bracey
|
| posted on 18/4/08 at 05:49 PM |
|
|
amount of steering turns
what is prefered amount of turns lock to lock ,
got standard turns on mine 2.9 ?
would going quicker make a good difference ie 2.4?
cheers
richard
|
|
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 18/4/08 at 06:03 PM |
|
|
faster the better imho, when the back end goes you need to be able to point the wheels fast.
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 18/4/08 at 06:44 PM |
|
|
Yes yes yes
|
|
|
RazMan
|
| posted on 18/4/08 at 11:20 PM |
|
|
I found a 2.4 was a little too fast for motorway cruising and the 2.9 was perfect, especially with a small steering wheel. Ardent track day nuts will
want 2 turns or even less 
Cheers,
Raz
When thinking outside the box doesn't work any more, it's time to build a new box
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 19/4/08 at 10:24 AM |
|
|
Mine is fine as a pure road use car with 2.4 turn rack.
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 19/4/08 at 05:55 PM |
|
|
I started with the standard 3.5 turn rack, changed to the 2.4 turn one. After a while I thought it was a bit too 'brisk' so I changed
back - and hated it! The 2.4 one is now a permanent fixture.
It's a bit heavy at parking speeds, but really easy at driving speeds.
I wouldn't go any slower now...
|
|
|
bimbleuk
|
| posted on 20/4/08 at 05:23 AM |
|
|
Similar experience here I was using the car regularly on track with a 2.4 rack. Now I'm using it a lot more on the road I've gone to a 2.9
rack and its a good compromise. Maybe a little slow sometimes to catch the car on track so you can end up wagging the tail a bit more!
|
|
|
