OK, time to go out on a limb again............
Can you produce the C & D article, perchance, and prove they said 36 front
and 30 rear? All logic - and 35 years experience driving MGBs - tells me
that would make sense the other way around (for a rubber-bumper car; CBs
don't need such a wide differential front to rear).
Putting 6 psi more in the front would make for a car that oversteered
terribly, esp. when you consider the RB cars call for five more in the
rear.......
Lawrie
British Sportscar Center
-----Original Message-----
From: REwald9535@aol.com <REwald9535@aol.com>
To: barneymg@ntsource.com <barneymg@ntsource.com>; mgs@autox.team.net
<mgs@autox.team.net>
Date: Monday, December 28, 1998 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: Overinflated Tires -> Skiddish
>In a message dated 12/28/98 7:34:06 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>barneymg@ntsource.com writes:
>
>> >Overinflating the front tires only on an MGC to about 36psi reduces a
lot
>> of the nose-heavy understeer of these cars for this reason.
>>
>> Huh? Overinflating front only reduces grip of front only. So how does
>> that reduce understeer? The logic doesn't follow.
>>
>I gotta go with Barney here.
>BTW in case anyone remembers back when MGB ran in show room stock (75?)
Car
>and Driver did an article on which of the cars that were eligible handled
the
>best. They found that the MGB with 36 PSI front and 30 PSI rear had the
best
>handling of the cars tested.
>I of course went out and pumped up the tires on my car and sure enough the
car
>handled better.
>Rick Ewald
>67 MGB roadster.
>99 Volvo S 80 T-6
>
|