Mike asks if the reason for moving to a deDion rear was to help
the ride on the Super Seven.
This is a tough thing to justify, putting the deDion on this car. I
just read an article on the latest Caterham HPC with the Vauxhall
engine in it. Most of the changes that Caterham has instigated were
out of necessity because of loss of the original supplier! This
car has been basically unchanged for almost thirty years! I think
any changes were made because the original parts were no longer available.
Chapman's philosophy on suspension revolutionized the industry. He
wanted a light car first. Then he wanted very soft springs, large
suspension travel. Most of the control was through suspension
geometry and sway bars. Stiff shocks aided control.
I think he would have rightfully rejected the heaver third member
solution just becasue it did not offer more road holding. I would
imagine that the ride is softer but wonder if you would notice it in this
car. Your rear is only four inches off the ground, tied tightly
to the rear of the Caterham. Your feet and hands also have immediate
input and feel immediate response from the car (THis is why we drive
LBC's!)
I think the one advantage to an independent rear that I wanted wat
was the camber change that could be achieved. Look at the lengths
the NASCAR boys are going to to get negative camber in a solid rear
axle! How does the handling compare across the Triumphs with and
without IRS? Take a look at the attempt Honda made to mix the
benefits of a cheap (deDion) rear with a swivel action of a couple
of inches to get an IRS like feel.
Maybe Mike will get his and we can do a comparison test and let the
world know. Meet me half way? Trade rides with all you netters on the
way?
Michael
|