Lafrente, just to be clear, please stop arguing. You're posting a lot of misinformation and probably confusing some people. You've been doing it for a long time. I have no idea how you're not banned yet. Aren't you the same guy who was saying the same **** about the JZA80 a few years ago?
Do you not see the madness in speaking with such conviction about things that you are operating on pure assumptions about? You have no work experience in the simulation industry, no experience making physics mods, I don't think you have spoken to developers in private. Where are your ideas coming from? It is true KS gets some data and sometimes even laserscanned/CAD suspension geometries (Front geo for the Nismo GT-R is not so bad, but there are mess ups too, like the signage is wrong on the Z point of the outboard UCA in the rear suspension of the Praga R1 and similar messups in the Lotus Elise SC geometry) but they don't get nearly as much as you think they do. Nobody does. Most of their cars are internet researched, especially the Japanese classic cars.
Please, by all means, do some research. That's how we found out that KS cars are not as accurate as people think. I'll give you an easy one.
Unpack the KS RX-7 and look at the spring rates and damper rates. I'll give you some material to do calculations.
Front MR for FD3S at design height from kinematics software = 0.62821962558
Front Spring K for FD3S from Mazda = 47100 N/m
Rear MR for FD3S at design height from kinematics software = 0.77321580453
Rear Spring K for FD3S from Mazda = 35200 N/m
Calculate those and check what rates come out.
I'll also post a graph showing the damper dyno from Mazda. The black line is the Bilstein Kouki damper data. It also shows the spring K in N/mm.
You can also calculate the damper rates from this. Don't forget to apply the motion ratio, they're at the shaft.
I will also post the motion ratio graphs if you wish to use another point. Bear in mind they are inverse, so do the conversion.