[gtv27]

Hi Jason. I've thought and thought about this and I'm still not convinced. My main thing is that although the contact patch will be moved, there is still a force acting vertically under the bottom balljoint. This force is always vertical (or close enough) regardless of where the contact patch is.

I think about a 'T'. If you invert it, and the vertical part (the long bit) is fixed so that it can only move vertically, and you now apply a force under either ends of the top(crossbar?) the force acting vertically on the long part will be exactly the same regardless of where on the crossbar you push. That's how I rationalise it.

OK, I think I understand where you are coming from with the upside down T. What changing the offset will do is either shorten or lengthen the cross bar, giving a change to the effective lever ratio. So while the force is acting verticaly on the ball joint (or the vertical bit of the T), it can have a greater impact as a result of the wheel offset giving it more mechanical advantage (hypothetically speaking if the wheels stick out heaps)

Ride height should change with offest if the wheel rate does. (the same weight or a 1m lever will deflect more than a the same weight on a .5m lever). I do agree that practically it probably won't make enough difference to worry about, but if you're trying to figure out torsion bar equivalencies, you need to get the formula right. I'm a practical person so I might try and experiment this weekend with it and see.

Aha, I hadn't thought about the impact of the weight of the car on the ride height, just the geometry. You are right, the big outboard offset wheel would have the car sitting a bit lower due to the increased leverage on the spring - the ride height would reduce (in theory). I think that helps confirm the theory from an independent line of thought!