Dale
|
| posted on 8/9/03 at 05:24 PM |
|
|
Maybe a silly question or stirring up a hornets nest
I have been playing with chassis changes to fit my ass feet and engine into a fun to drive package. I have a question, other than to allign the
front A arms what reason is there for the lower section to be narrower than the top (other than to cramp my feet. Is there a structural methood to
this (trianguation) ?
Dale
|
|
|
|
|
suparuss
|
| posted on 8/9/03 at 05:56 PM |
|
|
its actually for the suspension geometry, the longer bottom wishbone follows a longer arc than the top one so that when you go around a corner, when
the car body rolls the wheels stay at a fairly constant angle to the road in relation to the car. with wishbones the same length, the wheels would
tilt over when cornering and have an adverse effect on grip.
if you really need to lliminate the angle in the frame, i would definately suggest an anti-roll bar.
russ.
|
|
|
Dale
|
| posted on 8/9/03 at 07:23 PM |
|
|
I have considered making the angle less but if that was to be done I would have to ad and inner mount to keep the mounting locations the same. The
only drawback I can see would be that I would need a longer hole for the A arm to pass through as the arc would be more if the mounting points were in
the origanal location- but just on a additional mounting bar.
Dale
|
|
|
Bigfoot
|
| posted on 9/9/03 at 04:31 AM |
|
|
In my larger design, I have both upper and lower, front chassis rails at the same angle to allow room fo my huge feet. The lower rail stops and cuts
in at the lower suspension mounting point. The necesary traingulation is of course included. It is easy to arrange an alternative wishbone mount. With
the body panels on, you won't be able to tell the difference.
Bigfoot
|
|
|
