|
Suspension | Chassis | Brakes -- Sponsored by 949 Racing Relating to suspension, chassis, and brakes. Sponsored by 949 Racing. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
10-04-2013, 08:43 AM | #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '23 BRZ
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 4,613
Thanks: 1,395
Thanked 3,931 Times in 2,053 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
|
|
10-04-2013, 08:55 AM | #30 | ||
Corner Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2012
Drives: 13 BRZ, 11 STI, 99 RS
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,908
Thanks: 129
Thanked 1,520 Times in 702 Posts
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
Quote:
Hmm... Need to do some thinking. |
||
10-04-2013, 08:58 AM | #31 |
i'm sorry, what?
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Canada
Location: I rock a beat harder than you can beat it with rocks
Posts: 4,399
Thanks: 357
Thanked 2,506 Times in 1,268 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 3 Thread(s)
|
ALso, here is a MacPherson design used in a Lotus racing car.
I can guarantee you that under compression these thigns gain an ample amount of camber i'd say pre-aero days this would have been a fantastic design. -
__________________
don't you think if I was wrong, I'd know it?
|
10-04-2013, 11:22 AM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2013
Drives: Mazda 3
Location: round rock, tx
Posts: 413
Thanks: 487
Thanked 108 Times in 74 Posts
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
I only drive around on the street but even then I can appreciate a better setup suspension than stock. optimal static camber for maximum lateral grip level of the stock tires; more front roll stiffness from springs and less from sway bars will make steering response more linear and feel more supple. Having more bump travel in the rear will make taking bumpy corners so much more confidence inspiring. I've had quite a few instances on the street where the rear momentarily lost traction in the middle of a corner when hitting a bump, not to mention when the rear hits the bumpstops full-on, the chassis bounces off the bump stops and the whole car wiggles left to right.
there is so much I can improve on the stock setup that will make the car better without upsetting the balance and I only drive on the street... I see most bad setups start at very low ride height with not stiff enough spring rates or the use of too big sway bars... |
03-28-2014, 10:37 AM | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Drives: Some rust bucket
Location: Polar ice cap
Posts: 3,058
Thanks: 312
Thanked 1,045 Times in 556 Posts
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Excellent gif. It took me a second to realize what I was looking at. I think the pause in the animation threw me off a little because it looks like I'm looking at the rebound effect rather than the compression effect.
Based on this animation, one can infer that macpherson struts gain negative camber under rebound when the LCA and strut are past the perpendicular point. Not really useful when you're cornering since you want the outside wheel to gain negative camber and not the inside wheel. |
03-28-2014, 10:52 AM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Drives: Some rust bucket
Location: Polar ice cap
Posts: 3,058
Thanks: 312
Thanked 1,045 Times in 556 Posts
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
So all else equal, if you lower the front of the car, you'd want to increase spring rate to minimize the LCA and the strut from being perpendicular under compression.
Assuming @ZDan's suspension model is accurate, the front keeps gaining negative camber up until 4'' of compression. However, that doesn't take into account body roll, which changes the angle of the strut. That 4'' of bump travel is actually less when you take into account body roll, right? Then you also have to take into account caster, which can change the amount of camber when cornering. More caster equals more negative camber under bump. I'm sure there are other variables as well. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears you want the front to be as stiff as possible when tuning macpherson struts (ignoring all other factors). From a pure performance standpoint (ignoring cost, packaging, etc), double wishbone appears to be the superior design. I guess that's why Formula One still uses it. |
03-28-2014, 11:01 AM | #35 | ||
i'm sorry, what?
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Canada
Location: I rock a beat harder than you can beat it with rocks
Posts: 4,399
Thanks: 357
Thanked 2,506 Times in 1,268 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 3 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
Quote:
but otherwise, F1 suspension design laughs and farts and throws beer bottles in the general director of production vehicle suspension theory. so you should NEVER draw any conclusions of F1 design and production cars. If you want to immitate a racing body.. watch what the rally guys do.
__________________
don't you think if I was wrong, I'd know it?
|
||
03-28-2014, 11:07 AM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Drives: Some rust bucket
Location: Polar ice cap
Posts: 3,058
Thanks: 312
Thanked 1,045 Times in 556 Posts
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
So by adding camber plates and adding negative camber, you're essentially changing the angle of the strut. This means you increased the negative camber bump travel to greater than 4", right? Let's assume zdan's model is accurate.
|
03-28-2014, 11:13 AM | #37 |
i'm sorry, what?
Join Date: Jan 2012
Drives: Canada
Location: I rock a beat harder than you can beat it with rocks
Posts: 4,399
Thanks: 357
Thanked 2,506 Times in 1,268 Posts
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 3 Thread(s)
|
yes, but do it too much and wonky things start happening during steering
__________________
don't you think if I was wrong, I'd know it?
|
03-28-2014, 01:15 PM | #38 |
There's some debate about whether it's better to add camber at the topmounts (camber plates) or at the lower strut mounting point (camber bolts). Using plates pushed in gives you a higher roll center and can improve camber curve. However, it also increases the SAI which has a negative effect on camber when you turn the steering wheel.
- Andy |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Racecomp Engineering For This Useful Post: | CSG Mike (03-28-2014) |
03-10-2019, 02:08 PM | #39 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Drives: 2016 Scion FR-S
Location: Washington
Posts: 3
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Wow, this thread was very informative and exactly what I needed!
So since FR-S engineers added less negative camber to the front, this helps break out of a slide easier? (harder to oversteer?) |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Advice on negative rear camber | Thongpocket | Suspension | Chassis | Brakes -- Sponsored by 949 Racing | 23 | 09-27-2013 10:38 PM |
Camber Question | Ryeong86 | Suspension | Chassis | Brakes -- Sponsored by 949 Racing | 5 | 04-12-2013 12:05 PM |
Question about adjustable LCA's vs Camber Plates vs Camber Bolts | djdnz | Suspension | Chassis | Brakes -- Sponsored by 949 Racing | 13 | 03-27-2013 11:38 PM |
Camber Question | subaruatheart | Suspension | Chassis | Brakes -- Sponsored by 949 Racing | 10 | 03-24-2013 01:49 PM |
Excessive negative camber? | MTeator | Suspension | Chassis | Brakes -- Sponsored by 949 Racing | 10 | 06-22-2012 10:30 AM |