Getting the back to stick
18 January 2003, 01:28 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is it when I go to B&Q's and buy 2 bags of sand, put them in the boot and drive back the back of my car feels rooted to the gound. Also read a few posts on here with people saying that their car seems to handle better with some passengers in the back.
Why is this?
Is there anything we can do to our suspension to emmulate the bags of sand handling?
Why is this?
Is there anything we can do to our suspension to emmulate the bags of sand handling?
18 January 2003, 05:29 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: oustide the asylum?
Posts: 3,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get a decent sized ICE install? 
I'm planning on a rear strut brace for my UK to see what that does, and the dampers really need replacing as well. (I can feel them sagging a bit.)
What tyres are you using? Mine feel quite grippy withoug extra weight in the back.
I'm planning on a rear strut brace for my UK to see what that does, and the dampers really need replacing as well. (I can feel them sagging a bit.)
What tyres are you using? Mine feel quite grippy withoug extra weight in the back.
18 January 2003, 11:28 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: oustide the asylum?
Posts: 3,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mine (Uk car) feels much better with no people in the back. Think it's the worn rear shocks causing this - I'm looking forward to replacing them next month, then I can look at the next handling problem.
How do you find the strut brace? does it make much difference in an RA - with the solid rear bulkhead?
How do you find the strut brace? does it make much difference in an RA - with the solid rear bulkhead?
19 January 2003, 09:17 AM
#5
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dnb
Its been a long time since I've driven a scoob without one. I asked the same question ages ago with my STI 5, plenty of people that I respected said its worth it, so I did and now would be without. In any case it can't hurt can it?
Paul
Its been a long time since I've driven a scoob without one. I asked the same question ages ago with my STI 5, plenty of people that I respected said its worth it, so I did and now would be without. In any case it can't hurt can it?
Paul
19 January 2003, 05:57 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dnb
I would have though a uk car would show even more gain from fitting
Still does answer the question, why does the back of my car handles better with 2 bags of sand in the boot?
Paul
I would have though a uk car would show even more gain from fitting
Still does answer the question, why does the back of my car handles better with 2 bags of sand in the boot?
Paul
Trending Topics
20 January 2003, 01:23 PM
#8
Just read this thread again. Have you had a PROPER check done on the suspension geometry?
Maybe when you load the boot with 2cwt sand, you make the suspension legs camber out, which makes it grip better.
Mine were set at 1degree 30 minutes negative camber by Powerstation last week, and the back feels better now, but I also had the rear arb changed for a thicker one, and solid droplinks all round.
Alcazar
Maybe when you load the boot with 2cwt sand, you make the suspension legs camber out, which makes it grip better.
Mine were set at 1degree 30 minutes negative camber by Powerstation last week, and the back feels better now, but I also had the rear arb changed for a thicker one, and solid droplinks all round.
Alcazar
20 January 2003, 01:42 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
alcazar
Geometry is ok, with in reason. Rear camber is just over 1 degree negative either side, just happen to have some new tyres at MichelDevers so I have a print out with it on.
The back just rides better with the sand, doesn't want to jump so much, just sort of sits down and feels more stable, if you know what I mean.
Paul
Geometry is ok, with in reason. Rear camber is just over 1 degree negative either side, just happen to have some new tyres at MichelDevers so I have a print out with it on.
The back just rides better with the sand, doesn't want to jump so much, just sort of sits down and feels more stable, if you know what I mean.
Paul
20 January 2003, 02:00 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: oustide the asylum?
Posts: 3,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are the springs too hard for a light car, so it bounces too much?
(silly idea, but you never know)
Could you generate some downforce with a rear wing?
(silly idea, but you never know)
Could you generate some downforce with a rear wing?
20 January 2003, 02:29 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dnb
I think you've not too far from the truth, I've noticed that when I'm getting low on fuel that the ride height on the car goes up. I thought that maybe the spring are too stiff but I'm no expert.
Paul
I think you've not too far from the truth, I've noticed that when I'm getting low on fuel that the ride height on the car goes up. I thought that maybe the spring are too stiff but I'm no expert.
Paul
20 January 2003, 03:52 PM
#12
OK..
One thing to remember is that adding weight to the rear of the car will not (unless there is some other major factor affecting things) make the rear stick more during bends - in-fact it will do the reverse.
Doubling the weight on a tyre does not double it's gripping force, so you will end up with less effective cornering grip at the back.
If the car REALLY IS stickier at the back when you add weight to it, the chances are your geometry is miles out and the slight lowering of the suspension causes the contact patches to be flatter or something like that.
I would suspect that it just "feels" more sticky though.
Cheers
Simon
PS. It will also make the car roll more at the back, which *could* in turn make the front of the car less performant under lateral load as it will shift the dynamic roll couple distribution rearward (meaning more load transfer across the front tyres).
One thing to remember is that adding weight to the rear of the car will not (unless there is some other major factor affecting things) make the rear stick more during bends - in-fact it will do the reverse.
Doubling the weight on a tyre does not double it's gripping force, so you will end up with less effective cornering grip at the back.
If the car REALLY IS stickier at the back when you add weight to it, the chances are your geometry is miles out and the slight lowering of the suspension causes the contact patches to be flatter or something like that.
I would suspect that it just "feels" more sticky though.
Cheers
Simon
PS. It will also make the car roll more at the back, which *could* in turn make the front of the car less performant under lateral load as it will shift the dynamic roll couple distribution rearward (meaning more load transfer across the front tyres).
20 January 2003, 04:20 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simon
I hear what you are saying but, I think maybe the word "stick" is maybe not correct. Its sometimes difficult to describe how one interprets the handling of a car. dnb maybe had something with the rear being too light and no one seem to offer a comment re the ride height changing as the fuel tank empties. What I think I'm trying to say it that if I stick 2 bags of sand in the boot (50kg) then the whole rear suspension works better, it doesn't skip over bumps and generally feels more rooted to the road.
Paul
I hear what you are saying but, I think maybe the word "stick" is maybe not correct. Its sometimes difficult to describe how one interprets the handling of a car. dnb maybe had something with the rear being too light and no one seem to offer a comment re the ride height changing as the fuel tank empties. What I think I'm trying to say it that if I stick 2 bags of sand in the boot (50kg) then the whole rear suspension works better, it doesn't skip over bumps and generally feels more rooted to the road.
Paul
20 January 2003, 04:29 PM
#14
pban
I get you. It could well be as simple as the fact that you've changed you sprung wieight / unsprung weight ratio in the right direction (admitedly from the wrong starting point!
) which is almost always an advantage.
If I'm reading you correctly, you're getting more consistent compliance, rather than increased grip. This is very possible.
Try lighter wheels maybe?
cheers
Simon
I get you. It could well be as simple as the fact that you've changed you sprung wieight / unsprung weight ratio in the right direction (admitedly from the wrong starting point!
) which is almost always an advantage.If I'm reading you correctly, you're getting more consistent compliance, rather than increased grip. This is very possible.
Try lighter wheels maybe?
cheers
Simon
20 January 2003, 04:38 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simon
Yep, now we are on the right wave length, AFAIK the springs/shock and wheels are all standard so this is "as factory", hense another thread asking owners of STI3 RA's to tell me what there cars are like and if they have modded the suspension.
What effect would slightly softer spring make? Would this act as if their is more weight to the rear of the car?
Paul
[Edited by pban - 1/20/2003 6:14:53 PM]
Yep, now we are on the right wave length, AFAIK the springs/shock and wheels are all standard so this is "as factory", hense another thread asking owners of STI3 RA's to tell me what there cars are like and if they have modded the suspension.
What effect would slightly softer spring make? Would this act as if their is more weight to the rear of the car?
Paul
[Edited by pban - 1/20/2003 6:14:53 PM]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post