dr bob

Colin--

What does 1/16" toe-in translate to in degrees?

Lizard928

In this link there is a chart part way down.
https://rennlist.com/forums/racing-a...onversion.html

1/16" is 0.0625" for conversion

dr bob

Thanks for the link.

Looks like you are right at about the factory's 15' toe-in recommendation.

I suppose that using inches makes some sense if you are doing string alignments as many do. My DIY laser setup is easier for me in degrees initially, especially since I end up doing the conversion back to inches. No sensitivity to rim size, and old eyes (mine) find it easier to look at a red dot on a tape measure on the floor a few feet away vs. trying to fiddle a total of 1/16" (1/32" per side...) with strings and a small scale. I shoot spots on the floor 43" in front of and the same 43" behind wheel center. Five minutes of angle translates to 1/8" difference in measurements between spots, so the factory 15' +5' works out to 3/8", up to 1/2" max difference.

RKD in OKC

Here is a video from my iPhone with G meter in the corner...kinda slow course though.

IcemanG17

Thats an autox I would actually enjoy......but my car would suck at it, since it doesn't have an E brake.....

rad_951

Could you "flick" it? I tried it at an autox and almost made 1 out of 4 tries.

Renn_Thrills

To brian and whoever else may lend some wisdom: All other things being equal (as obviously the motors got more powerful, breaks improved etc) were there no developments in the chassis over the years that would give a benefit on track?

GlenL

The chassis itself, in regards to the suspension, was unchanged over the entire run.

brutus

Some minor redesign of the front suspension a-arm lengths and flipped over the lower ball joint. Minor tweaks of spring rates and sway bar sizes. But early or late stuff bolts on to early or late tub.

IcemanG17

Great ??? Other than the slightly different A arm lengths and lower ball joints like others said, thats about it..... So ALL the changes were in the front.....the only changes to the rear were wheel spacers.....

In regards to "flicking" my racer to achieve a 180' turn.....I dunno....I don't think it would work....I'm afraid with that hard of braking just before, it wouldn't be enough just with the flick, then you would have to modulate power oversteer to finish the turn, which is possible.......I just figure I would suck at it for the 1st several attempts...

RKD in OKC

I sucked at the ebrake turn the first several attempts. Actually we don't have that sort of 180 at many of the events, they just throw one in every once in a while for fun.

IcemanG17

its a very "drift" like aspect....not easy in a 928 since the E brake is on the "wrong" side.... :>)

I would rather do the E brake on the semi-track you run, than the standard "sea of cones" we see out here.....friggin confusing if you ask me......since we do the SAME THING in police training....otherwise known as BORING....imagine an autox in a cop car....4400lbs of nose heavy, under tired mess that you CAN'T power rotate (in time anyway).....

RKD in OKC

This is another typical setup...

Lizard928

Why not just use the braking force to initiate the 180? Ie when braking at the limit turn in, the weight transfer to the front limits the weight on the rear making it more prone to rotate.
I use this on the track when entering a turn, especially when I initiate the brakes a fraction too late.

RKD in OKC

Sounds easy enough, much more difficult to make a full 180 out of it in practice.