Ultimate Suspension Test for a Pro Touring Car
 

I've been thinking about this a little lately. What popular handling test equates to the best all around handling performance in our segment.

Skid Pad
Slalom
Max G
Run through the cones
Run around the road course

Or is it the best average of the cumulative of tests?

You stated handling test so I'm not sure where the skid pad fits into that equation.
As far as best overall handling test I would have to say maybe a tight road course.

slalom has always been a base test for handling. In that small test you can quickly identify weaknesses or strengths.

When Art Morrison first starting selling his Tri-Five chassis -- he pounded the numbers he got against other well known "performance cars":

He used 0-60 -- 1/4 mile -- Skid Pad -- 60-0 braking



Super Chevy Magazine recently performed a series of tests on Art Morrison Enterprises, Inc. “GT55” project vehicle. Testing was conducted with the GT55 after it was driven 1,200 miles from Tacoma, WA to Los Angeles, CA. There were no modifications made to the chassis or to the BFGoodrich tires before testing. The results (vs. Road & Track tests) were:
MORRISON GT55 vs. EXOTIC SPORTS CARS
Model 0-60mph Quarter Mile Skid Pad 60-0mph
GT55 4.2 seconds 12.6 seconds @116mph 0.94G 132 feet
Cadillac XLR-V ($100K) 4.3 seconds 12.7 @ 112 mph 0.87G 123 feet
Corvette C6 ($54K) 4.5 seconds 12.8 @ 115 mph 0.98G 110 feet
Ferrari F430 Spider ($205K) 4.0 seconds 12.3 @ 117 mph 0.90G 107 feet
Ford Shelby GT500 ($48K) 4.7 seconds 13.1 @ 112 mph 0.87G 122 feet
Lamborghini Gallardo ($184K) 4.0 seconds 12.3 @ 117 mph 0.95G 110 feet
Mercedes-Benz SL65 AMG ($187K) 4.0 seconds 12.0 @ 123 mph 0.90G 115 feet
Porsche 911 GT3 ($118K) 4.2 seconds 12.4 @ 114 mph 0.92G 119 feet

I'll go with technical road courses. Cumulative elevation changes of +200', off-chambers, increasing/decreasing radius corners, 10* banking, medium to short straights with hard braking zones.

Streets of Willow came to mind before you posted this, but I believe it may have many of these features you list.

Todd, so you are gonna bring to market the Iowegian Super Pro Touring Suspension Challenge... good for you Big Daddy. :thumbsup:

I know some level b roads and terraced fields to put your cars to a real test! Oh wait those were from my booze-touring days in high school... :_paranoid

Judging by the Super Chevy shoot outs, slalom speed doesn't always reflect race speed.(I am doubting the new Camaro autocross time published) I find it really hard to believe that it's getting beat by 8 seconds on a 44 second course.

I'm interested to hear from the suspension manufacturers. Remember, this is a pro touring site and we autocross AND road race.

The ultimate has to be unlimited testing in both venues for a day and making adjustments. That's something I'd really like to do. I've always felt my car was a natural on the big track but no so much around a parking lot.

I'm going to change my perspective on this a bit. If I were looking at this from a manufactures stand point I would want to build a suspension that I could tune for autocross and road course.

After finally building this system I would test it over and over again on the same road course and post lap times, Lateral-G's, etc, etc. with a 200 treadwear tire since that is what the target audience has been using per the rules of the ASC , Optima, etc, etc.

Since no two cone courses are alike I would use a slalom test with a left hand u-turn on one end and right hand u-turn on the other.

I'd just go to driving school....


:D

Then when Greg was done with driving school I'd use him as a test driver. If you can make Greg fast the skies the limit :unibrow:

So the Speedtech Nova was 4mph faster than a new camaro in the slalom
Nick said it was one of the fastest times they had ever had. it was .02 better in the skid pad. and 1 sec faster in the autoX that was right out of the box, it would be much faster now I am sure.
being that it is about "All" round preformance i would think that a road course would be the best "All round" test like Sieg said with some elevation off camber corners and good braking zones. it kind of covers it all. also the street drivability cuz I'm sure a road race car is faster but not to comfortable on the street.

thats my .02

From a complete amateurs perspective, this was my first thought. Make it an increasing or decreasing radius slalom and a speed stop at the end. Tune for the best of each individually then combine the components and work thru it till you get the best time. Something like a speed-stop challenge with a crazy slalom and double 180 in the middle. The dimensions of your course could easily be shared and duplicated for multiple days testing and comparison with others.

Bring that Canary yellow Mustang down and let's see if you can back up that big mouth.

T-Hill has some challenging turns with elevation changes. The by-pass at 5 and I think coming out of turn 9 going up and having the blind slight right would be the other.

Making the left at turn 1 and then the right at turn 2 at Infineon is another fun turn with elevation change at Infineon. I think they may actually call it 3A but I'm talking about the turn right in front of Earnhart Terrace.

I like that thinking. I've run enough autocrosses now to set up a wide variety of elements. Get really familiar with the course and start throwing different set ups at the car until the stop watch finds the best set up. I may just pitch a test and tune day to my SCCA. It's really hard to learn much with 8 runs in a entire day with very little time between those runs. This is a variable that separates us from the vendors along with seat time at the Pro Touring events. All manufacturers test and find the sweet spot, why shouldn't we?

Figure maybe a 7 cone slalom with 70' of seperation and then configure u-turns on each end.
Since I'm back to ground zero with the new set up if I get the opportunity I may try this at the local Costco parking lot on a Sunday when they are closed..
I'll see if I can get Flash up here and I just met another local Lat-G member that has a pretty cool '63 Falcon and lives about 10 miles from me. One guy driving, one on the stop watch, and another on the vid cam.

I also doubted that time spread and I drove both cars ...

While I didn't see every single time posted, the GenV Camaro sure didn't feel ten seconds off the pace and got through my course very well.

Mary Pozzi

Truer words were never spoken! :lol:

But the thing about using a road course or autocross for "testing" you are relying on your total time. It would not be a true test of your suspension.
Let me reiterate. If you run and achieve a "time" you make a change that you would assume would make you faster, however you enter soft into a chicane...your time dropped by .2 then you brake late, a loss of .1. Now your times are slower. Was it your suspension, the change or was it your driving? Its unclear.

The nice thing about a slalom, its quick, you can quickly feel changes and you can redo on a whim.

Now if Todd asked "what is the best way to put a Pro-Touring car throught it maximum performance " or " What is a true test of a Pro-touring car " then I'd say a road course. You get autocross, drag racing and repetative high speed braking all in one deal.

We got you to chime in, I'd love to hear your opinion on the subject. :unibrow:

I like the Super Chevy testing format as it has a lot of the elements we see on the street and on the tracks. It also provides feedback and advice for people that want to improve their existing suspensions but may not want to autocross or track their cars. No, it's not perfect but it's workable.

My "perfect" would be for the suspension companies to give me one car with their product on it. All cars would be the same, i.e. the proverbial and ever present '69 Camaro. All tires would be the same. Brake friction material would be the same. The steering wheel and seat would be the same and also be adjustable. The Stig for a day would be the same.

Each company could practice the day before the actual testing and fine tune their systems for the track surface and conditions. The course would be similar to what I set up for the 2011 Super Chevy testing as it had almost every element you'd see for street driving and for an autocross. It was also low-speed enough that it didn't reward the high-horsepower cars and penalize the ones that didn't bring the ponies. That course was fun and several of the sections were very fast. They tested adhesion and balance, and also how a car accepted pressure. I'm not a huge fan of doing this sort of testing on an actual racetrack as if the suspension has an evil side, having it slap me upside the face at 100+ mph wouldn't be good. If a car can handle well at an autocross with its slower speeds and transitions, it should work at track days. Times are secondary to the testing. I've driven some very evil cars that turned very quick times ...

And it would be expensive to do unless a tire company sponsored it. Nitto does with the Super Chevy day but the suspension manufacturers and car owners have an out if Nitto doesn't make a tire that the car can use.

Mary Pozzi

Super Chevy article for reference:
http://www.superchevy.com/events/suc...nge/index.html

I agree with Mary about all variables being the same. Tires are the biggest factor IMO- even if two different tires have similar treadwear ratings, that doesn't make them equal. You can't compare a Mich PS2 to a Nitto Invo, they just aren't similar at all in terms of traction.

To give you an idea, my own car tested 1.0g with BFG KDW2 tires and around 0.95 with the Nitto Invos - the tires being the only change.

And while performance numbers are easy to compare and great to read, I wish more emphasis was placed on drivability. Not from Super Chevy's perspective, but from the customers. I always try to tell people that ultimate traction is great, but you really want the car to drive nice on the street. That's what made European cars stand out, easy to drive fast yet great for long distances as well. Getting a car to grip is easy, but combining grip with comfort and driving ease is another story.

EXACTLY!
Ive always mentioned that when people bring up the debate between staying with a modded stock sub and leafs compared to a link type rear and an aftermarket sub. sure you can get your car to perform exceptionally well in a racing applications with a "primitive" setup but your ride quality will suffer greatly... "cant have your cake and eat it too" (unless you spend the dough on a sub and rear suspension system. lol)