View Single Post
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 12-20-2004, 05:11 PM
mylesdw mylesdw is offline
CC Member
Visit my Photo Gallery

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Cobra Make, Engine: Ram 427 SC CSX6042. Chev 355. Quad Weber DCNFs
Posts: 208
Send a message via ICQ to mylesdw
Not Ranked     
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by strictlypersonl


No matter what kind of suspension you use, anti-squat is achieved by making the instaneous trailing arm axis be as high as possible. If it passes through the center of gravity (side projection), you acheive 100% anti-squat. The problem is that the wheel must follow a up-and-to-the-rear path as it moves under bump. It decreases basic braking and accelleration stability - it is essentially in a state of unstable equilibrium.

There is no way to change essential weight transfer under accelleration. The net force vector (weight+accelleration) will always create a moment that transfers weight. The front will always rise up, the only limitation being the front spring rate.
Not according to my book. 100% anti-squat is achieved when the instantaneous trailing arm axis is anywhere on a line drawn between the rear tyre contact patch and a point directly above the front axle centreline at CofG height. The majority of anti-squat effect is caused by the torque reaction from a live axle being transmitted through the suspension and causing a jacking effect equal and opposite to the weight transfer. An IRS transmits no torque reaction through the suspension so ant-squat is severely limited.

As you say, there is no way to increase weight transfer but anti-squat DOES increase rear tyre loading and thus traction. For an IRS anti-squat also has the benefit of minimising any camber change due to suspension compression.
__________________
Cheers
Myles D-W
Reply With Quote