Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*rear\s+suspention\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*rear\s+suspention\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "John Burk" <joyseydevil@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 15:38:45 -0400; Most cars with sprung rears have one or both of these problems . (1) Too much rear roll stiffness (to overcome the effects of drive shaft torque) or (2) unequal rear wheel loading under acceleration; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00566.html (8,293 bytes)
2. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Russel Mack" <rtmack@concentric.net>; Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:29:50 -0500; I should have know you'd have it all "down-pat". Thanks for making it easy! Russ, #1226B (which only has 2 wheels, but hopefully is not last ride I'll have!) Most cars with sprung rears have one or; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00569.html (8,968 bytes)
3. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 15:47:41 -0500; A torque-tube driveshaft solves the problem, too. Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ Most cars with sprung rears have one or both of these problems . (1) Too much rear roll stiffness (to overcome the effects; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00571.html (8,831 bytes)
4. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Russel Mack" <rtmack@concentric.net>; Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:20:38 -0500; I guess it must. I never had noticible torque-steer on my (torque-tube equipped) '49 Chevy (stove-bolt 6). MUSTA been the torque tube! Russ, #1226B John; A torque-tube driveshaft solves the problem,; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00572.html (8,204 bytes)
5. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:23:33 -0500; Touche Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ Neil: I guess it must. I never had noticible torque-steer on my (torque-tube equipped) '49 Chevy (stove-bolt 6). MUSTA been the torque tube! Russ, John; A torque-tube; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00573.html (8,575 bytes)
6. Re: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "bennevl" <bennevl@netzero.net>; Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 20:36:38 -0400; Sounds to me what you are describing is similar to the 3rd generation F Body GM cars. Nice to know about the offset, Now just need a way to modify the original mount. Bill much . oversteer roll fix; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00577.html (9,476 bytes)
7. Re: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: Dave Dahlgren <ddahlgren@snet.net>; Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 04:34:22 -0400; This sounds like a NASCAR modified rear suspension.. How does the math work for the offset what are the units used give an example please. Dave Dahlgren; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00583.html (9,020 bytes)
8. Re: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: Nt788@aol.com; Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:41:31 EDT; << A torque-tube driveshaft solves the problem, too. Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ I agree with that! Isn't that all rear suspensions try to emulate? Jack; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00592.html (8,297 bytes)
9. Fw: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "John Burk" <joyseydevil@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 22:00:30 -0400; 500 .The (slot link; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00596.html (10,232 bytes)
10. Fw: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "John Burk" <joyseydevil@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 22:01:37 -0400; tire steer/ In to; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00597.html (9,280 bytes)
11. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 10:48:42 -0500; I wonder if this is similar to "anti-squat" geometry but applied to only one side? Regards, Neil Tucson, AZ 500 .The (slot link; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00618.html (11,223 bytes)
12. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 10:53:41 -0500; If a torque-tube equippped car also uses a solid rear axle, the axle bump & rebound twist is usually taken up by the motor mounts. Obviously only a limited axle travel is possible. Yes, IRS is the u; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00620.html (10,120 bytes)
13. Re: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: docb8532@aol.com; Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 13:03:39 EDT; i've been following the suspension thread with interest and trying to figure out the major differences between a land speed suspension system and high performance sports car suspension i've raced dra; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00622.html (9,028 bytes)
14. Re: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: Dave Dahlgren <ddahlgren@snet.net>; Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:58:32 -0400; Personally i think you are right on target.. Just think of it as a sports car that the traction circle is at about 0.6 g's Dave; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00626.html (9,319 bytes)
15. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>; Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:20:18 -0500; Lance; It would work just fine... but without a torque tube, it still flexes the chassis under engine torque. If the chassis is stiff enough, no problem, but with long, skinny LSR cars, it isn't eas; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00644.html (8,080 bytes)
16. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Russel Mack" <rtmack@concentric.net>; Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:35:16 -0500; Nobody has mentioned it lately-- but you can completely eliminate this torque-steer problem with chain (or belt) drive. You still have to make the chassis stiff enough to keep your sprockets aligned,; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00651.html (8,608 bytes)
17. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>; Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:06:24 -0500; Didn't a driver get decapitated by a broken chain years ago at Daytona Beach? Not a pleasant prospect to think what could happen if a chain breaks; I wonder if a belt drive might be better? Regards,; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00694.html (8,908 bytes)
18. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Russel Mack" <rtmack@concentric.net>; Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:43:54 -0500; I hadn't heard the decapitation story-- but I've heard plenty of stories about maimings and even deaths from broken driveshafts. The obvious point here is--WHATEVER drivetrain you use-- there is a l; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00699.html (9,447 bytes)
19. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>; Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 18:24:21 -0500; You are right about that-- safety first. I finally found a reference to the chain-drive LSR car: http://www.morrigancraftpottery.co.uk/pt3b.htm "Babs" used a 27 liter aircraft engine-- talk about a; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00709.html (9,262 bytes)
20. RE: rear suspention (score: 1): Author: "Russel Mack" <rtmack@concentric.net>; Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 22:00:26 -0500; incredible car. Would love a chance to drive such a beast, but it'd take me two years of work just to get the safety features up to my own standards. As-is, the SCTA inspectors wouldn't allow it pas; /html/land-speed/2003-10/msg00714.html (10,066 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]