Quote:
Originally Posted by Def
I've said it about 20 times here, but I'll say it again, the rear roll center does NOT drop as quickly as the front when lowering the car. Raising the rear roll center up to almost stock height when you've lowered the rear CG a few inches is going to create an UNFAVORABLE roll axis inclination in that it crosses through your CG axis. This causes all sorts of undesirable things to happen with your suspension.
I still have no clue why people think going to stock geometry is the right thing to do when you've now lowered your CG significantly. These two things work together, why in the world would you want to keep one the same and change the other one significantly?
|
Beyond that even when referring to "stock" geometry when referring to roll center people are using the wrong reference point. We keep talking about the roll center's heighth in reference to the ground. We need to be referencing the roll center heighth to the CG (like you said) even when referring to taking things "back to stock". The roll center's heighth in reference to the ground isn't nearly as important as the roll couple length and we all need to wake up to that as well as to what you posted above.
One question though, how bad would it be if someone got to the point where the roll center was actually above the CG? I wouldn't imagine that would be a good thing.