Disconnecting rear swaybar

[cjm]

I saw a post or something that said the RMR GTO is running with no rear swaybar.

Anyone else found that running without the rear bar is a good way to go?

I'm trying to understand how that affects initiating and controlling a drift. I have too much understeer at the moment. BMW's are made that way for safety.

Thanks.

[Tuner]

nonono. You want a massive rear bar, and a tiny front bar..

[Rayspeed]

the end that has a sway bar usually has less steering and the thicker it is the less grip that end has.

so u might want to stay with the bar on or go with a thicker one if oyur car is understeering

hope this helps

[Ichi-Go]

If your understeering unhook the front one. Put more pressure in your rear tires. More rear dampening or/and spring rates. A thicker rear will also help.

[GRiDRaceTech]

Millen's GTO is most likely stiff enough that an anti-roll bar would be superfluous.

Lower your car with some nice springs and Koni shocks and get camber plates. BMWs are equipped with a MacPherson strut front end that tends to undergo positive camber change during heavy cornering. This positive camber change leads to less contact patch and thus understeer. Thus, dial in some negative camber using the camber plates to counteract the positive camber change. Get a stiffer rear bar also. You could also try ways of getting around the understeer, like lift-throttle oversteer or late-braking. However, if you are not comfortable with the car yet, or if you don't have much experience behind the wheel, do so in a controlled environment where you won't hit anything.

[mranlet]

Originally posted by GRiDRaceTech
...MacPherson strut front end that tends to undergo positive camber change during heavy cornering.

MacPherson generate positive camber under bound? I though that the problem was too much negative camber reducing contact patch...

The more roll resistance you have in the rear the more the front tires will be able to turn - it seems backwards.

When you get better with your car and need to have more understeer built in to be able to apply power through the turn, then you'll want no rear sway bar.

Like Grid said, the GTO is so probably as roll-resistant as it will get, or Rhys wants a certian amount of roll.

If you want to understand how changing settings on suspension effects handling, it's much easier to buy the Don Alexander "High Performance Handling Handbook" than to go case by case on message boards.

-MR

[MrodDrft]

Or u can just play some Live For SPeed

[mranlet]

I'm sure that the makers of Live For Speed have all read these books:

http://www.drifting.com/forums/showt...5&pagenumber=1

-MR

[GRiDRaceTech]

MR- Yup, MacPherson struts' geometry causes them to undergo positive camber under load. The positive camber change will be less with a strut brace, preventing the strut towers from moving much, but in reality the only way to counteract the positive camber is with static negative camber. I wish I could find you a pic of my car at an autocross, then you'd know exactly what happens. I'll look for it.

[cjm]

Thanks for the input. I'll have to get some of those books. I would like to be able to adjust camber so guess I'll have to invest in some plates at some point.

[mranlet]

Help is what we [or at least some of us] are here for.

I'd love to see that autoX pic - when you say that the positive camber is reduced by a strut bar, are you implying that it is flexing of the frame causing the camber change, or simply that a stiffer chassis makes for more consistent handling?

Why do strut suspensions gain negative camber when they are lowered then?

Just to make sure we're talking about the same thing (not that I doubt your technical expertise, seeing as how it is even in your name) - negative camber is having the top of the tire angled in, positive camber is top of the tire angled out.

-MR

[GRiDRaceTech]

MR- Yup, we're talking about the same thing.
This is NOT my car, but it's an example nonetheless:


I'm implying that both the flexing of the unibody along with flexing of the actual strut body itself leads to the positive camber change.

Macpherson struts tend not to undergo excessive negative camber change when lowered, unlike a double-wishbone sytem. It's all in the geometry of the strut. When you shorten the spring, it decreases the distance between the lower arm and the top of the strut. Not only does it decrease the distance, but it also changes the angle at which the lower arm is situated. That, in turn, pulls the inside of the tire farther outward, thus increasing negative camber.

[mranlet]

Originally posted by GRiDRaceTech
increasing negative camber.

So we're talking about the same thing...

-MR

[Ichi-Go]

Dang... I think that is exactly what was happening to me at auo-x. I could almost picture my tire doing that but didnt think it was possible becuase I have 1 1.5 negative camber. I just wrote it off as tire roll and added more pressure which felt like it hurt me more. It almost felt as is it had 5 degrees of positive camber. Or like the front suspension was buckling under the load.

[mranlet]

You have a strut tower brace? How much roll do you have? If your car is lowered, things happen that make the car roll MORE even with a lower roll center, but usually this is counteracted by stiffer springs...

-MR