autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: front sway bar allowance

To: <autox@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: front sway bar allowance
From: "Brian Berryhill" <brianberryhill@usa.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 15:19:29 -0500
This is one of those things that does get a little biased towards RWD.  I
agree with Kent in that front sway bars shouldn't be allowed in stock class.
I went to a larger rear sway bar for my FWD car, so that's automatic SP or
STS/STR.

For FWD, thicker front sway bars are baddd... traction upon acceleration is
limited anyway from just weight shift, include a tight turn in 1st gear,
sometimes 2nd, and the front bar just takes away traction from the inside
front tire.  I've been contemplating going to a smaller front sway bar for
better traction even though I have a thicker rear bar and lift my inside
rear tire.  Heck, with 2/3 the weight on the front, just 1 tire is enough on
the rear :)

Brian

--
Brian Berryhill
http://www.angelfire.com/ms/brianberryhill/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kent Rafferty" <gs96@sgi.net>
To: <autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: front sway bar allowance


> There's no question a front bar change can be a
> big help - I now have a bigger bar on the family
> Vette. The point, IMO, is there is nothing stock
> about being able to swap out your sway bar.  It's
> certainly not a wear item.  If a car is a miserable
> dog without a bar change, then that fact should
> be considered in the upcoming restructuring...
> There, now we're back to car classing issues. :-)
>
> Kent Rafferty
>
> Alex wrote:
> > I, and a lot of rear wheel drive owners out there
> > run bigger bars up front, it helps putting the power down.
>
> > Why not worry what classes all the cars are going to end up in
> > first, ie. change one thing at a time.
>
>
>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>