View Single Post
Old 05-10-2020, 10:40 AM   #9 (permalink)
cv129
A True Z Fanatic
 
cv129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 3,236
Drives: 09 Nismo, 16 Nismo
Rep Power: 163995
cv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond reputecv129 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OptionZero View Post
I don’t think this is related to height - in those two linked threads, there was a lot of talk about curing oversteer in those race cars. I noticed those cars had TRUE TYPE coilovers running heavy springs in rear...


Since those threads we discussed how true type required a different spring rate from divorced type. I wonder if those drivers would have solved their issues by going softer in rear accordingly
It’s specifically BG’s response. It’s about the part where he discussed lowering CG via smaller diameter wheel + tire vs lowering via spring, leading to benefits on keeping a longer suspension stroke (also see how second post mentions lowering too much via spring messes up the roll center), and how he managed the gain in rear toe-OUT under braking (makes the rear end wander) during braking. Add what Rusty said, sort of finicky nature of camber change.

It’s not so much directly related. Just somewhat related.
__________________
Setrab | RE-71 | SPL | JRZ | Nismo | ARK | Whiteline | RacingBrake | CJM Oil Pan | Ti shield

Last edited by cv129; 05-10-2020 at 10:43 AM.
cv129 is online now   Reply With Quote