Focus Rs revoknuckle suspension

[caled]

Unless I'm being particularly 'tarded at this point in the evening, but wouldn't the caster angle actually result in the opposite camber to what you actually want? Therefore stopping the caster would lead to an increase negative camber on the inner turning wheel, which is good...

[Scort_CVH]

I'm being a tard actually outside is the word I was looking for as that's where the weight of the car has transferred too t

[caled]

Like this

 

http://www.evo.co.uk/images/front_picture_library_UK/dir_864/car_photo_432139_25.jpg

[Craig855S]

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.

 

I don't know why ford Gay out of 4WD, Fiat made a 4WD panda, and still managed to sell it for pittence, so they cant use the excuse "It's too expensive"

 

To make a car that tuners will adore (and therefore, actually compete with the likes of Subaru and Mitsubishi) Ford need to make a 4WD RS model.

[Stu]

I don't know why ford Gay out of 4WD, Fiat made a 4WD panda, and still managed to sell it for pittence, so they cant use the excuse "It's too expensive"

 

To make a car that tuners will adore (and therefore, actually compete with the likes of Subaru and Mitsubishi) Ford need to make a 4WD RS model.

 

You really are a clown.

[massivewangers]

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.

 

I don't know why ford Gay out of 4WD, Fiat made a 4WD panda, and still managed to sell it for pittence, so they cant use the excuse "It's too expensive"

 

To make a car that tuners will adore (and therefore, actually compete with the likes of Subaru and Mitsubishi) Ford need to make a 4WD RS model.

 

Been to many shows lately? Tuners DO adore the new RS. You see loads of them at shows, and countless companies have them as demonstraters. Jamsport have one, Sitech Racing, GGR, Pumaspeed have had a couple, I could just go on and on, there's loads.

 

I think my local RSOC group (one of the smaller ones in the UK) has about four of them, one of which is an RS500. It's a very popular car, and with good reason.

 

Wolf in Germany are in the process of developing a 4WD version, using some parts from the Kuga, so it will be interesting to see what that turns out like. It's interesting, many many people say that the car "should have been 4WD", but I've not yet seen a bad word said about the way it drives by owners or the motoring press? It's widely regarded to be one of the best handling cars about.

 

I would have liked to have seen a 4WD version, a true Cosworth replacement for the 21st century. But, the FWD car clearly has the minerals.

[Ahmotorsport]

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

I am not a Motorsport garage? I'm the apprentice for my fathers Race Car Engineering firm so don't expect me to know everything, i don't. I answered your question perfectly, no, the more negative camber doesn't equal more grip. Less camber change is a good thing, you don't want camber changing through cornering, it will cause impaired tyre wear, which will eventually lose grip. Less camber change doesn't mean less negative camber, it means the camber is less likely to change to more negative, or less negative. If your camber is set to the correct position for the vehicle, lets say, 1 degree, you don't want it altering to 2 degree's when cornering, it reduces tyre contact. I'm not saying this is 100% spot on, or even correct, i'm just an apprentice, but that's my view on it.

 

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.

 

I don't know why ford Gay out of 4WD, Fiat made a 4WD panda, and still managed to sell it for pittence, so they cant use the excuse "It's too expensive"

 

To make a car that tuners will adore (and therefore, actually compete with the likes of Subaru and Mitsubishi) Ford need to make a 4WD RS model.

 

Been to many shows lately? Tuners DO adore the new RS. You see loads of them at shows, and countless companies have them as demonstraters. Jamsport have one, Sitech Racing, GGR, Pumaspeed have had a couple, I could just go on and on, there's loads.

 

I think my local RSOC group (one of the smaller ones in the UK) has about four of them, one of which is an RS500. It's a very popular car, and with good reason.

 

Wolf in Germany are in the process of developing a 4WD version, using some parts from the Kuga, so it will be interesting to see what that turns out like. It's interesting, many many people say that the car "should have been 4WD", but I've not yet seen a bad word said about the way it drives by owners or the motoring press? It's widely regarded to be one of the best handling cars about.

 

I would have liked to have seen a 4WD version, a true Cosworth replacement for the 21st century. But, the FWD car clearly has the minerals.

I agree with that, i'm not a big fan of the looks of the new Focus, but i certainly enjoyed watching it, it looked a very good car for performance, FWD doesn't mean its a bad thing.

[caled]

Just been reading more in to this this morning (why do I need to do work, anyway?)

 

Suspension geometry really is a very complicated subject, and it seems to be made up of a vaste array of compromises to ensure that you maximise the contact patch between the tyre and the ground, which got me thinking - lowering an escort must really f*ck up all the hard work the suspension designers at Ford did.

 

Are the handling characteristics of an escort improved by dropping the suspension? Or do people just think it is because it is stiffer? And I assume tyre wear is probably greater?

[Stu]

lowering an escort must really f*ck up all the hard work the suspension designers at Ford did.

 

This is something i've tried to educate people on in the past on this website and it's a complete waste of time. Unfortunately the aftermarket, including magazines, brainwash people into thinking that lowering their cars is a good thing.

 

The shock absorber's (spring + damper combo) purpose is to keep the tyre on the ground when travelling over bumpy surfaces. If you lower a car, the spring rate has to go up. This reduces the shock absorbers capability which means the tyre is not in contact with the road as much. This means less grip.

 

You control roll with other suspension components, primarily anti-roll bars (funny that!). A proper works race car (either rally or road) will have very soft suspension compared to a lot of these boy racer packages, especially junk coilovers!

[caled]

So, just to clarify, these are some of the things you'd need to keep in mind if you want to lower your car;

 

You'd need to calculate the variations in castor angle (which I doubt you could reset to factory on a lowered car anyway), camber, toe in/out, all relative to varying degrees of jounce.

 

Throw in to the mix that when people drop cars, there's likely a change of alloys anyway, so you'll need to recalculate the scrub patch for variations in tyre width and wheel size, including the increase in distance between the swivel line/steering axis and the centre line of the tyre/contact patch.

 

And then just to complicate things further, there will be variations in stresses caused owing to lowering the centre of gravity and reducing the capability of the shock absorbers and the increased stiffness of the springs.

 

And this is without thinking about the differences in torsional, tensional and compressional stiffness of the new components and any effects of lower profile tyres.

 

Christ. I don't envy the guy who has to model that.

[Stu]

caled- I'm no suspension guru, but i'm fairly sure caster is fixed.

 

Don't forget, everything is a compromise. You have to factor in silly things like ride quality too :-)

 

 

Important things to look up are slip angle.. scrub radius (this is why I tell people not to put escort cosworth wheels on)..

[caled]

Pah, ride quality is for women lol

 

And the cosworth wheels I assume is owing to the offset?

 

And yeah, thats what I thought - the caster angle is set for a given jounce, but dropping the car will increase castor angle and I cant see a way of resetting it without drilling some more holes in the chassis lol.

 

Anyway, I think Ive sent this topic way off tangent in trying to figure out suspension geometry (pun intended...)

[massivewangers]

There are ways to adjust caster angle. Group A FWD Escorts used a compression strut arrangement which allowed the wheel to be moved back or forwards, thus adjusting caster to some degree. It can be done in adjustable top mounts as well.

 

Suspension set up is all about compromise really though. You'll never get a perfect set up when modifying a production car. The lengths people like GSE went to try and make the MK5/6 handle for rallying were pretty extreme, and even they didn't always get it quite right. The suspension on a Grp A RS2000 is certainly very far removed from a production model anyway.

[Stu]

Some of those GSE rear ends are worse than standard!

[bronze4door]

i love discussions like this