fot
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Suspension Thoughts

To: "'Larry Young'" <cartravel@pobox.com>
Subject: RE: Suspension Thoughts
From: Bill Babcock <BillB@bnj.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 10:21:44 -0800
Wow, now that's interesting. The kind of modification that would
absolutely meet tech criteria for probably every sanctioning body--if only
because they couldn't detect it. I'll play with that. It might also
provide the added benefit of stiffening the upper mount, since anyone who
did it would probably pay attention that that at the same time. For that
matter, it might make a very easy way to move the upper mount inwards at
the same time, which would increase camber using stock parts. So far the
ideal seems to be stock or longer upper arm length with the pivot point
moved inward about 1 inch. IF you can do that with a change that also
lowers the upper mount and increases camber gain we'd really be on to
something. 

It definitely has a 1960 feel to it as well. Any guy with a sawzall and
gas welding equipment could have done it--if only he had what would have
been $20 Million worth of computing power and a big circle of friends who
were also engineers. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Young [mailto:cartravel@pobox.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 8:16 AM
To: Bill Babcock
Cc: 'stutzman'; David Wingett; fot@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Suspension Thoughts


Would shortening the spring towers be a legal mod?  It seems like it
should be legal.  From my experiments with FSGP, that looks like a very
good thing to do.  By lowering the upper fulcrum you improve both camber
gain and roll center height.  With a more sophisticated program like
SusProg3D, you could probably predict body roll and determine how much to
shorten the spring towers to get the camber gain you need for maximum tire
patch.  It will probably need to be shortened about 1 to 1 1/2 inch.  Has
anyone tried this?

Larry Young

Bill Babcock wrote:

> Not many organizations would. What I'm really up to is building a set 
> of fundamentally stock-looking modifications that dramatically improve 
> handling. I suspect Hardy had a thoroughly non-stock front 
> suspension--we're not all racing vintage. Every so often I remind 
> myself that Peyote would be mid pack at most SCCA sports racer meets 
> just as it is.

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