IFS as IRS?

[Silver69Camaro]

Jake, what you mention is balancing the line of forward traction and lateral grip. Most radial tires will have more lateral grip with a small amount of negtive camber. The rear tires like some negative camber just like the fronts do.

Solid axles will benefit from negative camber also - I've done this myself with very impressive results, to the point I either need to raise the static RC by 1" or increase the rear roll rate by about 5000 lb-ft/rad.

[68protouring454]

yes i agree, they like some neg camber, but not to the point of wanting .75 to 1.0 neg camber gain per inch like a front susp may have.
I as well tune with the rear rc height, depending on track configuration, speeds, etc. its always a balance of getting the car to rotate, but still have good forward bite coming out of the turn. Thats when adjustable rc, double adjustable shocks etc come into play when fine tuning on the thresh hold.

[Silver69Camaro]

Originally Posted by 68protouring454

yes i agree, they like some neg camber, but not to the point of wanting .75 to 1.0 neg camber gain per inch like a front susp may have.

Respectfully, my opinion differs. Because of packaging and the desire to reduce angular misalignment with CV axles, the overall bump/rebound travel in performance-oriented IRS systems is often reduced. To make up for the reduced travel, the camber gain is increased. Obviously this isn't a set-in-stone rule, but appears to be a modern trend.

[68protouring454]

I agree to disagree.
We are talking about different platforms and uses, which is why we have different thoughts on the subject.
keep it going, discussions always help everyone out.
thanks