Agreed. What I was trying to say is that if you try one setting at each
of 3 different events on 3 different surfaces, then how will you know
what the effect of your change is? What you really need to do is the
entire process of running thru the settings at each surface, which is
what I suggested for concrete. Unfortunately this is hard to do given
the limited seat time we have. Top racing teams don't start with a
setting, go out and do a lap on cold tires, change a setting and do
another lap on slightly warm tires and then change it again and do a lap
on warm tires an call it a day of good data either. And they certainly
don't do it while in the middle of competition. But that is
unfortunately one of the constraints of our sport.
I also agree that people have different driving styles and the same
setup won't work for everyone. I have experienced this first hand.
What I was trying to say is that whatever your driving style is, you
need to be consistent enough to know what change lap to lap is coming
from your car setup, and what is coming from your driving. If you go
out there and underdrive one lap, come in and make a change, and then
barbeque a corner entry on the next, you might just think that nasty
understeer was from your swaybar change but it wasn't. If you can't
drive consistently enough to make the "noise" of your laptimes smaller
than the effect of the thing you are changing, then you need to work on
your driving first, and the car later.
But yeah, good points.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Kolstad [mailto:ckolstad@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2003 2:23 PM
To: Thana, Peter {HTS~Palo Alto}; Jeffrey Macko; ba-autox@autox.team.net
Subject: RE: Sways, How much bar is too much bar?
Actually, I think that the setting should take all of these things into
account "You need to make sure the changes are coming from the car, not
the surface or the course or the driver."
Surface is a huge factor. How many racing teams leave their settings
alone when it rains? The way things grip and the car behaves are VASTLY
different depending on the friction of the surface. Also, some drivers
like a car that is rear end happy while others do not. That is
something the driver should play with based on feedback from others as
the the fast way around the course.
Chris
At 11:35 AM 4/22/03, Thana, Peter {HTS~Palo Alto} wrote:
>You'll never really know if it will work until you try it, as Katie
>said. But changing things event by event while we change from surface
>to surface is not a good idea IMO. You need to make sure the changes
>are coming from the car, not the surface or the course or the driver.
>My first question would be, what amount of front bar gives the least
>amount of understeer? As I mentioned in the previous post, softer may
>not always meen less understeer in a car with near 0 static negative
>camber, high roll angles, and struts. You may actually be giving up
>more in contact patch than you are gaining from the weight shift
>effect. The only way to know is to try.
>
>I'd try to find some time at Oakland, or maybe 3Com where there are fun
>runs or you might get a second card if turnout is low enough. Go thru
>the range of adjustment on the front bar first, with the rear full
>soft. Which setting gives the least understeer? Do you get less
>wheelspin as you go stiffer? I'd run the front as stiff as you can
>tolerate- you should get less wheelspin and a minor improvement in
>transitions.
>
>Once you figure out what the optimum setting is for the front, then you
>can goof with the rear, probably just with the front on full stiff. My
>gut feeling is that running the rear stiff will hurt you more than it
>will help you no matter what, since the stiffer the rear bar, the more
>it will pick up that inside wheel. But I really can't tell sitting
>here typing on a keyboard!
>
>After you get this all figured out, you'd probably have to do it over
>again on concrete, as Katie mentioned. Although I'm not at all
>convinced that the extra grip that we see on race tires translates to
>Falkens, because my experiences with them on concrete have all been
>rather negative.
>
>Like I said, my strategy would be to set the car up around the worst
>problem that's costing you the most time, and then adjust other things
>around it. To me, the biggest problem on the 330i is all that
>wonderful torque and no LSD to put it down. I would try very hard to
>minimize wheelspin. If that makes the car push, then I'd consider
>getting the balance back with alignment first (toe, rear camber)
>because that doesn't increase wheelspin.
>
>The other thing you can change which doesn't cost you anything is
>driving style. Is the car really pushing or are you just carrying a
>little too much speed into the corners. By braking earlier, longer,
>and harder, you can bleed off enough speed so that there's a little
>reserve grip for you to start feeding in the power earlier. If you are
>always riding the front tire on the edge of terminal understeer, when
>you go to put the power down you'll just get more of the same. As long
>as you don't overdo it on the way in, I'm pretty sure your car has
>plenty of torque to give you all the power oversteer you want on the
>way out.
>
>It definitely doesn't hurt to experiment, but remember you're running
>one of the only torquey, heavy, RWD cars in STS. Your car is never
>going to be the speed maintenance car of the class, it's always going
>to be the muscle car. It's always going to earn its money powering out
>of slow corners and flying down the straights. If I had that car and a
>limited budget, I'd want to make sure I was capitalizing on those
>advantages.
>
>Peter
|