iwbunting
|
| posted on 22/2/05 at 09:07 PM |
|
|
Tiger avon/locost bump steer
Has anyone built (or bought) an avon chassis to the book and can tell if the front angled anti-bump steer section actually works or has anyone
incorporated it into a locost book chassis ???
Just wondering if it actually works,cant seem to find much info on this subject (bump steer,or lack of it)
|
|
|
|
|
WIMMERA
|
| posted on 23/2/05 at 10:41 AM |
|
|
I think the angled front on the Tiger is to build in castor, the wishbones only have a couple of mm offset
Wimmera
|
|
|
stressy
|
| posted on 23/2/05 at 11:39 AM |
|
|
I havent seen the book or the car but are you maybe talking about anti-dive geometry?
WHO DARES SPINS
|
|
|
Bob C
|
| posted on 23/2/05 at 12:12 PM |
|
|
anti-dive - 'fraid not it's "EXTRA dive" geometry!!!
Bob
|
|
|
dozracing
|
| posted on 23/2/05 at 12:13 PM |
|
|
You are correct it is there for anti-dive, but, would ask the question what on earth do they think you want that for.
If you want braking performance, you don't want anti-dive. On a car such as a 7 with low CofG with a reasonable ride height dive is not a
problem. You use anti-dive on low ride height heavily aero dependent race cars, to stop the ground effect changes dramatically effecting the feel of
the car on turn in.
Darren
|
PLEASE NOTE: This user is a trader who has not signed up for the LocostBuilders registration scheme. If this post is advertising a commercial product or service, please report it by clicking here.
|
Mr G
|
| posted on 23/2/05 at 12:47 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dozracing
You use anti-dive on low ride height heavily aero dependent race cars, to stop the ground effect changes dramatically effecting the feel of the car
on turn in.
Darren
Such as the mk1 & 2 Ford Escort 
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 23/2/05 at 02:10 PM |
|
|
I looked at pictures of the Avon front suspension a couple of years back and remember thinking "what the **** is that about " -- I
actually had been thinking about buying an Avon in the pre-Tiger days and must say I am glad I didn't .
From what I saw the Avon steering geometry is distinctly odd. In the picture I saw looking down to give a plan view the rack was mounted at least
1" perhaps 2" in front of the outer track rod ends ie the track rods were swept back like the wings on a 60s fighter jet. This would give
a lot of of extra toe-in on turns -- lots and lots of anti-ackerman.
|
|
|
iwbunting
|
| posted on 23/2/05 at 08:40 PM |
|
|
Anti-dive
The reason i asked the question (that has been answered by dozracing and brit trident) is that after reading some of the Suspension geometry books
available... i couldnt understand why it was there either.
As i said,question answered.
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 23/2/05 at 09:07 PM |
|
|
Actually a tiny ammount of proper anti-dive is fine but go too far and as already pointed out the front suspension wiil "patter" under
braking if it encounters the slightest ripple. First car I drove with it was the original 1969 XJ6, I did try some on the front suspension my Davrian
Imp saloon by packing down the front swing arm pivot by about 1/2" seemed OK but as the car was written off (not by me :-)) early that season
I was 100% never sure Trouble nobody really knows how much is too much I know anti-squat on the rear is a bit more forgiving.
[Edited on 23/2/05 by britishtrident]
|
|
|
WIMMERA
|
| posted on 24/2/05 at 12:16 AM |
|
|
Doesn't look like anti dive to me, in side view the w/bone brackets centrelines don't converge they slope from front to back at 5 degrees
and are parallel or very close to it and are heading away from the CofG not towards it .
Wimmera
|
|
|
Northy
|
| posted on 26/2/05 at 10:12 PM |
|
|
What is it then?
Graham
Website under construction. Help greatfully received as I don't really know what I'm doing! 
"If a man says something in the woods and there are no women there, is he still wrong?"
Built 2L 8 Valve Vx Powered Avon
|
|
|
WIMMERA
|
| posted on 27/2/05 at 02:38 AM |
|
|
Castor
Wimmera
|
|
|
iwbunting
|
| posted on 28/2/05 at 08:48 PM |
|
|
Definately anti-dive.Given up on using the idea though.
|
|
|
Bob C
|
| posted on 28/2/05 at 09:58 PM |
|
|
if it's anti-dive... it's done completely wrong to give "extra-dive" like I said before.
Actually I think it's "where they could stick the brackets" geometry ;^)
cheers
Bob
PS I've just looked at the drawings in the book - never seen a real one
|
|
|
