jon Posted January 27, 2007 Report Share Posted January 27, 2007 Q: And can you play around quite a bit with the current suspension layout. Is it flexible enough in terms of geometry that you can accommodate a number of camber angles etc? AN: Camber angles, yes, that’s easy. In truth, the front suspension has so little travel that the movement kinematics – things like camber change – aren’t that important. The rear suspension is where you might see more development by teams that have been on Michelins and are now on Bridgestones. http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?Type=Ge...53&PO=38353 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted January 27, 2007 Report Share Posted January 27, 2007 Q: And can you play around quite a bit with the current suspension layout. Is it flexible enough in terms of geometry that you can accommodate a number of camber angles etc? AN: Camber angles, yes, that’s easy. In truth, the front suspension has so little travel that the movement kinematics – things like camber change – aren’t that important. The rear suspension is where you might see more development by teams that have been on Michelins and are now on Bridgestones. http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?Type=Ge...53&PO=38353 I agree with those statements for the race car... Geometry is a modifier when the suspension Kinematics cannot deliver required characteristics.. More important considerations are.... 1: Chassis calibration 2: Aerodynamics 3: Dynamic indexing 4: Tyres 5: Geometry In no particular order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.