Quote:
|
Originally Posted by John V
This is where I disagree. I can build you a car with positive camber up front and negative camber in the rear, wider tires in the rear, stiffer front springs and STILL make that car oversteer in a steady state. It's just not as simple as you're making it out to be.
I think you understand what I'm saying and I understand your overall point about having a car that will have the front end lose traction before the rear in a steady state around a constant-radius corner. I guess that just isn't very useful information to have.
|
Hi,
Again, you're delving into the realm of the
Academic here. You may well be able to "build you a car with positive camber up front and negative camber in the rear, wider tires in the rear, stiffer front springs and STILL make that car oversteer in a steady state." I'm not disputing that. Nor do I dispute that there are greater complexities than those mentioned here.
But I don't believe that you can take a
Boxster and "build a car with positive camber up front and negative camber in the rear, wider tires in the rear, stiffer front springs and STILL make that car oversteer in a steady state".
The Boxster naturally understeers. This has been both my experience, and many other members' experience. Virtually every Driver Review ever done on the car as well as the view of most Aftermarket Suspension tuners share the same view...
Happy Motoring!... Jim'99