363 replies to this topic

[vocky]

Ok, just did a quick search...

That's funny, on so many levels....

Come on, Own up, who came up with this ?

think you will find that that was a development part, pics borrowed from Haggi's thread

Edited by vocky, 17 March 2013 - 10:39 AM.

[2-20]

We're agreed that the stock front anti-roll bar does so little it's almost useless (as demonstrated in your video)

The video shows that some loads are transfered to the opposite side. This is why the car moves so much.

[Scuffers]

Ok, just did a quick search...

That's funny, on so many levels....

Come on, Own up, who came up with this ?

think you will find that that was a development part, pics borrowed from Haggi's thread

showing those does not change my view, yes looks prettier, still has the same basic issues though, ignoring the validity of having a rear ARB or not, that's not the way to implement one IMHO.

[VIX]

.

Edited by VIX, 17 March 2013 - 02:06 PM.

[Spitfire Engineering]

Ok, just did a quick search...

That's funny, on so many levels....

Come on, Own up, who came up with this ?

think you will find that that was a development part, pics borrowed from Haggi's thread

showing those does not change my view, yes looks prettier, still has the same basic issues though, ignoring the validity of having a rear ARB or not, that's not the way to implement one IMHO.

Well on the basis of when you implemented yours, by your own admission it was so poor it didn't work and you had to take it off, I would not pay any attention to your humble opinion at all, not that I have ever seen you give a humble opinion.



Hey, I have a good idea, why don't we talk about lap times again!

[Scuffers]

Well on the basis of when you implemented yours, by your own admission it was so poor it didn't work and you had to take it off, I would not pay any attention to your humble opinion at all, not that I have ever seen you give a humble opinion.



Hey, I have a good idea, why don't we talk about lap times again!

Ho ho ho...

Almost funny...

Shame it's slightly more serious than that...

[SteveA]

Scuffers - Can I assume the lap times you are posting are from Jamies TA car? How much cash has been poured into it to make it do that? 50K-60K? On the original subject, how much of that is on the arb? 1%?

[hughcam]

Thread summary: Someone asks which antiroll bar will improve the handling of their car. A few guys offer their experience of different rollbars being used to improve the handling of their cars (not much mention of lap times). Another seemingly helpful and very experienced guy advises of his product's pros with regards to improving handling (no mention of lap times from him as his product relates to driving in varied locations, not just balls out on track). Another very experienced guy comes on and as usual he is nursing a hard on for slagging everyone off for asking questions or giving their view. He then discredits everyone elses products, ways of thinking or experiences and starts spouting shite about getting your lap times out. I like a debate as much as anyone but there are way s and means of getting your point across.... This thread is full of fail (and unfortunately has a reoccurring theme) and not with the usual .org.uk spirit

[Scuffers]

Scuffers - Can I assume the lap times you are posting are from Jamies TA car? How much cash has been poured into it to make it do that? 50K-60K? On the original subject, how much of that is on the arb? 1%?

No, only one of from Jamie's car.

Assides, thats not really the point is it?

If you want to get technical, its about cornering speeds, ie just how much grip you can get with optimised suspension.

I would love to get into a proper discussion with real track data to back this all up, but you may have noticed, there is none being offered for this rear ARB setup.

I am not the one suggesting anybody goes out and buys the most expensive option out there, quite the opposite.

Seems to me the problem is the vendor of the expensive option is not prepared to put up the track data to defend it.

PS. I also have some concerns about what its bolted to...

Edited by Scuffers, 18 March 2013 - 11:39 AM.

[SteveA]

I will have a look through my Racelogic data to see if I have some before and after laps. I probably do but there will have been other changes in that time too (power upgrades, driver tuition etc) so I'm not sure how much use it will be. Add to that the fact I'm not a professional and mine is not a race car and although my lap times are fairly consistent they will never be anywhere near a race car setup with a pro-driver at the wheel. If any one want's to chuck 50K my way though I'm sure working with Cornering Force and a mate of mine who is a proper racing driver we will have a giant killer and certainly something that will compete with your times ETA - it's bolted to the wishbones

Edited by SteveA, 18 March 2013 - 12:12 PM.

[Scuffers]

I will have a look through my Racelogic data to see if I have some before and after laps. I probably do but there will have been other changes in that time too (power upgrades, driver tuition etc) so I'm not sure how much use it will be. Add to that the fact I'm not a professional and mine is not a race car and although my lap times are fairly consistent they will never be anywhere near a race car setup with a pro-driver at the wheel.

If any one want's to chuck 50K my way though I'm sure working with Cornering Force and a mate of mine who is a proper racing driver we will have a giant killer and certainly something that will compete with your times

ETA - it's bolted to the wishbones

OK, post up the lapdata with corner speeds, (I agree with different power/etc affecting laptimes, however, corner entry/exit speeds will be purely down to car setup and tyres).

here's one from Snett 300 cct, (yes, Jamie's car!) with entry and exit speeds marked.



this car only has a front 1" ARB and was on Kuhmo V70's

[techieboy]

(I agree with different power/etc affecting laptimes, however, corner entry/exit speeds will be purely down to car setup and tyres).

and even more so the driver?

[SteveA]

Comparing my cornering speeds against Jamie's car is only going to prove two things; 1. The TA car is optimised as a race car and mine isn't. e.g. aero package, tyres etc (mine has no aero and tyres with a lower utqg rating, 80 vs 180?) 2. The driver has more experience/confidence/bigger balls than I do (i've only done Snett once and that was the old layout) Now comparing my laps pre CF and post CF would be a more telling comparison but as Chris pointed out earlier most of that will be down to my confidence due to the feel of the new setup. I think this is the initial point of this thread - which arb will help an amateur tracker who does a few trackdays a year in his road car go faster.

Edited by SteveA, 18 March 2013 - 02:03 PM.

[Mike (Cliffie)]

The problem we have here is that it is all down to driver preference and opinion. SteveA is a quick driver and is very happy with his CF set up. I have not driven his car but I did drive JG's but it did not suit me or my driving hence why I didn't go for the CF set up on my race car. Scuffers' background and aim is to build the fastest race car possible which will not suit the majority of folks on here. Simply put, you cannot compare the two really. Paul, you have a road car that you drive well and fast on track days; The CF set up will work well on your car but at a cost as it will entail a lot of new components. The 1" will be a useful addition and improvement that will work with what you have got at a fraction of the cost.

[chris_uk]

Well i know for a fact and mike can back me up. In maxs car with v70a's were were going around the last long right hander at 100mph. He didnt have cf tackle on it.

[Scuffers]

Comparing my cornering speeds against Jamie's car is only going to prove two things;

1. The TA car is optimised as a race car and mine isn't. e.g. aero package, tyres etc (mine has no aero and tyres with a lower utqg rating, 80 vs 180?)
2. The driver has more experience/confidence/bigger balls than I do (i've only done Snett once and that was the old layout)

Now comparing my laps pre CF and post CF would be a more telling comparison but as Chris pointed out earlier most of that will be down to my confidence due to the feel of the new setup. I think this is the initial point of this thread - which arb will help an amateur tracker who does a few trackdays a year in his road car go faster.

why do I feel like your just making excuses now?

pick another cct then, I have data for most of them...

yes, tyres make a difference, but not by as much as you would think, (unless we are comparing super soft hill-climb slicks with world-beater mileage road tyres).

what a well setup car will do is make the most of it's tyres, ie, keep the biggest/most consistent contact patch.

what I am struggling with here is that you/others are pushing the use of a rear ARB without the real data to back any of this up.

I (and others) on the other hand who have been setting up these cars for years, as well as racing them, with literally years of data to look back on, have all found that adding a rear ARB with any significant rate to it makes the cars not only harder to drive, but certainly no faster (in fact slower as close to the limit's the behaviour is far less confidence inspiring than without one).

What I have found however, is a 1" front bar works, and if anything, for a all out track car is still not stiff enough (hence working on the even bigger one that was on the Autosport show chassis).

Now, people can dress this up with all the technical mumbo-jumbo they like, but without the simple basics of track data to back up their product claims, it's all a bit hollow.

Quite apart from all of that, I would not want to be putting any vertical loads on the lower wishbone hangers, they are just not designed for this, and neither is the chassis rail they are bolted to either.

[Bumblebee]

Can I ask what your back ground is scuffers? I'm keeping well out of this argument/discussion as its too technical for me but just curious to the above

[Scuffers]

Can I ask what your back ground is scuffers? I'm keeping well out of this argument/discussion as its too technical for me but just curious to the above

in the context of this subject, I'm somebody with an engineering background that started working on the Elise back in 1998, been racing them and making bits for them ever since, from simple stuff like gear linkages though to Honda conversions and suspension stuff etc.

These days I just do odd project stuff, either for customers (like Jamie) or companies like EliseParts (like the sequential gearbox), as well as getting to race in various cars around the planet (sounds glamours doesn't it?)

[Mike (Cliffie)]

Comparing my cornering speeds against Jamie's car is only going to prove two things;

1. The TA car is optimised as a race car and mine isn't. e.g. aero package, tyres etc (mine has no aero and tyres with a lower utqg rating, 80 vs 180?)
2. The driver has more experience/confidence/bigger balls than I do (i've only done Snett once and that was the old layout)

Now comparing my laps pre CF and post CF would be a more telling comparison but as Chris pointed out earlier most of that will be down to my confidence due to the feel of the new setup. I think this is the initial point of this thread - which arb will help an amateur tracker who does a few trackdays a year in his road car go faster.

why do I feel like your just making excuses now?

pick another cct then, I have data for most of them...

yes, tyres make a difference, but not by as much as you would think, (unless we are comparing super soft hill-climb slicks with world-beater mileage road tyres).

what a well setup car will do is make the most of it's tyres, ie, keep the biggest/most consistent contact patch.

what I am struggling with here is that you/others are pushing the use of a rear ARB without the real data to back any of this up.

I (and others) on the other hand who have been setting up these cars for years, as well as racing them, with literally years of data to look back on, have all found that adding a rear ARB with any significant rate to it makes the cars not only harder to drive, but certainly no faster (in fact slower as close to the limit's the behaviour is far less confidence inspiring than without one).

What I have found however, is a 1" front bar works, and if anything, for a all out track car is still not stiff enough (hence working on the even bigger one that was on the Autosport show chassis).

Now, people can dress this up with all the technical mumbo-jumbo they like, but without the simple basics of track data to back up their product claims, it's all a bit hollow.

Quite apart from all of that, I would not want to be putting any vertical loads on the lower wishbone hangers, they are just not designed for this, and neither is the chassis rail they are bolted to either.

But Simon, the point is that 99% of these owners on here are road cars that may do three or four track days a year.

Their data is simply "We have the CF set up and it feels better and I feel faster on track due to the increased confidence I have". OK Steve has PB Box and V Box data but as you are not allowed timing on a track day, it is all about how it feels.

SteveA and JG have the CF set up and they get a better ride and more confidence than standard and that cannot be argued.

[techieboy]

And just to make things even harder, the only Snett 300 data I have is in an entirely different format (Racelogic) and doesn't produce an output vaguely similar to Scuffers' data above (AIM? DL1?). So even if I were stupid enough to post it up, as if it were definitive proof of anything, it would only prove my car is slower than Jamie's as a total package (no aero, no sticky tyres, yada, yada, yada, no surprise) and that my balls are smaller than Scuffers' when it comes to corners (again, no great surprise) and slower as a result. It wouldn't prove anything else. SimonR has proper DL1 multiple sensor logging from a base (possibly standard NTR equipped?) car, then through it's development to the final product. Carried out in the same place by the same pro driver (so hopefully he was vaguely consistent). I'm hoping he'll decide to post some of that (wouldn't blame him if he didn't though) and better yet give me some assurance that the fuel tank isn't going to fall out of the bottom of the car as the rear ARB mounts destroy the bulkhead the bushes are mounted to. Though it still seems to be there after a couple of years.