Notices
Racing & Drivers Education Forum
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Suspension (Moton Clubsport vs Moton Motorsport)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-19-2009, 09:38 AM
  #46  
Larry Herman
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
Larry Herman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, NJ
Posts: 10,432
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Geoffrey
Interesting, I would have gone the other way and reduced the compression dampening to allow the weight to transfer more quickly to the front. I'm not sure what you were trying to accomplish by slowing down the weight transfer to the front of the car.
Geoffrey, I was having trouble with braking going into 1 and 8 at WG. Both braking zones are downhill. I was actually triggering the ABS as I was building braking pressure on initial application. Chris and I discussed it and I felt that I was not getting the weight to transfer fast enough onto the front tires, so increasing the low speed compression in the front would transfer the weight faster as the body pitchs forward under initial braking. With softer LS compression, I have to wait for the body to pitch down and compress the springs. With stiffer LS compression, as soon as there is any movement, the shock loads the tires while the pressure on the springs build. Make sense?

And, FWIW, my car with spring rates approximately 1/4 of Chris's had the same amount of roll. It took awhile to figure that one out...
I need to know what you learned about that.
__________________
Larry Herman
2016 Ford Transit Connect Titanium LWB
2018 Tesla Model 3 - Electricity can be fun!
Retired Club Racer & National PCA Instructor
Past Flames:
1994 RS America Club Racer
2004 GT3 Track Car
1984 911 Carrera Club Racer
1974 914/4 2.0 Track Car

CLICK HERE to see some of my ancient racing videos.

Old 02-19-2009, 10:13 AM
  #47  
Geoffrey
Nordschleife Master
 
Geoffrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kingston, NY
Posts: 8,305
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

Larry, I think you have it reversed, the spring rate is what transfers the weight around the car. If the car had no springs at all, it would effectively have springs of infinite spring rate and the weight transfer would occur immediately. The function of the dampers is to resist the weight transfer, so, increasing the compression in the front will slow down the weight transfer onto the front tires. You went the reverse of your desired outcome.

I need to know what you learned about that.
I'll let you think about that one for awhile...
Old 02-19-2009, 10:16 AM
  #48  
Veloce Raptor
Rennlist Member
 
Veloce Raptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: All Ate Up With Motor
Posts: 41,864
Received 1,692 Likes on 873 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Geoffrey
And, FWIW, my car with spring rates approximately 1/4 of Chris's had the same amount of roll. It took awhile to figure that one out...
So, a question: how did you intrepret this ^^^ information? Why did your car behave this way with only 1/4 of the spring rates?
Old 02-19-2009, 10:29 AM
  #49  
Geoffrey
Nordschleife Master
 
Geoffrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kingston, NY
Posts: 8,305
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

Answer to the first question:
Chris's car is a 993, mine is a 964 with 993 front suspension, so the fronts are identical and the rears are not since the rear motion ratio of a 993 is <1 and a 964 is > 1. We both have MoTeC ADLs with suspension position sensors which measure damper position and a math channel for wheel travel which is calculated from the motion ratio and damper position. At the time I was running 600/650 and chris at 2000+ F/R (I cannot remember exactly). My car is about 200lbs lighter than his car at the time.
Old 02-19-2009, 10:31 AM
  #50  
Veloce Raptor
Rennlist Member
 
Veloce Raptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: All Ate Up With Motor
Posts: 41,864
Received 1,692 Likes on 873 Posts
Default

Thanks. I did not realize you had a hybrid suspension with different motion ratios.

So how do you think your car would have behaved, had you had the same spring rates?
Old 02-19-2009, 10:44 AM
  #51  
Geoffrey
Nordschleife Master
 
Geoffrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kingston, NY
Posts: 8,305
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

So how do you think your car would have behaved, had you had the same spring rates?
Differently
Old 02-19-2009, 10:46 AM
  #52  
Larry Herman
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
Larry Herman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, NJ
Posts: 10,432
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Geoffrey, I would argue that the shock does not resist weight transfer, it resists movement over time. The stiffer the shock is set, the faster and harder it resists this movement. In my understanding, the body will compress the spring and the shock. The force from both is transferred to the tire, however, the force from the spring will increase in a somewhat linear amount with movement, while the shock will exert force immediately respective of the amount of dampening it is set for.
Old 02-19-2009, 10:50 AM
  #53  
Larry Herman
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
Larry Herman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, NJ
Posts: 10,432
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Geoffrey
I'll let you think about that one for awhile...
Probably comes down to roll centers. Even though you have the same front suspension, your rears are different, your ride heights are probably different and so the roll centers in your car are higher, therefore less body roll, allowing for lighter springs.
Old 02-19-2009, 10:54 AM
  #54  
Geoffrey
Nordschleife Master
 
Geoffrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kingston, NY
Posts: 8,305
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

Exactly, my car was approximately 25mm higher than Chris's, so although my center of gravity was higher, the suspension geometry had the roll centers closer to the center of gravity and therefore had less roll, not to be confused with weight transfer.
Old 02-19-2009, 10:58 AM
  #55  
wanna911
Race Car
Thread Starter
 
wanna911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: With A Manual Transmission
Posts: 4,728
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Larry Herman
Geoffrey, I would argue that the shock does not resist weight transfer, it resists movement over time. The stiffer the shock is set, the faster and harder it resists this movement. In my understanding, the body will compress the spring and the shock. The force from both is transferred to the tire, however, the force from the spring will increase in a somewhat linear amount with movement, while the shock will exert force immediately respective of the amount of dampening it is set for.

I'm a nub at this but I was going to say the same thing, suspension doesn't prevent chassis weight transfer, it simply controls those motions and translates them to tires. You'd still have weight transfer if you were riding with no springs and hard rods.
Old 02-19-2009, 11:01 AM
  #56  
Larry Herman
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
Larry Herman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, NJ
Posts: 10,432
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Geoffrey
Exactly, my car was approximately 25mm higher than Chris's, so although my center of gravity was higher, the suspension geometry had the roll centers closer to the center of gravity and therefore had less roll, not to be confused with weight transfer.
I have raised up and re-aligned several cars that were IMHO too low, all with good results.
Old 02-19-2009, 02:34 PM
  #57  
TheOtherEric
Rennlist Member
 
TheOtherEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 12,065
Received 36 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Accelerator
... I now have to jack up each side of the car (the only way to get an accurate pressure reading) in the AM to check canister pressures....
I'm surprised nobody commented on that. Isn't there disagreement here? My shock rebuilder (reputable) told me that measurements are done wheels-on-ground.
Old 02-19-2009, 02:55 PM
  #58  
Larry Herman
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
Larry Herman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, NJ
Posts: 10,432
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TheOtherEric
I'm surprised nobody commented on that. Isn't there disagreement here? My shock rebuilder (reputable) told me that measurements are done wheels-on-ground.
I was letting that go for someone else.

I agree about all wheels on the ground. That is the operating condition.
Old 02-19-2009, 03:05 PM
  #59  
Geoffrey
Nordschleife Master
 
Geoffrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Kingston, NY
Posts: 8,305
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

It will depend on the way the damper works. The Moton / JRZ / Protrac shocks are built where the canister pressure adds effective spring rate to the suspension. They need to be filled and tested with the damper unloaded (wheel off the ground). If you have airjacks it really isn't an issue. I check and set mine on a regular basis.
Old 02-19-2009, 03:36 PM
  #60  
Accelerator
Racer
 
Accelerator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Atlanta area
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=Geoffrey;6302255]It will depend on the way the damper works. The Moton / JRZ / Protrac shocks are built where the canister pressure adds effective spring rate to the suspension. They need to be filled and tested with the damper unloaded (wheel off the ground).

That is precicely why I jack up each side to measure canister pressure. I was wondering when someone would pick up on and question that procedure. There is also the issue of ambient. My measurement for this weekend at 32 ambient will be a different reading from the one taken at Road Atlanta in August, assuming no system leakage, which in my case is a poor assumption.


Quick Reply: Suspension (Moton Clubsport vs Moton Motorsport)



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 05:12 AM.