Hi guys

I have a Jabba RARB on the car at the moment and am having FSDs and Eibachs and 312 brakes put on and am thinking that I wont need the RARB too so am tempted to have it removed when the other stuff is put on?

I want the car to be nice for every day use and don't plan any track days etc, so dont want the car to be too tight and twitchy etc, so wondered what thoughts were on this?

Thanks.

Keep it !!!!!!!!!

Thread closed.

I would strongly recommend keeping it. The combo of Eibach springs, Koni FSDampers, and the Jabba rear ARB is how I ran the car for ages, it works very well together

Keep it, seriously.

Take it off if you want lots of understeer; if you don't, keep it.

Take it off if you want lots of understeer; if you don't, keep it.

I think that's a bit emotive! But seeing how it'd have far less of an effect on day-to-day ride comfort than the stiffer springs and firmer dampers, then I agree it'd be a daft move to take it off...

Never needed one on mines...

Be interesting to see if anyone on here has had the same setup as mine will be then and what it eas like, but I hear what your saying guys!

Will have a chat with some of the gang at the JKM RR tomorrow for extended views!

Never needed one on mines...

Well no, more than once I've made the same observation based on the massive girder joining the back wheels together and the fact that those that have them swear by them despite the fact they don't attach to the chassis at any point to create any leverage. Nevertheless, if they do make a difference to the handling, they certainly aren't going to worsten the ride comfort to the extent that lowering it and putting firmer dampers on will...

Well no, more than once I've made the same observation based on the massive girder joining the back wheels together and the fact that those that have them swear by them despite the fact they don't attach to the chassis at any point to create any leverage. Nevertheless, if they do make a difference to the handling, they certainly aren't going to worsten the ride comfort to the extent that lowering it and putting firmer dampers on will...

Urm - the bar attaches between the points where it matters, and is attached both to the beam as well as the moving parts at the back, stating it has no impact is just wrong.

Apart from that though:

Koni FSDs are not firmer as such, the damping is variable and in reality firms up at speed, whereas it is comfy at lower speed.

The Eibachs lower the car, which improves the center of gravity, but there I would agree the springs are firmer due to the type of spring winding used.

The effect of the rear ARB on driving at 'fairly normal' speeds is that the car corners virtually flat. Apart from the fun factor when pushing on, in reality having the car corner virtually flat is more comfy for the passenger(s).

It is a good combo of items regardless, which improves the car no end IMHO

ap0gee is right.

The rear arb isnt really an anti roll bar as such. It doesnt mount to the body and then twist.

In reality all it is a beam brace, stiffening the rear beam, adding to its torsional ridigty.

Urm - the bar attaches between the points where it matters, and is attached both to the beam as well as the moving parts at the back, stating it has no impact is just wrong.

I think if you actually take the time to look under your car, you'll find that the rear suspension beam actually joins the two trailing arm, and the ARB attaches at four points along what is effectively a SOLID rear axle. I can't find a picture that shows what exactly I'm talking about, so this one of Oggy's Octy will have to do:

In both the Octavia and the Fabia, the rear suspension components look like a flattened 'H' with the pivots and hubs attached at the top and bottom 'points'. Therefore, there is effectively no independence between the two rear wheels, other than that provided by the flexion of the beam itself. The rear suspension beam has a far larger cross-section than either of the ARBs available, and while I concede that an ARB might add slightly to the overall stiffness of the unit, it doesn't provide the same leverage effect as the front one does, where it acts as a lever between the chassis and the wishbones thereby actually counteracting the body roll by working to raise the car body on the side it's leaning into. So I can see that fitting one might give you a handling condition like in the SportClio where you get lots of 'inside leg-c0cking' when pushing it in the bends, but I just can't agree that it's give you the kind of flat handling that truly independent and ARB-ed rear suspension would give you, like on the Focus or MINI...

Thanks all.

I guess stiffness and ride harshness is not the major concern, more that the rear wheels will have less contact with the road when on bumpier roads as they wont be able to move up and down so freely which could make the back more liable to step out?

I'm running fsd eibach jabba and 312s, ride is fine, cornering is fine, still possible to experience understeer

I think if you actually take the time to look under your car, you'll find that the rear suspension beam actually joins the two trailing arm, and the ARB attaches at four points along what is effectively a SOLID rear axle. I can't find a picture that shows what exactly I'm talking about, so this one of Oggy's Octy will have to do:

In both the Octavia and the Fabia, the rear suspension components look like a flattened 'H' with the pivots and hubs attached at the top and bottom 'points'. Therefore, there is effectively no independence between the two rear wheels, other than that provided by the flexion of the beam itself. The rear suspension beam has a far larger cross-section than either of the ARBs available, and while I concede that an ARB might add slightly to the overall stiffness of the unit, it doesn't provide the same leverage effect as the front one does, where it acts as a lever between the chassis and the wishbones thereby actually counteracting the body roll by working to raise the car body on the side it's leaning into. So I can see that fitting one might give you a handling condition like in the SportClio where you get lots of 'inside leg-c0cking' when pushing it in the bends, but I just can't agree that it's give you the kind of flat handling that truly independent and ARB-ed rear suspension would give you, like on the Focus or MINI...

Agreed its not the best way if you were going to build a car from scratch, but would you rather change the rear of your car over to independant suspension? i can guarentee its going to cost a hell of alot more money and unless your going to solid mount the shocks, bushes and so on, so nothing moves... (a race car) there wont be a great deal of differnce between the two.

This design is one that every arb supplyer uses on a beam type axel... it does work and has been proven, these people design suspension

hope this clears it up

Luke

I was under the impression the bar also transferred torsion from one side to the other as it is also attached to the moving part of the suspension, not just the rear beam? Apologies for getting the wrong end of the stick in my previous post at any rate

It definitely makes a big difference in handling regardless, so keeping it on still gets my vote