#1 (permalink)  
Old 01-14-2012, 06:15 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 73
Default What happens when the front is MUCH narrower than the rear?


This is way over the top (I'm more a fan of subtle) - but my question is this...
What happens to driveability when the rear is so grossly wider than the front?
I'm sure its a rocket in a straight line, but what happens in the slaloms??

Thanks!!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-14-2012, 10:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: na
Posts: 1,674
Default

You know I read something about this in my quest to understand suspension. I forget the source.
But it referred to the Porsche 911 as being the best example of a wider rear than front problem.

Although the look of having the wider rear is appealing to the eyes, it makes the handling worse. So does wider than needed tires. If memory serves, it will induce sliding, and front end drift in corners. The Porsche guys actually prefer it as it can cause for a skilled driver, a predictable response in corners that can make corner transitions smoother and faster.

Funny though. Ive been on this forum for 3 years now, and Ive never actually seen that car move under its own power. I too have different appeals to what works and what doesn't on a car. I think he actually had it for sale at one point.

Last edited by ydeardorff; 01-14-2012 at 10:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-14-2012, 10:59 PM
letterman7's Avatar
Honorary Admin
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Downingtown, PA
Posts: 3,713
Blog Entries: 6
Default

That idiot has been trying to sell that for a few years now. He thinks it's the hottest car on the planet, or at least in his little world. And it's all show, of course, still running a basic 1600 if memory serves.

I can't comment too much about what the ratios will do to cornering rates. I would assume that Yaughn is pretty accurate with his assessment though. I guess it comes down to what you want the car to do as to how you'll set it up in the end. Drag races want the wide meats on the rear, corner carvers would want pretty close to all the same size I would think!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-14-2012, 11:53 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: na
Posts: 1,674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by letterman7 View Post
That idiot has been trying to sell that for a few years now. He thinks it's the hottest car on the planet, or at least in his little world. And it's all show, of course, still running a basic 1600 if memory serves.

I can't comment too much about what the ratios will do to cornering rates. I would assume that Yaughn is pretty accurate with his assessment though. I guess it comes down to what you want the car to do as to how you'll set it up in the end. Drag races want the wide meats on the rear, corner carvers would want pretty close to all the same size I would think!
I didnt want to say, but yes Rick, that car looks like a cross between the back to the future delorean, and some post apocalyptic gun runner movie car. None of the additions make any stylistic, or functional sense from a cars perspective. Its like he bought the whole J.C. Whitney catalog and bolted it on there.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-14-2012, 11:53 PM
delbertinie's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: kansas city mo
Posts: 505
Blog Entries: 3
Default

what in the heck are those shoe boxes glassed over the rear wheel arches supposed to accomplish.

I'll bet that guy watches corvette summer over and over and over and over.................................*insa ne**insane ** insane*
__________________
Today is the only day that you guaranteed,
Make it count !
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-15-2012, 09:27 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 73
Default

It just occurred to me - I remember reading about 6 months or so ago - in Motor Trend, or Road & Track (one of those type magazines) about them trying to set up either a 350 or 370 Z car. They DID make the point that that car got the best skid pad results and overall times when they did NOT use a staggered setup - but I think that was referring more to using the same size wheels, front and rear. At the time I took it to mean the rims were all the same - but now I think it was probably not even just diameter, but cross section too...

I should go look at the NSX - I understand those have dedicated tires for all 4 corners...

And I agree with the above assessments - very Mad Max...
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-16-2012, 11:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 30
Default

A lot of times what happens is that if you put wider tires on the rear then the rear will have more traction. So, your rear has more traction than the front. When you go around a corner too fast, the car will understeer because the front looses traction first.

If you have the same grip on all four tires, then the front and rear will loose traction at the same time and you will go into a 4 wheel slide which is usually easier to control.

This of course can all change depending on the driver and how he goes into a corner.

I have a 350Z with wider (275) on the rear and less wide (255) on the front.

If I just yank the wheel to one side the car will push forward and understeer. However, if I setup the turn properly (setup the suspension prior to entering the turn), it will stick around the corner just like it should. Or, if I am feeling frisky, give it some gas, swing the rear end out and slide that baby right around

It also depends of braking. If you are heavily breaking when entering a turn, the weight transfer will move forward and effectively give you front tires more grip because of the dynamic weight.
__________________
Brian Tullio
Wide Open Pixel - Web Design, Web Hosting and graphic design
www.WideOpenPixel.com
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2012, 12:48 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Southern California
Posts: 26
Default

Tullio has hit the mark on the staggered setup. In a perfect world every car would have a perfect weight ratio of 50/50 front and back and drive like its on rails. Keeping the car 50/50 is just one way of balancing the car. When I drove in the SCCA (autocross solo) with the mr2, balancing the car happened in several ways.

1) using staggered tire setup to either increase or decrease oversteer.
2) changing tire pressure
3) adjusting shock compression/rebound (if you have the option)
4) adjusting swaybar preload (if you had adjustable sway bars)
5) using different brake compounds for front and rear to change brake bias

Obviously you can overdo the stagger setup for handling, but putting a huge tire size in the rear would help in a drag setup.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2012, 08:56 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 73
Default

Soooo - not to overstate the situation, but in these 2000lb cars that we drive, that are ALREADY too light on the front end - this guy's suspension set-up is PROBABLY jacked up for anything but sheer straight-line acceleration...???



Ok - so what about running staggered RIM sizes??? Like 18" rears and 15" fronts. Is there a good reason to do so, or not to do so? I know it was kind of faddish a few years back, but I mean from a strictly PERFORMANCE perspective - can anyone make an argument why you might want to run lets says 18" rears and 16" fronts?
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-18-2012, 10:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: na
Posts: 1,674
Default

Wheel wells aren't the same size?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
LinkBack
LinkBack URL LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks About LinkBacks