Tony Posted May 4, 2012 Report Share Posted May 4, 2012 Brilliant example can be seen in this video, can anyone spot what's happening? Please wait a few moments for Video to Load! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazza Posted May 4, 2012 Report Share Posted May 4, 2012 I would say the car has not been built to carry the power its running Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMARTLY Posted May 4, 2012 Report Share Posted May 4, 2012 Torque steer but isn't that on front wheel drive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyelcomb Posted May 4, 2012 Report Share Posted May 4, 2012 Well it has quite soft suspension which helps with initial takeoff, but as it changes gear there is a significant lift and bounce of the back end. While that is happening, could it be that the torque of the engine is twisting the car slightly and so it is getting uneven weight across the axle and therefore a degree of rear-steer? I believe they always said that the old gas turbine F1 car could almost lift the wheels on one side when it was stationary and revved hard - is it like that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam_r Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 could it be the rear steer comming from a poor geo setup? Car pulls away and all weight is transfered to the rear, car pivots around its rear axle and squats down. this squating motion then causes the rear toe to change forcing the toe to increase. As the toe has increased both wheels are now more / \ which will cause the back end to become less stable so will shimmy around. this aslo isnt helped by the crazy power its trying to put down. am i rambling on with no clue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liner33 Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 I know he would be chucked off a UK strip after a couple of runs like that , the rear end is moving around under power and steering the car , had a similar issue with my bike There is a reluctance for many jap racers to consider the effects of a powerful engine and lots of traction and stick with unsuitable rear ends Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted May 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 When thrust is removed you can see the squat disappear allowing the inertia to move forward this then makes the rear loose until traction is regained then squat. I think the rear suspension is just a little to soft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hms Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 If you watch the viideo about 3 From the end where the other Car has a chute, there is very little little squat. H Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted May 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 There won't be, reason being the chute is deployed from the unsprung chassis, if it were the sprung the squat would be horrendous and lift the front off the ground. Traction rod adjustment could help reduce squat but won't help inertia transfer. The Honda S2000 is a classic domestic example involving inertia transfer, that being under engineered and then over compensated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hms Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 No,Ii meant the car that had the 'chute showed very little squat under accelleration. H Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hms Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 No, I meant the car that had the 'chute showed very little squat under accelleration. H Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted May 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 Ok you got me here, under acceleration there is no chute Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam_r Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 There won't be, reason being the chute is deployed from the unsprung chassis, if it were the sprung the squat would be horrendous and lift the front off the ground. Traction rod adjustment could help reduce squat but won't help inertia transfer. The Honda S2000 is a classic domestic example involving inertia transfer, that being under engineered and then over compensated. Tony, Whats up with the S2000 chassis ? i could not fault it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted May 7, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2012 Bespoke chassis/ suspension for the early S2000 proved horrendous, namely snap oversteer.... The S2000 didn't suffer from squat thanks to the traction rods but it had real transitional issues, mainly on the suspension re-bound reaction or lack of it. Honda revised the dampers to gas and employed an aggressive geometry set-up in order to make the rear tyres/ thrust stick..... It didn't work in my opinion. Application of thrust opens an ungoverned application of factors resulting in snap-overseer, all this despite Honda's best intentions, as a result the S2000 remains very unbalanced dynamically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam_r Posted May 7, 2012 Report Share Posted May 7, 2012 Bespoke chassis/ suspension for the early S2000 proved horrendous, namely snap oversteer.... The S2000 didn't suffer from squat thanks to the traction rods but it had real transitional issues, mainly on the suspension re-bound reaction or lack of it. Honda revised the dampers to gas and employed an aggressive geometry set-up in order to make the rear tyres/ thrust stick..... It didn't work in my opinion. Application of thrust opens an ungoverned application of factors resulting in snap-overseer, all this despite Honda's best intentions, as a result the S2000 remains very unbalanced dynamically. Very interesting... whilst im no racing driver i have pushed the S2000 hard on track and found it very stable as long as you respected the car and didnt just 'mash' inputs in to the car. Im aware the early S2000's where more snappy but some people have found with a slight geo tweak, this moves from snap to progressive. but what do i know! your the geo man Tony! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kozy Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 Bespoke chassis/ suspension for the early S2000 proved horrendous, namely snap oversteer.... The S2000 didn't suffer from squat thanks to the traction rods but it had real transitional issues, mainly on the suspension re-bound reaction or lack of it. Honda revised the dampers to gas and employed an aggressive geometry set-up in order to make the rear tyres/ thrust stick..... It didn't work in my opinion. Application of thrust opens an ungoverned application of factors resulting in snap-overseer, all this despite Honda's best intentions, as a result the S2000 remains very unbalanced dynamically. Interesting stuff, I've always been interested in the S2000 but never really fully understood its flaws dynamically. I was lead to believe it was a problem with the rear steer effects so that when the throttle was lifted in a corner the rear wheels toe'd out, so in effect to keep the rear planted in a corner you had to keep the throttle applied, obviously requiring a more committed driving style than a lot of buyers were capable of... resulting in a lot of crashes and complaints that it handled badly. Does this sort of tie in with your explanation on the rebound reaction? Can it be properly fixed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted May 8, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 Rear toe migration was toward negative albeit not much, nevertheless stock rear toe is + one degree total Applying an aggressive geometry calibration and corner weighting vastly improves a poor build. Don't get me wrong i love the cars but this niggling issue is a challenge.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parthiban Posted May 10, 2012 Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 That driver has some balls to keep his foot in with a car that looks so out of control Looks like they've taken a standard supra packed as much power in as possible and left the rest alone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted May 10, 2012 Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 They need to have a word with Jamie P! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liner33 Posted May 10, 2012 Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 They need to have a word with Jamie P! Yep ideal person to speak to if you want the car to handle like that Jamie seems to want to stick to the stock set up despite its obvious shortcomings for drag racing and stability under power 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.