Suspension and Balance

Colby, I've lost track now of all the links that have been presented, but I imagine you've seen This page (by Ira Crummey) and all the other pages it links to?

Romeo wrote: ...repeatative bumps

Are those anything like repetitive bumps?

It's a common misconception that rally cars have soft suspension. Rally cars have soft shocks, and a tall suspension, but it isn't soft by any stretch of the imagination. And rally sort of follows it's own special guidelines, as the tires will spin before body roll becomes an issue. Like I said, the best approximation is the unpaved air-strip section of Sebring, or the two straights after the main straight of Monza. They're rough as sin, but during those races crew chiefs do not scale back stiffness.

I understand that point on a daily driven vehicle, as when dealing with bumps it's nice if the car soaks up some of the shock, rather than your vertibrae, but performance almost always favours a suspension that is supple enough to let the tires bite down, but stiff enough to fight the car from leaning over too much. And looking at the simulator results, I have a long way to go before that becomes problematic. Hell, even the Koni yellows look like they'd have a tough time being that bad.

And yes Patrick, I think I was caught between wanting to type repeating and repetitive and ended up with both.

Yeah, I'm pretty gnarley like that. 

Cheese wrote: Romeo wrote: Like I said, the best approximation is the unpaved air-strip section of Sebring, or the two straights after the main straight of Monza. They're rough as sin, but during those races crew chiefs do not scale back stiffness. I'm not familiar with those tracks or even very familiar with Formula 1 in general, but if it's the straights that are rough then they wouldn't care about increasing cornering power for those sections. Even if they're not straights, would you sacrifice traction on every other part of the track just so you can go faster around just a couple of the corners? I wouldn't. Romeo wrote: ... but performance almost always favours a suspension that is supple enough to let the tires bite down, but stiff enough to fight the car from leaning over too much. That's more or less what I've been saying all along. A stock Fiero doesn't seem to have too much lean, so making the front softer rather than making the rear stiffer should result in a car that has more traction while cornering. I made the mistake of not doing enough research before I bought some of my suspension parts and so I've taken potential traction away from both ends of my car.

Mine does (If you saw at autocross). Although an anti-sway bar may help, it will not totally alleviate the issue. Whatever the weak link in the Fiero's traction is, I'm going to try and concentrate on that until everything is flat as a board around the corners (If I have to Delrin - I will).

Cheese wrote: Does that make sense?

Theory all goes out the window Saturday once we're on the track.

Reflexes and luck will be playing a huge role. A good wheel alignment doesn't hurt either.

All I'm worried about is being able to follow the course. I don't want to get lost out there like I did on my first run at the last autocross.

I was holding back quite a bit last time (being my first autocross and not being familiar with how the car was going to feel while being pushed). I was probably braking too early and starting my turns too late.

I suspect I'll be hitting more than one cone tomorrow.