autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes)

To: Mike Lamfalusi <lamfalus@excite.com>
Subject: Re: Stock class rules was (Re: Sequential Stock Classes)
From: washburn <washburn@dwave.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:13:13 -0500
Mike Lamfalusi wrote:

> Okay, my next question would then be, is the suspension geometry of the M3
> and Boxster better such that they don't benefit with more camber as much as
> the other cars do?  Again, not arguing, just asking.  Eric pointed this
> possibility out regarding the TypeR and its limited camber settings.

I wish I could have a lot less static negative camber on my Neon.  It
just causes poor acceleration and braking traction IMO.  (See my small
pile of front tires with the inside edge worn to the cord) I would trade
static neg camber for a better dynamic camber geometry any day!

Pat

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