Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Anybody going to get a "Scat-Pack" R\T Challenger?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ry_Trapp0" data-source="post: 14497224" data-attributes="member: 27761"><p>tires and suspension tuning(spring rate/shock tuning) makes a FAR bigger difference than switching from a solid axle to an IRS. everyone talks about how terrible solid axles are because a bump on one side of the axle affects the contact patch on the other side, but no one seems to "get" that the contact patch on an IRS is CONSTANTLY changing with body roll. once you dig into independent suspension design, you'll realize how it is far FAR more complex than "tires move independently = better grip", because every single aspect of the suspension geometry is a compromise in MANY aspects. there is no such thing as perfect independent suspension geometry because it is impossible to ever maintain 100% contact between the tire contact patch and the pavement. the angle of the tire is constantly changing because the suspension points are mounted to, and thus influenced by the chassis, while the tires of a solid axle move independently of the chassis(assuming zero bind in the solid axle's suspension - this isn't true for '79-'04 mustangs as the shitty design of the triangulated 4-link with bushings[instead of spherical joints] will bind up and cause the inside tire to lift after so many degrees of body roll. the S197 has an insignificant amount of bind though, being a 3-link + panhard) and thus maintain a nearly parallel contact patch to the road surface(with sidewall roll being the only significant influence to the contact patch at that point). so, you need to add static negative camber to an independent suspension to compensate for body roll changing the suspension geometry(0 degrees of static camber would lead to positive camber gain of the outside tire in a corner, causing a loss of grip as the inside of the outside tire lifts off the ground), which means that you're on the inside edges of the tires while going in a straight line, thus reducing forward traction. and, while you can add negative camber to flatten out the contact patch of the outside tire in a corner, the inside tire is FAR from parallel and is contributing very little to overall cornering grip. meanwhile, the inside tire on a solid axle maintains pretty much the same contact patch as the outside tire. while the additional grip of the inside tire may not add a whole lot to the overall cornering grip, every little bit counts. keep in mind that, theoretically, you can put down power sooner on corner exit with a solid axle since the inside tire is the most likely to spin and you have much more contact patch on the ground vs the independent suspension(that's dependent on a LOT of variables outside of suspension geometry though). and, finally, the constant camber change of an independent suspension hurts breaking too as, again, you're not maintaining a parallel contact patch. but we're morso commenting on rear suspension design than front, so it doesn't have a very significant impact(though worth noting none the less).</p><p></p><p>all in all, the solid axle is SEVERELY underrated in cornering ability/handling prowess because the vast majority of people that comment on it have a very limited, rudimentary understanding of the VAST amount of variables and design compromises that play into cornering grip. the S197 didn't really "over achieve" with the solid axle as much as it was just a good example of what a well designed and executed solid axle is capable of. it's basic geometry and physics at work.</p><p></p><p>"but what about bumps?" how bumpy are the roads that you carve up or the race tracks you drive on? not anywhere near as bumpy as internet conjecture says i bet...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ry_Trapp0, post: 14497224, member: 27761"] tires and suspension tuning(spring rate/shock tuning) makes a FAR bigger difference than switching from a solid axle to an IRS. everyone talks about how terrible solid axles are because a bump on one side of the axle affects the contact patch on the other side, but no one seems to "get" that the contact patch on an IRS is CONSTANTLY changing with body roll. once you dig into independent suspension design, you'll realize how it is far FAR more complex than "tires move independently = better grip", because every single aspect of the suspension geometry is a compromise in MANY aspects. there is no such thing as perfect independent suspension geometry because it is impossible to ever maintain 100% contact between the tire contact patch and the pavement. the angle of the tire is constantly changing because the suspension points are mounted to, and thus influenced by the chassis, while the tires of a solid axle move independently of the chassis(assuming zero bind in the solid axle's suspension - this isn't true for '79-'04 mustangs as the shitty design of the triangulated 4-link with bushings[instead of spherical joints] will bind up and cause the inside tire to lift after so many degrees of body roll. the S197 has an insignificant amount of bind though, being a 3-link + panhard) and thus maintain a nearly parallel contact patch to the road surface(with sidewall roll being the only significant influence to the contact patch at that point). so, you need to add static negative camber to an independent suspension to compensate for body roll changing the suspension geometry(0 degrees of static camber would lead to positive camber gain of the outside tire in a corner, causing a loss of grip as the inside of the outside tire lifts off the ground), which means that you're on the inside edges of the tires while going in a straight line, thus reducing forward traction. and, while you can add negative camber to flatten out the contact patch of the outside tire in a corner, the inside tire is FAR from parallel and is contributing very little to overall cornering grip. meanwhile, the inside tire on a solid axle maintains pretty much the same contact patch as the outside tire. while the additional grip of the inside tire may not add a whole lot to the overall cornering grip, every little bit counts. keep in mind that, theoretically, you can put down power sooner on corner exit with a solid axle since the inside tire is the most likely to spin and you have much more contact patch on the ground vs the independent suspension(that's dependent on a LOT of variables outside of suspension geometry though). and, finally, the constant camber change of an independent suspension hurts breaking too as, again, you're not maintaining a parallel contact patch. but we're morso commenting on rear suspension design than front, so it doesn't have a very significant impact(though worth noting none the less). all in all, the solid axle is SEVERELY underrated in cornering ability/handling prowess because the vast majority of people that comment on it have a very limited, rudimentary understanding of the VAST amount of variables and design compromises that play into cornering grip. the S197 didn't really "over achieve" with the solid axle as much as it was just a good example of what a well designed and executed solid axle is capable of. it's basic geometry and physics at work. "but what about bumps?" how bumpy are the roads that you carve up or the race tracks you drive on? not anywhere near as bumpy as internet conjecture says i bet... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Anybody going to get a "Scat-Pack" R\T Challenger?
Top