Scort_CVH Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 As above came across this: Clicky from what I understand (very little ) although it will reduce torque steer as its moving where the force is acting to stop it from turning the wheels, its also reducing the caster angle and the KPI which will reduce the amount of neg camber through corners on the inside wheel, also has a lower scrub meaning that the car has less grip overall. Is my understanding, would appreciate some educated opinions and comments/explainations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 If you think it gives you less grip then yes, you don't understand it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scort_CVH Posted April 20, 2011 Author Share Posted April 20, 2011 If you think it gives you less grip then yes, you don't understand it Where am I going wrong oh wise one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caled Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Judging by the results page, the bottom left graph is showing that camber is changing less for a given wheel travel, which would maximise tyre area in contact with the ground thus increasing grip? Pft. I'll stick with double wishbones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scort_CVH Posted April 20, 2011 Author Share Posted April 20, 2011 Judging by the results page, the bottom left graph is showing that camber is changing less for a given wheel travel, which would maximise tyre area in contact with the ground thus increasing grip? Pft. I'll stick with double wishbones. as far as i was aware more negative camber equated to more grip and thats the part thats confusing me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caled Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 This article is more useful to laymen, I think: caranddriver.com Which includes; Another benefit is significantly reduced camber change (the tilt of the tire away from a vertical orientation) as the car is steered off-center. Keeping the tire more perpendicular to the road during turning is a boon to handling. Looking again at the results, it looks like they're already set to ~-1* camber at 0mm travel, perhaps that is what Ford feel is necessary and more just reduces the contact patch too much and so degrading handling from that point. All compromises, I suppose. Does seem to increase positive camber when the suspension drops, though, which should help keep the tyre surface as flat as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sortedford Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Pah! Stolen from Renault. It makes the car feel very planted in corners, and you can really carry the speed through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caled Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Pah! Stolen from Renault. It makes the car feel very planted in corners, and you can really carry the speed through. Nearly as good as double wishbones, then :-P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottg17 Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 I dunno why ford bother with FWD for the like of ST's and RS's , Get RWD or AWD and create a real drivers car but the revoknuckle from what i can make of it is a very good setup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caled Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Because both RWD and AWD would be heavier and require extensive reworking on the focus chassis for a single, low volume model? And they'd probably need to design a new system from scratch, would ford even have an applicable 4x4 system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaweV6 Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 I dunno why ford bother with FWD for the like of ST's and RS's , Get RWD or AWD and create a real drivers car but the revoknuckle from what i can make of it is a very good setup Oh, god. Haven't we been trough this before ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massivewangers Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Because both RWD and AWD would be heavier and require extensive reworking on the focus chassis for a single, low volume model? And they'd probably need to design a new system from scratch, would ford even have an applicable 4x4 system? Yes, from Volvo. As far as the stories go; 4WD models were tested, and not deemed worthwhile compared to the 2WD version. Drive wheel debate or not, the RS clearly has the goods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahmotorsport Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Judging by the results page, the bottom left graph is showing that camber is changing less for a given wheel travel, which would maximise tyre area in contact with the ground thus increasing grip? Pft. I'll stick with double wishbones. as far as i was aware more negative camber equated to more grip and thats the part thats confusing meNot correct, excessive negative camber will reduce tyre contact with the road. Judging by the results page, the bottom left graph is showing that camber is changing less for a given wheel travel, which would maximise tyre area in contact with the ground thus increasing grip? Pft. I'll stick with double wishbones. as far as i was aware more negative camber equated to more grip and thats the part thats confusing meNot correct, excessive negative camber will reduce tyre contact with the road.http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/ae68/Ahmotorsport/GetAttachment.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caled Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/ae68/Ahmotorsport/GetAttachment.jpg Spending a lot of time on two wheels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scort_CVH Posted April 20, 2011 Author Share Posted April 20, 2011 Excellent answer from a so called Motorsport Garage makes me wonder if you could actually explain the differences and back it up with some science? (its also cornering im talking about ) Im well aware of there being a limit to the camber all i merely asked was as the castor is a much lesser angle, we would get less camber change in cornering, so less negative camber (and as its conventional road car suspension we wont have any excessive numbers) therefore less grip generated due to less heat in the tyres etc. - somone explain where that is wrong please as i genuinally would like to learn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now