Just in case you thought that RR98ITR / Wai thread was about personal matters, you might like to direct your attention to this thread:

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=231870

and in particular my post near the bottom of page 4:

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=231870&page=4

Scott, who asks that you read the entire thread.....as many times as necessary...and post responses in THAT thread.


[Modified by RR98ITR, 8:57 PM 7/21/2002]


[Modified by RR98ITR, 9:39 PM 7/21/2002]

 

bump

 

What does this have to do with spring rates???

 

browse (very carefully there's alot of knowledge stored in that thread) what scott linked too... and continue the discussion here. Everyone ok with that?

 

Originally posted by RR98ITR
Maybe I phrased it wrong, but this is what I was getting at - that the rear roll stiffness can be increased more than the front even though the spring rate #'s may be the same or even less in the rear.
What I was asking is where the weight goes as the rear inside tire approaches lifting. Did some of that weight end up on the front outside tire? I realize that once the tire is off then there's no more weight to transfer.

Going Faster and How To Make Your Car Handle define oversteer as the rear tires having a higher slip angle than the front, and understeer as vice versa. I just assumed any discussion of understeer/oversteer must necessarily be about slip angles. (BTW, just to clarify, I asked whether it was a purpose, not the purpose; I realize there's more than one effect to increasing rear stiffness).
Thanks





[Modified by Steppin Razor, 9:01 PM 7/21/2002]

 

I don't understand why the original thread was locked. Seems to me like that discussion was going quite well, and would continue to do so if left alone...?

 

scott wanted to continue the discussion in a new thread? So here we are... unless you would like to continue in the other thread. Either way is fine by me, but we dont need two threads open on the same topic. Just let me know... Scott???

 

Your first paragraph is still not clear - suggesting you don't understand motion ratios. The shocks/springs are inboard of the wheel. Using the front as an example, for each inch that the shock is displaced the wheel is displaced 1.5 inches. Wheel rate is equal to Spring rate divided by the square of the motion ratio. For a G3 Integra with the same spring rates front and rear to have more rear roll stiffness than front it would need alot of rear bar and no front.

Where the weight coming off the inside rear goes depends on what the driver's doing. If they are turning in and trail braking some of it's going to the outside front. If the driver is still in the turn in zone and coming off the brakes some of that weight will want to return to the inside rear. I addressed this in the post - go back and read it harder.

Introduction of the idea of slip angles adds unnecessary complication to this discussion. From the drivers seat oversteer and understeer are pretty well understood around here. Yes, slip angles are the basis of what we're talking about. But they are not something you directly control in the physical sense - like a spring or bar you can change. If we have to make reference to them, I'll say this: our main goal with these cars is to setup our chassis to optimize the front slip angle, and sacrifice rear slip angle only then to acheive balance. See how that didn't add anything to the discussion?

Scott, who has read and heard the following words all too often: "yes, I understand that"....they frequently precede a comment that proves the opposite....I'm happy though when anybody refers to evidence that they are serious about learning and willing to read and crunch....and then drive and think.....repeat until broke....

 

The original thread is unlocked. I mis-read scott's intentions on continuing the thread here, so feel free to keep at this most informative discussion.