Quote:
Originally Posted by XXL
Makes sense. One problem with a tighter arc in the control arms, however, is that you get up on the edge of the tire very quickly. That's not such a big deal when you're just dumping the bags in the parking lot, but you get hit with this same issue when you're driving... so you get lots of wear on the corner of the tire, and the bump steer can get pretty aggressive. I think the real "solution" is a complex cantilevered upper A-arm setup, that gives you the "tuck" you have with your tighter geometry, but that keeps the wheel vertical center more nearly vertical. Let me know when you get that engineered out  |
I have a couple of "complex cantilevered" designs along with both push and pull-rod style mechanisms... only problem with those are the cost... if you want to pay $10K for a tricked out suspension or $20K for a tube chassis jump in line... I am booked out for a year. Only thing is the idea behind a production piece is affordability and quality at the perfect blend.
As for the geometry on the Dropmember C4... no worries about bumpsteer, there is less than .1 degree toe through the entire suspension cycle!!! That's a tighter tolerance than production vehicles. As for camber, It does follow a tighter arc... that's the idea... performance suspension, such as this, requires more camber to allow improved handeling and cornering. Let's say under "normal" driving conditions the wheel will compress 2-2.5" (that's pretty realistic) well camber gain at 2.25" is 1.225 degrees camber... not a ton, enough for a drast improvement from stock, and it won't be any harder on the tires than let's say a C4 Corvette
. Will they wear faster than stock geometry would allow... probably a little... if you're taking adavntage of the increased performance!