Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    rec.autos.tech    |    Technical aspects of automobiles, et. al    |    117,728 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 115,941 of 117,728    |
|    Xeno to thekmanrocks@gmail.com    |
|    Re: Split/Different Front and Rear Cold     |
|    20 Aug 20 21:50:46    |
      From: xenolith@optusnet.com.au              On 20/8/20 7:24 pm, thekmanrocks@gmail.com wrote:       > Xeno:       >       > My particular mid-size front-wheel drive specifies 32psi, front and rear.       > It already has 'light'(easy) steering due to its wide, 50-series low profile       > tires.       >       > So for a while, I took it upon myself to experiment with adding 2psi to       > the heavier axle(the engine) and removing 1-2psi from the lighter rear       > axle. So I had a set up of 34front, 31rear.       >       > While the back end seemed more planted, the steering actually became       > more 'dartier' than ever on the highway, and I found I had to make more       > corrections thn ever to stay in a lane!              Indeed. What you did by inflating the front tyres to a higher pressure       was to *reduce* the slip angle at the front. That makes the car behave       exactly as you described - "dartier". Actually, a more appropriate term       is *precise*. The problem is that you have upset the designed in       *balance*. You would find, if you pushed it harder, that you might get a       tad more oversteer than before. That you might find more than a little       unsettling.       The point to the manufacturers recommended tyre pressure setting is that       it was determined by a lot of *factory testing* and works in conjunction       with suspension and steering design. If you want to vary that, and don't       understand the nuances of steering and suspension design, vehicle       handling and the like, then be prepared to expect the unexpected.       >       > During the third week, I reset all tires back to 32psi cold, and the car       > calmed down, and actually drive as intended. I'm actually running       > 33psi cold all around now, because the weather here is starting to       > get cooler, and handling is still fine.       >       > So for my specific car, a 56/44 split weight front wheel driver, using the       > same front/rear pressure - as specified - actually works!              You will find that it is the design of the steering and suspension that       counters that seeming unbalance in handling. IOW, the 56/44 weight       difference front to rear has been compensated for in the steering and       suspension. In some other cars, a difference in tyre pressures F to R is       the manufacturers solution, especially in FWD cars.              My suggestion is that you do some study into slip angles, their       influence on handling and what influences slip angles. It is a very       complex thing to discuss and you need quite a deal of knowledge of       steering and suspension systems before you can move on to vehicle       handling. This understanding of slip angles however is vital to your       understanding of vehicle handling. The manufacturer of your vehicle has       designed the *basic* handling to be *safe* with a degree of understeer       built in because they have to assume not all drivers have the requisite       skill to operate a vehicle that handles differently.       >       > Can BMW and Audi do different front/back pressures simoly because       > their models' axle weights are closer to 50/50?       >       As I stated, you need to first look at the steering and suspension       design. That will tell you what the manufacturers goals are. Cars are       not designed from the *tyre* up.              --              Xeno                     Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.        (with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca