07-12-2007, 02:17 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,698
|
|
 Quote:
Originally Posted by junglejustice
...I still can't get you to live up to one indisputable fact; eliminate the roll and the LCA-position becomes a non-event!
|
JJ is an advocate of stiffer is better- eliminate roll, and you eliminate geometry problems.
richard is an advocate of fix geometry problems, and then match roll stiffness to work.
Both approaches work, sometimes better than others. You both need to get over it a little (if you ask me, and I know you didn't).
The whole welding thing is just fluff to add to the arugments.
My personal (and it's just my personal) want is geometry first, stiffness second- why? Becuase I autocross- and parking lots are rarely places where you can deal with huge spring stiffness without suffering from problems in bumpy braking areas or terrible lot surfaces. If you run on good quailty road courses, you can run super stiff- there's a reason you see all F1 races on billard smooth surfaces- so they CAN run super stiff, and take advantage of the aero benefits of a consistent platform.
Heck, if we want to bring up 105's, there's another solution to the cut and weld- turn the bottom joint upside down. Whether that's the most cost, geometry, saftey effective can be argued.
But in the end, it's the track that will decide who is best.
Both of you need to stop arguing, and start seeing the point of the other side, no matter how much you disagree with it. Especially if you are not going to explain WHY you came to such conclusion (which is perfectly OK, since it was hard work, and you deserve to hold onto your secrets).
BTW- jj- just becuase 100's were sold, it does not mean it's the best- we sell 800k F150's a year. 'nuff said? 
Eric 
|