j-c-c-62
Well-Known Member
Hold that thought, anybody else?I always thought was for reducing body lean in turns, and aid in traction, no?
Hold that thought, anybody else?I always thought was for reducing body lean in turns, and aid in traction, no?
For sure, this winter is making me crazy....trying to improve the car in my mind.I'm not the only one with anaylisis paralysis
I read this IMO useful analogy years ago on camber. Imagine taking a pencil with an eraser and placing the eraser on a piece of glass at an angle. Now drag the pencil in the direction of the lean.The very first thing I'd look at is alignment. These cars came with nearly no front negative camber (or positive camber), modern radial performance tires do not work well set up this way. Giving the car even 1-1.5 degrees negative camber can greatly increase front grip. This is what you really want. As J-C-C was trying to coyly allude to, a sway bar transfers load and reduces grip, which is why they induce more oversteer when put on the rear of a car that didn't have one. You always want to increase grip where you can, rather than reduce it.
If you want performance handling, you need a performance oriented alignment.
If body roll is excessive, the reduction in that by way of anti-sway bars is a streetable way to get there. Reduction in traction? You are confused. If a car responds better and is more controllable by using anti-sway bars, who is meticulous enough to dwell on reduced traction ?The very first thing I'd look at is alignment. These cars came with nearly no front negative camber (or positive camber), modern radial performance tires do not work well set up this way. Giving the car even 1-1.5 degrees negative camber can greatly increase front grip. This is what you really want. As J-C-C was trying to coyly allude to, a sway bar transfers load and reduces grip, which is why they induce more oversteer when put on the rear of a car that didn't have one. You always want to increase grip where you can, rather than reduce it.
If you want performance handling, you need a performance oriented alignment.
Alignment and pos cam is no problem. I have the Hotchkis upper arms and got it aligned at a really good shop.The very first thing I'd look at is alignment. These cars came with nearly no front negative camber (or positive camber), modern radial performance tires do not work well set up this way. Giving the car even 1-1.5 degrees negative camber can greatly increase front grip. This is what you really want. As J-C-C was trying to coyly allude to, a sway bar transfers load and reduces grip, which is why they induce more oversteer when put on the rear of a car that didn't have one. You always want to increase grip where you can, rather than reduce it.
If you want performance handling, you need a performance oriented alignment.
If body roll is excessive, the reduction in that by way of anti-sway bars is a streetable way to get there. Reduction in traction? You are confused. If a car responds better and is more controllable by using anti-sway bars, who is meticulous enough to dwell on reduced traction ? Me, but I am only speaking for myself. But regardless, this here is some informed progress on the topic.
Yeah, it does result in a transfer of energy from one side to the other which can keep the wheel on the rear axle from drooping if the other side is in compression as what happens with body roll. So what? (the drooping noted is countered by lifting that wheel, reducing that wheels grip btw)The gain in driver control and confidence is the goal, why quibble with useless side effects that don't matter. Then why don't we see 2"+ sway bars, and reduce all roll, because loss of traction decreases ultimate driver control, at least for me it does. All to mean, sway bars are partly a driver confidence builder, not a grip/traction improver, actually the opposite, and everyone is best served when best informed.
Anyone who wants their car set up for maximum cornering ought to. Increasing traction at the end that needs it (the front in the case of understeer), is ALWAYS preferable to decreasing traction at the end that already has it. This is basic performance car setup.who is meticulous enough to dwell on reduced traction ?
What specs did they align it to though?Alignment and pos cam is no problem. I have the Hotchkis upper arms and got it aligned at a really good shop.
Dude, lighten up on the motivational claims you make about others.If you sticklers are so obsessed with the finer points, keep in mind that that stuff only applies to bucks UP competitive racing where dollars are won or lost on a few thousandths of a second.
99.9% of the enthusiasts drive these cars for fun and the ways that are often used serve that purpose. Your nit picking is pointless and stupid because it will never apply to the overwhelming majority of classic car owners. Nobody is driving a 68 Super Bee at 200 mph nor are they going to race at Laguna Seca. These are hobby cars. They want to have driver control and comfort. Anti-sway bars are the way to get there.
Your contributions have merit elsewhere, a dedicated racing forum maybe.
So, you're the FBBO content police now?Your contributions have merit elsewhere, a dedicated racing forum maybe.
Don't make me cry.Nobody but you two care about those opinions.
You're comparable to a Hugo Boss or Tommy Hilfiger designer giving fashion advice to Carpenters and Mechanics for clothes to wear at work.
Feel free to post what you want but nobody will follow it, nobody will find it relevant.
Ah, the arbiter of all that is relevant too... yay.Nobody but you two care about those opinions.
You're comparable to a Hugo Boss or Tommy Hilfiger designer giving fashion advice to Carpenters and Mechanics for clothes to wear at work.
Feel free to post what you want but nobody will follow it, nobody will find it relevant.
Trying to sell caviar where beef is what the market wants....BRILLIANT.