater weight transfer, which is what the WALK seeks to achieve.

Edited 29 April, 200917 yr by EGC

I think one of the issues with suspensions modifications is that much of suspension design is 'counter intuitive', particularly in the sense that firmer suspension is not necessarily better for grip. The view that stiffer springs and greater roll resistance is better for grip is just plain wrong, especially off-track on normal roads where good wheel tracking (i.e. having the suspension soft enough to allow the wheels to maintain contact with a bumpy road surface) is very important. A car set up for a smooth track, with high spring rates and high roll stiffness, is actually quite unpleasant (not to mention dangerous) to drive on a normal road because its so skittish, the wheels spend half their time in the air. There is a compromise to be reached and often better traction and lateral grip are to be achieved through softer suspension and hence greater weight transfer, which is what the WALK seeks to achieve.

I quite agree with your point of view; that's why although I have an uprated rear anti roll bar the neutralise the inherent understeer of my TDI, I have kept to OE springs and prefer to run with 17" wheels (even though I have a set of 18s in the garage).

I spent 6 years Karting with my son so know a reasonable amount about 'stiff for dry' and 'soft for wet' principals.

PS> Glad to know you've been around a bit - we might want to tap your font of knowledge some more in the future.

Just to clarfy - the video I was referring to was the one filmed underneath the car, showing the incredible amount of slop and free play in the OEM bushes.

Still puzzles me how we're reading user reviews about "...the feel of a great forceful hand pressing down on the front of the car and the nose not rising under acceleration" when EGC is telling us the amount of lift should be greafter than before...

Guys, I am not saying the WALK kit doesn't work - IT DOES! - and its a worthwhile modification. However it DOES NOT reduce front end lift under acceleration, it actually increases it - this is how the traction is increased! It is just that Whiteline have misnamed it - its called an 'anti-lift kit' because it reduces the amount of 'anti-lift' in the suspension geometry to approximately zero. This is not an opinion, its a fact based on simple chassis dynamics and a bit of suspension geometry.

Hi again,

frankly I'm not completely sold on this, notwithstanding my engineering background, but hey a couple of decades have passed .

Aside from my seat of pant experience, quite debatable as we saw, at first glance it seems to me that with more caster, the car nose displacement vertical component would be reduced and that prings would be "softened" as less loaded by more caster. The reduction of bushes play would help reducing diving and lifting too, IMHO.

Would you please elaborate more or share (online) sources about this suspensions physics related effect?

Thank you,

Still puzzles me how we're reading user reviews about "...the feel of a great forceful hand pressing down on the front of the car and the nose not rising under acceleration" when EGC is telling us the amount of lift should be greater than before...

Well that's what it feels like - I'll admit; guess I got it wrong. Sorry chaps.

However the proof is in the pudding - traction has improved.

the amount of lift should be greater than before...

I'd like to see a physical demonstration of this statement.

Regards,

Would you please elaborate more or share (online) sources about this suspensions physics related effect?

Thank you,

I have a fair number of books on chassis dynamics, but obviously I can't share them online. You might want to check out the Whiteline link posted above by Bahnstormer (well done for finding it!) - which looks like is gives a comprehensive, if slightly confusing, account of the subject.

I'd like to see a physical demonstration of this statement.

Regards,

Well, I can't do much to help with that, but take a look at the technical paper linked by Bahnstomer. Whiteline measured about a 20mm increase in pitching with their WALK fitted to Impreza.

I have a fair number of books on chassis dynamics, but obviously I can't share them online. You might want to check out the Whiteline link posted above by Bahnstormer (well done for finding it!) - which looks like is gives a comprehensive, if slightly confusing, account of the subject.

There are others on Whiteline's website as well I believe; or try a bit of googling.

Here's a little explanation I nicked off the NASIOC (us Impreza owners' forum) which tries to explain how WALK softens up the front end. Thinking about it a little more, fitting an anti-lift kit is not a million miles from fitting a softer front ARB.

From Anti-lift Kit FAQ - NASIOC

"Technical Explanation

They change the suspension geometry of your front end by lowering the aft control arm bushings by varying amounts (depends on the manufacturer) increasing caster by varying degrees (depends on the manufacturer) of extra static caster. They change the front pitch and caster geometry by relocating the rear pivot point of the front lower control arm both in the vertical and horizontal plane. The suspension reconfiguration combines to provide the following benefits:

1. Stiffer bushings gives a more solid mounting point for the suspension which does a few things most important of which are better toe control at speed/braking and crisper turn-in.

2. Extra caster which gives a stronger on-center feel to the steering as well as more "dynamic camber" during cornering.

3. Remove the anti-lift and anti-dive characteristics of the stock suspension. What this means is that it effectively softens your front suspension's movement which allows the wheel to follow the road a little better during acceleration/braking in a corner.

What do the terms anti-lift and anti-dive mean? These terms are very, very confusing as most readers can get confused over the apparent double negative connotation of the terms.

Anti-lift is your car's natural ability to absorb lifting forces. This means a car with 100% anti-lift during hard acceleration would exhibit no force transfer to the springs of the car. Stated another way, 100% of the lifting caused by acceleration would be absorbed by the chassis, not the springs.

Anti-dive is your car's natural ability to absorb diving forces. This means a car with 100% anti-dive during hard braking would exhibit no force transfer to the springs of the car. Stated another way, 100% of the diving caused by braking would be absorbed by the chassis, not the springs.

How are these terms applicable to large upgrade units (Whiteline, Perrin, & GT Spec)? These kits, to varying degrees, decrease your car's natural anti-lift and anti-dive characteristics. This will soften the front suspension during acceleration and braking and a softer suspension will even out the load on the front tires, giving a higher total total cornering load available or more front end grip. Another way of looking at this is that under acceleration or braking, the effective spring stiffness is lower, reducing the front end anti-roll resistance, hence reducing weight transfer at the front and less understeer."

Been reading this thread with a bit of intrigue

Having both Front and Rear ARB's would the WALK kit now make the front ARB pointless and would i be better to take it off if i fitted a WALK

Cheers

Carl:thumbup:

Been reading this thread with a bit of intrigue

Having both Front and Rear ARB's would the WALK kit now make the front ARB pointless and would i be better to take it off if i fitted a WALK

Cheers

Carl:thumbup:

I could say; Blind Rudolph and Carlsberg but on the other hand (and here I am guessing);

if you want a track day special then keep your ARBs and fit a WALK OR if you want a useful fast road car, revert front ARB to OE one and fit WALK.

Anyone else go a different idea?

I could say; Blind Rudolph and Carlsberg but on the other hand (and here I am guessing);

if you want a track day special then keep your ARBs and fit a WALK OR if you want a useful fast road car, revert front ARB to OE one and fit WALK.

Anyone else go a different idea?

Was wondering if i could get a similar effect though by setting the Front ARB on softest setting and the Rear ARB to the Hardest. The reason i got both (and i said the same in the review i put in the maintenance and performance section) is that every Octy i have been in that just had the Rear tended to understeer more than OEM when pushed whereas with both it doesn't and improves handling an awful lot

Carl:thumbup:

Was wondering if i could get a similar effect though by setting the Front ARB on softest setting and the Rear ARB to the Hardest. The reason i got both (and i said the same in the review i put in the maintenance and performance section) is that every Octy i have been in that just had the Rear tended to understeer more than OEM when pushed whereas with both it doesn't and improves handling an awful lot

Carl:thumbup:

Well; all I can say is you have not been in mine! Uprated rear ARB at stiffest = no understeer (more or less).

But, to answer the question - YES; if you have adjustable ARBs at both ends it will cost you nothing to experiment with settings but £300+ to fit a WALK. go get your spanners/hex keys.

Well; all I can say is you have not been in mine! Uprated rear ARB at stiffest = no understeer (more or less).

But, to answer the question - YES; if you have adjustable ARBs at both ends it will cost you nothing to experiment with settings but £300+ to fit a WALK. go get your spanners/hex keys.

You obviously don't push yours then:P

Plus its a diesel:rolleyes: all the ones i've been in were petrol so maybe its cos they are fasterer and betterer than diesels :P:P:P:D:D:D

Just kidding

£300+. I dont think so:eek: looking at the kit and pics of it installed i reckon i could fit that myself and just get the Alignment re-done:rolleyes:

Carl:thumbup:

I've been quoted £268 inc VAT and re-alignment.

What's bothering me is that if I fit WALK, will I get more pitching and diving on acceleration and braking? 'Cos I hate that in a car. That's what I can't get my head round in this thread. The boffs are saying it softens the suspension, but the non-boffs are saying it feels more planted in braking and acceleration. They can't both be right...can they?

I'm off for a stiff drink and a hot towel..!

Think of it this way if the suspension is a bit softer rather than the wheel coming off the road on a bumpy surface it is easier for the suspension to move up and down thus keeping the tyre on the tarmac.

It is hard to explain but i kinda understand what it is all saying..................................i think

Carl:thumbup: