Lateral-g Forums - 1969 Torino

Lateral-g Forums (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/index.php)

- Project Updates (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - 1969 Torino (https://www.lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php?t=10645)

Quote:

Originally Posted by intocarss (Post 494289)

MAYBE EVEN BRING BACK THAT NORWOOD CREATURE TOO :rules: :relax:

Here's a concept that may be hard for some to comprehend........I've been driving ol' Norwood everyday since Wednesday of last week. :hello:

Back to Ferd's and KPI...........

http://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-G...-Gz4454q-L.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Sutton (Post 494318)

I understand. I am a visual learner as well. Especially for things as complex as women. :lol:

Here is a lil' sumthin' to tide everyone over for now.

.

Nothing better than a hot woman welding. Her roll center is.....umm, nevermind. :topic:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sieg (Post 494327)

Here's a concept that may be hard for some to comprehend........I've been driving ol' Norwood everyday since Wednesday of last week. :hello:

Back to Ferd's and KPI...........

The off idle stumble and mid transition lean spot don't bother you?:lol:

I wish those were my current problems.:bang:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron in SoCal (Post 494328)

Nothing better than a hot woman welding. Her roll center is.....umm, nevermind. :topic:

Just about perfect?:_paranoid

I'd guess that because I have a lot of experience with a little older model chassis with nearly identical specs, just a longer wheelbase.:D

:cheers:

Quote:

Originally Posted by FETorino (Post 494330)

The off idle stumble and mid transition lean spot don't bother you?:lol:

I wish those were my current problems.:bang:

Schmooth baby, schmooth.......

I am concerned about my front end geometry.......because of actual tire wear as opposed to hypothetical. :mock:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Sutton (Post 494318)

I understand. I am a visual learner as well. Especially for things as complex as women. :lol:

Here is a lil' sumthin' to tide everyone over for now.

.

Hmmm, that looks too hot, what's the amperage and wire feed set at? :sieg:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sieg (Post 494339)

Hmmm, that looks too hot, what's the amperage and wire feed set at? :sieg:

I dunno. She set the welder. :welder:

I was helping the photographer. :whistling:

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sieg (Post 494338)

Schmooth baby, schmooth.......

I am concerned about my front end geometry.......because of actual tire wear as opposed to hypothetical. :mock:

I'm surprised you've seen that much wear going back and fourth to PetCo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Sutton (Post 494342)

I dunno. She set the welder. :welder:

I was helping the photographer. :whistling:

.

Now I'm coonfused:hello: What welder? I don't see a welder.

In a similar vein to the TW / WB ratio question, at what point would having a wider front TW compared to the rear TW start to decrease handling performance? Or stated a different way, is there such thing as too much front TW compared to the rear?

I don't think that was answered already, but my brain is a little distracted by things other than FErds and suspension in this thread. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron Sutton (Post 494342)

I dunno. She set the welder. :welder: :whistling:

That confirms the heat setting. :unibrow:

Quote:

Originally Posted by FETorino (Post 494344)

Now I'm confused :hello: What welder? I don't see a welder.

Your problem is obviously too much stick-out. :welder:

Quote:

Originally Posted by FETorino (Post 494293)

g. Any parts of steering geometry: KPI, Caster, Caster Gain, Camber, Camber gain, Ackerman, toe, etc.
Since I believe I have a low amount of scrub in seeking a KPI/Castor split to gain grip on those tiny 285s I have up front is it more advantageous to simply gain castor by changing my UCA or would a spindle with a lower KPI angle be a better route. I realize the smaller angle of the spindle would create more scrub but since I have a high inside offset I would still be in what you consider the "low" range.

Tiny 285's :lol:

In my experience, keeping the KPI you have to keep the scrub radius lower is by far the smarter route. It's a little like widening the track width ... in that you're affecting the handling at the source, versus "trying to deal with it" afterwards with suspension tuning.

Same with scrub radius. If the car has a larger scrub radius, you will do a lot of tuning "trying to deal with it" afterwards with suspension changes. So no, I wouldn't change spindles, I would change or modify your UCA and/or LCA to achieve more caster.

Once I know the actual scrub radius ... and the "for sure" KPI of your spindle ... I can give you two caster targets. One that would "ok" for most road course corners ... and one that would turn on a dime regardless of corner radius.

Since we have been given 3 KPI different numbers on the C6 spindle ... :confused59: until we're "sure" of the KPI ... and scrub radius ... it's hard to say anything with certainty. I can teach you a "car guy" way of determining your scrub radius ... if you want to measure scrub radius yourself.

.