Extreme camber
Discussion
How long do these tyres last?
You can literally watch them disintegrating!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztAvcuxy5Io&fea...
You can literally watch them disintegrating!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztAvcuxy5Io&fea...
maniac0796 said:
Some of the guys I help mod with will put a lot of thought into what they do. Some not so much.
What I can say is after 3 years or so of abuse, components on these cars still work fine for the most part. It tends to wear out inner CV joints, and bottom ball joints due to new load angles, and obviously tyres but you can engineer around it.
Lifting the engine higher makes the driveshafts sit flatter, and reduces sump damage. Ball joint extenders flatten out the wishbones which reduce wear on the ball joints and bushes and make it handle a bit nicer.
Massive component failure is rare though. And they still pass MOT most years without massive work. Recently helped someone who has potentially the lowest Mk3 golf in the country through an MOT. Only major thing was an inner CV boot. This is a car that's been driven probably 15k about half an inch off the ground for a year.
That's the first post here which has addressed the problem of whether it's safe. The asnwer lies with whether the owner has bothered to plan it through, as you have outlined.
Mind you, I wouldn't want to have an extremely lowered car in most towns because of the speed calming measures. Must be frustrating to the driver , let alone the 20 normal cars queued up behind him. That alone would stop me from wanting to do it - common courtesy.
For those who say they don't handle well because they think they're the king of geometry, I've seen some of these cars fly around corners quicker than I'd dare in cars that are meant to be amazing at handling from standard.
What I can say is after 3 years or so of abuse, components on these cars still work fine for the most part. It tends to wear out inner CV joints, and bottom ball joints due to new load angles, and obviously tyres but you can engineer around it.
Lifting the engine higher makes the driveshafts sit flatter, and reduces sump damage. Ball joint extenders flatten out the wishbones which reduce wear on the ball joints and bushes and make it handle a bit nicer.
Massive component failure is rare though. And they still pass MOT most years without massive work. Recently helped someone who has potentially the lowest Mk3 golf in the country through an MOT. Only major thing was an inner CV boot. This is a car that's been driven probably 15k about half an inch off the ground for a year.
That's the first post here which has addressed the problem of whether it's safe. The asnwer lies with whether the owner has bothered to plan it through, as you have outlined.
Mind you, I wouldn't want to have an extremely lowered car in most towns because of the speed calming measures. Must be frustrating to the driver , let alone the 20 normal cars queued up behind him. That alone would stop me from wanting to do it - common courtesy.
For those who say they don't handle well because they think they're the king of geometry, I've seen some of these cars fly around corners quicker than I'd dare in cars that are meant to be amazing at handling from standard.
nicanary said:
maniac0796 said:
Some of the guys I help mod with will put a lot of thought into what they do. Some not so much.
What I can say is after 3 years or so of abuse, components on these cars still work fine for the most part. It tends to wear out inner CV joints, and bottom ball joints due to new load angles, and obviously tyres but you can engineer around it.
Lifting the engine higher makes the driveshafts sit flatter, and reduces sump damage. Ball joint extenders flatten out the wishbones which reduce wear on the ball joints and bushes and make it handle a bit nicer.
Massive component failure is rare though. And they still pass MOT most years without massive work. Recently helped someone who has potentially the lowest Mk3 golf in the country through an MOT. Only major thing was an inner CV boot. This is a car that's been driven probably 15k about half an inch off the ground for a year.
That's the first post here which has addressed the problem of whether it's safe. The asnwer lies with whether the owner has bothered to plan it through, as you have outlined.What I can say is after 3 years or so of abuse, components on these cars still work fine for the most part. It tends to wear out inner CV joints, and bottom ball joints due to new load angles, and obviously tyres but you can engineer around it.
Lifting the engine higher makes the driveshafts sit flatter, and reduces sump damage. Ball joint extenders flatten out the wishbones which reduce wear on the ball joints and bushes and make it handle a bit nicer.
Massive component failure is rare though. And they still pass MOT most years without massive work. Recently helped someone who has potentially the lowest Mk3 golf in the country through an MOT. Only major thing was an inner CV boot. This is a car that's been driven probably 15k about half an inch off the ground for a year.
Mind you, I wouldn't want to have an extremely lowered car in most towns because of the speed calming measures. Must be frustrating to the driver , let alone the 20 normal cars queued up behind him. That alone would stop me from wanting to do it - common courtesy.
For those who say they don't handle well because they think they're the king of geometry, I've seen some of these cars fly around corners quicker than I'd dare in cars that are meant to be amazing at handling from standard.
TheLastPost said:
This car was designed and built by the guy who literally wrote the textbook on Race Car Vehicle Dynamics:
Sadly, he died earlier this year, so you can't tell him how much cleverer than him you are.
...it takes the right tyre profile to make the most of it, though.
Cool. What did he have to say about these dynamics on public roads, using normal car tyres stretched across oversized wheels, on cars not designed with these dynamics in mind?Sadly, he died earlier this year, so you can't tell him how much cleverer than him you are.
...it takes the right tyre profile to make the most of it, though.
It is however not only using motorbike tyres, which are designed to work ar serious angles of lean, but they are also fitted to the correct size wheels 
Great minds
It's also a lightweight race car, with what must be purposely designed and/or setup suspension.
Great minds
It's also a lightweight race car, with what must be purposely designed and/or setup suspension.
Edited by SlimJim16v on Sunday 16th September 17:05
TheLastPost said:
This car was designed and built by the guy who literally wrote the textbook on Race Car Vehicle Dynamics:
Aah, because race car.TheLastPost said:
xRIEx said:
Cool. What did he have to say about these dynamics on public roads, using normal car tyres stretched across oversized wheels, on cars not designed with these dynamics in mind?
Pretty much what I already said at the bottom of my first post: that you need to have the right tyre profiles to take advantage of them.Am I able to infer that he said, "don't do it with stretched normal car road tyres"?
I don't know about other cars, but on an Elise on standard tyres you can easily feel braking performane start to drop off past about 2-3 degrees of negative camber.
Something running nearly 45 degrees, almost entirely on what is meant to be the tyre sidewall is not going to stop (or indeed do anything else) well.
I see nothing wrong with it if they're running tyres designed for the camber, though.
Something running nearly 45 degrees, almost entirely on what is meant to be the tyre sidewall is not going to stop (or indeed do anything else) well.
I see nothing wrong with it if they're running tyres designed for the camber, though.
Edited by kambites on Sunday 16th September 17:43
TheLastPost said:
xRIEx said:
Am I able to infer that he said, "don't do it with stretched normal car road tyres"?
No, I'm not aware of him making any such statement. You might infer that that's what he implied, but I don't think he said so directly.TheLastPost said:
Am I to infer that you would prefer to see any such non-standard modification of vehicles banned, even though you have no good evidence that that aredangerous, or that they have caused accidents?
If so, you'll be pleased to know that you have allies in the European Parliament.
D
Repeat after me:
All Individualism is Bad!
I Must Conform!
Anyone showing signs of non-conformity must be pilloried and punished!
Baaah!
Baaaaah!
Baaaaaaaaah!
No, you don't need to infer anything because I've stated my opinion further up, broadly summarised as 'each to their own'. Interesting psychosis going on there, though.If so, you'll be pleased to know that you have allies in the European Parliament.
DRepeat after me:
All Individualism is Bad!
I Must Conform!
Anyone showing signs of non-conformity must be pilloried and punished!
Baaah!
Baaaaah!
Baaaaaaaaah!
That's what I said "cornering forces" obviously deform the tyre, as you said. I've been doing this a long time and know all the advantages and disadvantages, both in theory and practice.
You are just clutching at straws to justify your opinion on an ugly, useless and almost certainly dangerous modification. Your arguments may sway someone with little knowledge, but not me.
You are just clutching at straws to justify your opinion on an ugly, useless and almost certainly dangerous modification. Your arguments may sway someone with little knowledge, but not me.
TheLastPost said:
kambites said:
I don't know about other cars, but on an Elise on standard tyres you can easily feel braking performane start to drop off past about 2-3 degrees of negative camber.
Yes, broadly (without wishing to get too deeply into the technicalities) for the reasons I set out in my post above: the weight transfer is generating 2-3 degrees worth of deflection in the tyres themselves.If the tyre's spring rate was softer, or you were able to generate suffient cornering forces to deflect them more, you'd get benefit from more static camber.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff