Board logo

Spring rates
brynhamlet - 20/9/08 at 02:00 AM

I apologies for asking something that has no doubt been asked before, but it’s keeping me awake

If I drop the bottom collar on the rear shockers, will it help to stop my car acting like a kangaroo on bumpy roads, or will I have to put softer springs in.

Locost chassis, live rear axle, 1600OHV engine.

Front is fine, I’ve fiddled with the shock rates at rear, but it improves it, but not cures it. Fine on smoother roads.

I haven’t got a clue as to the existing spring rates, so can somebody suggest a starting point for new springs.

Car is normally driven solo and I’m about 13 stone in real money

Paul TigerB6 - 20/9/08 at 02:11 AM

dropping the bottom collars will lower the ride height as well as slightly soften the rear end. Better bet might be to start off by backing off the damper settings by turning them fully anti-clockwise.

Try a search for ride height for the Indy and go from there. It might be worth pulling the shocks off too - just incase someone has fitted a set of front springs to the rear. I found a set of springs had the rating written on them which was hidden by the spring seat

mr henderson - 20/9/08 at 09:39 AM

Live axle 7's are very skittish due to the comparatively dire unsprung/sprung weight ratio.

There's a lot of useful info on this recent thread
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=96908

You will probably improve matters by fitting softer springs but this will be difficult to do unless you take the existing springs off and measure the spring rate and the unfitted length.

John

procomp - 20/9/08 at 02:06 PM

Hi.

Quote "Live axle 7's are very skittish due to the comparatively dire unsprung/sprung weight ratio. " Is a complete load of Bo###ks.

Basically for road use you will be wanting a rate of 140 - 160. This depend to some extent whether you are mainly using the car with driver only or usually with two up. Most go with 150 as a compromise which means you may need to take it a bit easier when encountering long fast dipping roads when two up. The race cars generally run as low as 100 - 140.

For length just measure you open length of the damper. jack the car up on the chassis at the back and then measure the bolt centers of the rear dampers. Then you can work out what length spring will be needed. If it's a 13" open you will kneed a 9" spring. If it's a 12" open you will need an 8" spring.

HTH cheers Matt

mr henderson - 20/9/08 at 04:00 PM

quote:
Originally posted by procomp
Hi.

Quote "Live axle 7's are very skittish due to the comparatively dire unsprung/sprung weight ratio. " Is a complete load of Bo###ks.



Oh no it isn't

"The unsprung weight of a wheel controls a trade-off between a wheel's bump-following ability and its vibration isolation. Bumps and surface imperfections in the road cause tire compression--which induces a force on the unsprung weight. In time, the unsprung weight then responds to this force with movement of its own. The amount of movement is inversely proportional to the weight - a lighter wheel which readily moves in response to road bumps will have more grip when tracking over an imperfect road. For this reason, lighter wheels are often sought for high-performance applications. In contrast, a heavier wheel which moves less will not absorb as much vibration; the irregularities of the road surface will transfer to the cabin through the geometry of the suspension and hence ride quality is deteriorated."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsprung_weight

Let me know if there is anything else I can help with

John

procomp - 20/9/08 at 05:09 PM

Hi.

Mr henderson it is all very well quoting unsprung weight from Wikipedia. But you stated that seven type cars with a live axle are very skittish. Which is simply not true. And what your second statement says has nothing to back up your first statement.

Any car with springs or dampers that are not matched to the aplication can make a car skittish. But to simply state that a seven with a live axle is very skittish. Simply shows you have little idea of what you are talking about when it comes to driving or using or designing cars of this type in real life situations.

And as for this comment " Let me know if there is anything else I can help with"
Well to be honest a lot of your posts show that you do not have much knowledge about these types of car at all really. So i certainly do not think there is anything you can help me with. Except maybe spelling and grammar lessons.

Cheers Matt

Syd Bridge - 20/9/08 at 05:09 PM

A man just had to to know that the quote above came from Wikipedia.

Who wrote that total load of bollocks?

Moreso, what moron believed it?

There is no mention of the effect of shock absorbers(dampers), spring rate effect, and at what percentage of the total axle weight. that that statement may even remotely come close to reality.

Mr.Henderson, you've told us a couple of times that you are not too good at maths and physics, so please try and do some research beyond that cursed 'Wikipedia' before making such definitive statements.


Cheers,
Syd.

Paul TigerB6 - 20/9/08 at 05:11 PM

Anyone want to join in on a group buy of popcorn???

mad-butcher - 20/9/08 at 05:17 PM

you could spray the entire car durring this one

Syd Bridge - 20/9/08 at 05:31 PM



Someone's gotta provide the entertainment and liven things up.

Gee, I betta chek that my speeling is korekt, and the punchooayshun is rite az well.

Cheers,
Syd.

mr henderson - 20/9/08 at 05:32 PM

I think I will drop out of this one at this stage, now that Matt and Syd have decided to gang up. I have a history of arguments with both of these gentlemen, and it nothing ever gets decided.

I do need to correct one thing, though, and that is that although my maths isn't too good (although I could probably meet the average here), my grasp of physics is excellent.

So, if no-one else has anything to say then I wil say no more either. Readers can make their own minds up who to believe, or who they agree with

John

[Edited on 20/9/08 by mr henderson]

irvined - 20/9/08 at 05:39 PM

quote:
Originally posted by brynhamlet
I apologies for asking something that has no doubt been asked before, but it’s keeping me awake

If I drop the bottom collar on the rear shockers, will it help to stop my car acting like a kangaroo on bumpy roads, or will I have to put softer springs in.



Before you fork out for new springs - check that your suspension travel is allowing for the amount of movement its trying to make.

I had to raise the back of my car an inch at SVA time to get the lights high enough. On the way back the suspension was reaching the end of its travel and the car was fine on the smooth bits, but when hitting a bump in the bend, the car would jump a foot or so in whatever direction.

I'm a fat barsteward and my car is comparibly heavy (Lots of steel) so I'm running 160's on the rear - i'd probably go for softer ones next time.

Custardtart - 24/9/08 at 07:04 AM

quote:
Originally posted by brynhamlet

If I drop the bottom collar on the rear shockers, will it help to stop my car acting like a kangaroo on bumpy roads, or will I have to put softer springs in.



Are you sure the rear shocks are ok, kangarooing is often used to describe the effect of knackered shocks?

The advice on spring rates sounds good to me provided the shocks are all working ok.

I do have to comment on the "skittish" quote though, if you believe this I strongly suggest you get your car set up by an expert or take some driver training. Compared to a normal car the handling limits arrive with less warning but in real terms they can be made to "handle" brilliantly and predictably and not at all "skittish".

mr henderson - 24/9/08 at 08:39 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge
A man just had to to know that the quote above came from Wikipedia.

Who wrote that total load of bollocks?

Moreso, what moron believed it?

There is no mention of the effect of shock absorbers(dampers), spring rate effect, and at what percentage of the total axle weight. that that statement may even remotely come close to reality.

Mr.Henderson, you've told us a couple of times that you are not too good at maths and physics, so please try and do some research beyond that cursed 'Wikipedia' before making such definitive statements.


Cheers,
Syd.


Again, you nasty little piece of sh!t. Of course there is no mention of shock absorbers in that perfectly correct wikipedia article.

Why not, because it's an article about unsprung weight! Are you so intent on taking every opportunity to attack me that you let that little gem of obvious truth slip pasts you! Why would there be any meniton of shock absorbers in a piece about unsprung weight?

If you want to learn about shock absorbers then look at the article on shock absorbers!.

You would be better off looking at the article on etiquette though, not that you would understand any of it.

Next time you want to call somebody a moron, I suggest you find an easier target.

Cheers
John

mr henderson - 24/9/08 at 08:46 PM

My apologies to anybody else having to read my riposte to Hissing Syd, but I'm not going to allow him to drive me off this forum in the way he did to a well respected memebr previously.

He started with the personal attacks and each time he does it I will reply in a similar vein.

I would be perfectly happy to discuss the actual subject matter of the thread with him but I will not allow his personal remarks against me to go unanswered

John

Syd Bridge - 24/9/08 at 08:55 PM

Oh dear dear dear..we're getting all hot and bothered aren't we.

And again, if you did your research properly, you'll find it was actually a Scotsman now residing in Cypress who did the damaging deed, and not me!

All I ask to see on here is proper and infomed, sensible engineering. When I see something to the contrary, I will continue to raise its unacceptibility to me, and other informed engineers.

Cheers,
Syd.

Daddylonglegs - 24/9/08 at 09:05 PM

Being fairly new to the site (as a regular user anyway), does this happen a lot?



[Edited on 24/9/08 by Daddylonglegs]

mr henderson - 25/9/08 at 06:49 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Daddylonglegs
Being fairly new to the site (as a regular user anyway), does this happen a lot?



[Edited on 24/9/08 by Daddylonglegs]


No, it doesn't, and it won 't happen again as long as he refrains from making personal remarks about me, and keeps to the topic under discussion.

You will note that, even though he has replied to my last post, he again hasn't added anything to the actual topic.

So, repetition for emphasis. If he stops making personal remarks, direct or implied, about me then Iwill say no more about him

John

mr henderson - 25/9/08 at 06:59 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge


All I ask to see on here is proper and infomed, sensible engineering. When I see something to the contrary, I will continue to raise its unacceptibility to me, and other informed engineers.



Well, let's hear what you consider to be unacceptable in the article that I linked to, and better still, let's here your alternative version (I'll bet we don't).

You see, it's all very well saying this is rubbish and that is rubbish, but it's about time you gave us your 'informed engineer's' version.

Come on then, Syd. A challenge. Tells us all what is wrong with that article on unsprung weight. Please restrict yourself, as the writer of the article had to do, to the topic of unsprung weight.

I'm waiting to hear your response.

Please note the lack of personal remarks in this post

John

[Edited on 25/9/08 by mr henderson]

procomp - 25/9/08 at 07:22 AM

Hi.

To be fair this sort of thing dose not happen very often. But of late there has been a lot of BS advice offered for no good reason.
If people start offering advice they should have at least some understanding of the topic in discussion . Rather than doing a bit of research on Wikipedia and making statements that simply are not true.
The novice builder has enough trouble trying to get his head around many problems whilst learning about building a car. It is simply made even harder when people start offering uninformed advice.

The above and other similar situations appear to be occurring when people who do not seem to be able to accept they are wrong about the statement they wrote. It is a great shame realy as it would seem that certain people would rather let the novice builder who is asking for advice receive uninformed advice rather than advice from people who have at least got something positive to offer to the discussion or from people who have vast experience in the area that is being discussed.

Cheers Matt

mr henderson - 25/9/08 at 07:43 AM

quote:
Originally posted by procomp
Hi.

To be fair this sort of thing dose not happen very often. But of late there has been a lot of BS advice offered for no good reason.



But you personally are not able to say what is wrong with it, apparently.

quote:
Originally posted by procomp

If people start offering advice they should have at least some understanding of the topic in discussion . Rather than doing a bit of research on Wikipedia and making statements that simply are not true.



But what in the statement that is untrue? If you are referring to my saying that the live axle cars are 'skittish', well, 'skittish' is a matter of opinion. Your opinion is obviously different to mine. I note that your main work is in the area of the racing versions of these cars. AFAIK the cars you work with are not allowed independent rears?

If what I wrote is, to use your word, 'bollocks', I wonder why so many people that are free of restrictive race regulations, choose not to use live axles? Any ideas about that? Could it be anything to do with the unsprung weight issue?

quote:
Originally posted by procomp
The novice builder has enough trouble trying to get his head around many problems whilst learning about building a car. It is simply made even harder when people start offering uninformed advice.

The above and other similar situations appear to be occurring when people who do not seem to be able to accept they are wrong about the statement they wrote. It is a great shame realy as it would seem that certain people would rather let the novice builder who is asking for advice receive uninformed advice rather than advice from people who have at least got something positive to offer to the discussion or from people who have vast experience in the area that is being discussed.


My advice is not uninformed at all, it is in fact very informed. I'm sorry that you don't think so but don't you think it would be better if, instead of simply saying that I am talkng 'bollocks' that you actually said what it wrong with it?

As for me doing research on Wikipedia? ROFL!. I knew all about unsprung weight issues before Wikipedia and the internet itself were even thought of. I knew about it when I was building and driving my live axle Dutton probably before you were born. I linked to the article so you could read about unsprung weight from an independent and easily accessible source.

It remains a fact that the ratio of unsprung to sprung weight in any light car with a live axle is going to be undesirable, and you saying that that is 'bollocks' isn't going to change that, and isn't going to change any of the other laws of physics either.

Perhaps if you hadn't started your first post on this thread in the way you did, we could have discussed this in a much calmer and more productive way.

I look forward to your response, and trust that it will contain something more substantial than just saying that I am wrong, some actual proof (though how you are going to disprove a basic law of physics I don't know).

Perhaps you would also bear in mind that many Locosts are driven on mostly public roads, which, as we all know, are not as smooth as your average race track.

John

[Edited on 25/9/08 by mr henderson]

procomp - 25/9/08 at 08:31 AM

Hi.

If it's proof you need that a seven type car fitted with a live axle is not VERY SKITTISH. Then maybe you are the one wanting to do the research. You could try by asking all those drivers who actually drive them on the road for starters. As i said earlier any car can be skittish if it is fitted with dampers of the wrong valving or has springs not suited to the aplication.
The OP asked for a starting point for springs for road use. I gave him advice based on what myself and many many people have found to be rates that offer a comfortable ride on the road and what people have found works on the race track.

Now i am sorry but your statement. Quote " Live axle 7's are very skittish due to the comparatively dire unsprung/sprung weight ratio. " Is uninformed and completely untrue. IE Bo###ks. Are you there for saying that if i had not used the expression "Bo###ks" you would retract your untrue statement. Or are you going to offer proof that your statement is correct. Or are you now going to give us your definition of what very skittish means to yourself.

Now as for the unsprung weight being a problem on a live axle car. I have already said that if dampers and springs are used that have been selected to suit the aplication then the unsprung weight issue is not such a problem.
As for skittish well the thing with the live axle is that it maintains the tyres footprint in a location that it was designed to be in. This actually offers a stable footprint on the ground. It is however a completely different situation with just about all of the IRS designs that are around at the moment with these type of cars. Most have very poor geometry control with toe and camber. It is actually these poor designs that actually have a tendency to have a skittish behaviour. That is not to say that an irs can not be done properly just that most of the kit manufacturers have not bothered to take the time to sort one properly.

And the reason most people buy/build kits with irs is purely that there are not many manufacturers offering kits with live axle these days. Due to the fact that live axle units are not easy to find where as diff units are plenty full.

Cheers Matt


PS. I am now off to Snetterton for a weekends racing so will not reply until Monday. Although i would well imagine Fozzie will have also locked this post also.

mr henderson - 25/9/08 at 08:49 AM

quote:
Originally posted by procomp
Hi.

If it's proof you need that a seven type car fitted with a live axle is not VERY SKITTISH. Then maybe you are the one wanting to do the research. You could try by asking all those drivers who actually drive them on the road for starters.


Well, to be fair, I did say that the 'skittish' comment was an opinion. You seem to be treating it as some sort of quantifiable fact that can be proved or disproved. It isn't, it's just an opinion, as indeed most adjectives that end in 'ish' are!

quote:
Originally posted by procomp


As i said earlier any car can be skittish if it is fitted with dampers of the wrong valving or has springs not suited to the aplication.
The OP asked for a starting point for springs for road use. I gave him advice based on what myself and many many people have found to be rates that offer a comfortable ride on the road and what people have found works on the race track.



Yes indeed you did, I acknowledge that. Much better than Syd's non-contribution.

quote:
Originally posted by procomp
Now i am sorry but your statement. Quote " Live axle 7's are very skittish due to the comparatively dire unsprung/sprung weight ratio. " Is uninformed and completely untrue. IE Bo###ks. Are you there for saying that if i had not used the expression "Bo###ks" you would retract your untrue statement. Or are you going to offer proof that your statement is correct. Or are you now going to give us your definition of what very skittish means to yourself.



Yes indeed I will, further down. I remind you, though, that skittishis an opinion, not an observable fact that can be proved or disproved.

quote:
Originally posted by procomp

Now as for the unsprung weight being a problem on a live axle car. I have already said that if dampers and springs are used that have been selected to suit the aplication then the unsprung weight issue is not such a problem.
As for skittish well the thing with the live axle is that it maintains the tyres footprint in a location that it was designed to be in. This actually offers a stable footprint on the ground. It is however a completely different situation with just about all of the IRS designs that are around at the moment with these type of cars. Most have very poor geometry control with toe and camber. It is actually these poor designs that actually have a tendency to have a skittish behaviour. That is not to say that an irs can not be done properly just that most of the kit manufacturers have not bothered to take the time to sort one properly.



That's basically just contradiction, and the bit at the end about 'most kit manufacturers' is straying into territory that you and I have had discussions about in the past.

quote:
Originally posted by procomp

And the reason most people buy/build kits with irs is purely that there are not many manufacturers offering kits with live axle these days. Due to the fact that live axle units are not easy to find where as diff units are plenty full.



Basically a matter of opinion there, I reckon I could buy a live axle without too much trouble, and it would certainly be easier to design/build a chassis using one than it would an IRS (the basic components of which are not exactly plentiful either)


quote:
Originally posted by procomp
Cheers Matt


PS. I am now off to Snetterton for a weekends racing so will not reply until Monday. Although i would well imagine Fozzie will have also locked this post also.


I trust your team/customers will be sucessful and that the weather will be good.

I don't see any reason why Fozzie would want to lock this post as long as it continues in this calm and non-personal manner, and as long as the 'bollocks' type remarks are discontinued.

John

[Edited on 25/9/08 by mr henderson]

mr henderson - 25/9/08 at 09:37 AM

I’ve been taken up on my ‘very skittish’ remark earlier in this thread.

As I said before, ‘skittish’ is an opinion. It is not an observable fact. To be capable of being proved or disproved it would need to be tightly defined with measurable parameters, and ‘ish’ at the end of an adjective is the very essence of vagueness.

This is a little bit from the wikipedia article, which puts it much better than I can (I added the bit in brackets for clarity) - The unsprung weight of a wheel (and anything rigidly attached to it such as an axle) controls a trade-off between a wheel's bump-following ability and its vibration isolation. Bumps and surface imperfections in the road cause tire compression--which induces a force on the unsprung weight. In time, the unsprung weight then responds to this force with movement of its own. The amount of movement is inversely proportional to the weight - a lighter wheel which readily moves in response to road bumps will have more grip when tracking over an imperfect road.
.

It may be that some of the respondents are thinking too much about smooth racetracks and not enough about average country road surfaces. They may also be thinking about race situations where corners are taken at the maximum speed at which the vehicle can stay on the track, whereas on public roads we have to drive at speeds which allow for an unseen obstruction around a curve, in other words, quite a bit slower! A car which has better grip on an imperfect road will be, IMHO, less ‘skittish’ especially when negotiating curves.

John

Syd Bridge - 25/9/08 at 09:38 AM

quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
I don't see any reason why Fozzie would want to lock this post as long as it continues in this calm and non-personal manner, and as long as the 'bollocks' type remarks are discontinued.

John

[Edited on 25/9/08 by mr henderson]


OK, Lets substitute 'bollocks' with 'uninformed anecdotal evidence'. Doesn't change the content or context much though. And the worst 4 letter word I use is 'work'.

And I'll keep pointing out these instances of 'uninformed anecdotal evidence'.

As for long diatribes to substantiate my statements, they just won't happen. I've made this clear many times previously. As this all overlaps with my work, I am not about to give away openly on the i'net, what I get paid for, regardless of how inconsequential or relevant it may be.

If anyone happens to be in the same place as me and any other racers when these things are being discussed, then they will most certainly hear what I will not put in writing, as well as the inputs of the others present.

Just as a forum member did at Silverstone. I think he went away that day, much the better off for the experience and discussions on racecar setup and design he listened in on. A lot of it was not just Locost specific, either. And a thoroughly nice fella he is too. Even if he does speak with his 'ay oop' northern accent!

Cheers,
Syd.



]

[Edited on 25/9/08 by Syd Bridge]

Paul TigerB6 - 25/9/08 at 09:44 AM

^^^ Well thats helpful then!! Its been said before that "i've got a secret but am not going to tell anyone"!!! Maybe the best option if you arent prepared to help anyone with anything to do with suspension theory that you dont tell people that they are wrong without pointing out why.

mr henderson - 25/9/08 at 10:04 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge


As for long diatribes to substantiate my statements, they just won't happen. I've made this clear many times previously. As this all overlaps with my work, I am not about to give away openly on the i'net, what I get paid for, regardless of how inconsequential or relevant it may be.



Well, no surprises there, then!

I can well understand the secrecy bit, I am working on a project of my own which I would not dream of discussing on the internet.

What I don't understand is why you need to keep appearing on this forum saying that other people are wrong?

For instance, this thread-
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=91832&page=2

Matt at Procomp is frequently to be found on the other side of the fence from me, but at least he does provide useful and usable information for everybody to use.

I like to think that I help a little bit as well, and I don't think you will find that I have ever said that anyone else was talkng rubbish, I just put forward my own ideas and experience for people to use, consider, argue with, ignore as they please.

Any more anecdotes about the people you've 'helped privately' that you would like to share?


John

[Edited on 25/9/08 by mr henderson]

Syd Bridge - 25/9/08 at 10:06 AM

quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
The unsprung weight of a wheel (and anything rigidly attached to it such as an axle) controls a trade-off between a wheel's bump-following ability and its vibration isolation. Bumps and surface imperfections in the road cause tire compression--which induces a force on the unsprung weight. In time, the unsprung weight then responds to this force with movement of its own. The amount of movement is inversely proportional to the weight -

John


Ok you wanted some extra on why I consider the above to be 'uninformed anecdotal evidence'. Here goes, I'll just comment on that little bit above...

The 'vibration isolation' bit has me puzzled. Is it referring to it's oscillation frequency, or dealing with small road surface variations? Both are very different, and dealt with differently.

Then there is the compresson in the tyre...This depends on a number of factors. Tyre pressure for one, then aspect ratio, sidewall stiffness, total corner weight,....it goes on. Just altering pressure changes things immensely.

The tyre compression then reacts against the unsprung weight...true, but not before the system as a whole has seen its force. This statement takes no account of spring stiffnesses, which are vital to the oscillation frequencies of the system, of which the tyre is also seen as a part of the springing system. This then affects the ability of the system to transmit the impulse loads experienced by the tyre.

'a lighter wheel which readily moves in response to road bumps will have more grip when tracking over an imperfect road.' Not so on every occasion. Again, it depends on what forces the wheel is seeing, and the frequencies of the springing system as a whole, and the forces acting. A light wheel with a light load, will be subject to much higher displacements than a heavy item on a lot of occasions. But this all depends on tyres and aspect ratios, and sidewall stiffnesses, and again, pressures, which play a very large part.

Then you have to throw dampers and their valving ratios in, which change all of the above parameters again, some in a very marked and major way.

You see, some of my work is with vehicles that run on non sealed surfaces, and dealing with all of the above can be a nightmare, at times. Then there are the gents who drive them.......

Cheers,
Syd.

mr henderson - 25/9/08 at 10:20 AM

Syd, you are just picking on various parts of an article (not a thesis, or a book, but a comparatively short encyclopedia article) and saying that it doesn't deal with other relevant (to suspension systems in general) factors.

What you haven't shown is that the article is actually wrong in any respect. And considering what you said about it originally........

I did say earlier that there was a separate article about shock absorbers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_absorber

John

Syd Bridge - 25/9/08 at 03:16 PM

If that much of the article is wrong, then the sweeping statement that 7 type cars with live axles being skittish, follows suit.

You cannot separate the different bits, as they all work together and effect each other.

I can be given two identical live axle cars, and set one up to be very loose, oversteer, be 'skittish', and the other to push, or understeer, profoundly. Two complete opposites on identical cars. It's just a matter of knowing what to do to achieve each setup. And there I end.

Cheers,
Syd.

mr henderson - 25/9/08 at 04:06 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge
If that much of the article is wrong, then the sweeping statement that 7 type cars with live axles being skittish, follows suit.

You cannot separate the different bits, as they all work together and effect each other.

I can be given two identical live axle cars, and set one up to be very loose, oversteer, be 'skittish', and the other to push, or understeer, profoundly. Two complete opposites on identical cars. It's just a matter of knowing what to do to achieve each setup. And there I end.

Cheers,
Syd.


So you couldn't find anything wrong with that article then. That's good, just wanted to get that cleared up.

I'm happy to finish this thread up now too.

John

Syd Bridge - 25/9/08 at 09:04 PM

Now, Fozzie dear has given me a ticking off for inferring someone was a moron, and I must use polite words and keep my aussie bush sense of humour out of things.......I'll do my best.

Mr.Henderson, you are either being deliberately difficult, or you are having difficulty understanding what I've written.

Either way, you quite obviously have some sort of problem.

To come to the conclusion you have, after what I wrote showing that several points in that article are inaccurate, and thereby the sweeping statements are also inaccurate, is beyond my comprehension.

If you must be right all the time, and never wrong, then you must be right this time also.

Anyone with half an ounce of knowledge of car setup practice will readily understand what I wrote previously.

If I say any more I'll get another beating by Foz, with a stick!

Lets just leave things as they are. I'll let you win this one, in your own mind at least.

Cheers,
Syd.



[Edited on 26/9/08 by Syd Bridge]

mr henderson - 26/9/08 at 06:58 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge


Lets just leave things as they are. I'll let you win this one, in your own mind at least.

Cheers,
Syd.

[Edited on 25/9/08 by Syd Bridge]


I hadn't realised that we were in a competition here.

Never-the-less, and at the risk of labouring the point, I have challenged you to show me what is actually wrong in that article on unsprung weight, the article that your referred to earlier as, and I quote, "Who wrote that total load of bollocks?"

Anyway, I challenged you to show me what is wrong with it and you have wriggled like a worm on a hook. The best you have come up with so far is to say that it missed out certain elements that you think should have been included. A far cry from 'total load of bollocks, isn't it?

But that is typical of you. Rubbish everything that anyone else has to say anout suspension, but you have nothing to say except to plead secrecy when asked for your version of the truth.

John

Syd Bridge - 26/9/08 at 08:59 AM

See my last post above. ^No more to add.

Cheers,
Syd.

mr henderson - 26/9/08 at 12:23 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge
See my last post above. ^No more to add.

Cheers,
Syd.


That was already obvious. Still, the main thing here is that people looking at the article in question
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsprung_mass
can rely on the information contained not being a "total load of bollocks" at all.

John

MakeEverything - 13/10/08 at 02:39 AM

Yaaawn......

Just meet up in an Asda carpark somewhere and have it out.

mr henderson - 13/10/08 at 06:52 AM

quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Yaaawn......

Just meet up in an Asda carpark somewhere and have it out.



What a particularly pointless contribution!

As far as everybody else is concerned this thread is dead and buried, but for some reason you have to dig it up and make some completely useless addition to it! If you've nothing useful to say, then perhaps you should say...........

John

[Edited on 13/10/08 by mr henderson]

Marcus - 13/10/08 at 11:53 AM

I really don't want to resurrect a dead post, but in my limited experience (only built 2 book Locosts), the first car was (still is) very skittish. We used original book dimensions with short(11" ) trailing arms and 180lb springs. The second we made 11 1/2" trailing arms and used 150lb springs. The difference was surprising! Everyone who has driven or been a passenger in the second car has commented how well planted it is despite its 15" wheels and 50 profile tyres. I've driven far more unstable IRS cars which no amount of tweaking could improve and I think my live car is as close to optimum as I can make it. I'm not picking sides here, but just a couple of real world observations to try and help the OP.

[Edited on 13/10/08 by Marcus]