Tom:
you and John are getting me really confused here with the terminology. Hrd
to figure out what you mean.
This is a very simple concept, so I'll really be embarrassed if I'm
remebering it wrong-- but "center of mass" and "center of gravity" are the
same thing, I think, in a gravitional field (CG doesn't apply in outer
space). (HELP ME, MAYF!)
-- so how does one get "The center of mass behind the center of gravity"--??
Do you have an antigravity generator in the old coupe, you sly dog????
Russ, #1226B
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-land-speed@autox.team.net
[mailto:owner-land-speed@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Thomas E. Bryant
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 7:03 PM
To: John Goodman
Cc: land-speed@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Weight and Balance stuff again
John,
The simple answer, from my point of view, is if you add weight to the
rear for traction, (Conventional wisdom of old), it works great unless
you spin the tires. If it still spins the tires the rear will want to
lead. It has been proven by several that a balanced car handles. The
rule I will live by, which came at great expense and experience, is: The
center of mass behind the center of gravity.
After adjusting the car to the above, I made a check out run with the
tires spinning for over a mile on a loose course, after hitting the
nitrous, and it moved about on the course, but at no time did it seem
uncomfortable. The front wanted to lead.
Tom, Redding CA - #216 D/GCC
John Goodman wrote:
> I respectfully disagree. Road racing cars are surely
> designed to increase tire patch grip via sound
> suspension design, chassis rigidity, springs, dampers,
> aero, etc. but straightline stability is one of those
> extremely important components to any competitive road
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|