Attn mr felstead
16 April 2003, 12:52 PM
#91
It is not an academic work at all, it is a little essay
It's quite apparent that you're running away and hiding behind your growing list of questions rather than facing up to the mess you've created for yourself.
With every post you make I get the impression your a windup merchant getting caught out by your own gaffs.
No need for anyone to waste any time on you, except maybe to enlighten your new followers in a few months.
Paul
16 April 2003, 01:03 PM
#92
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tone loc.. your posts are turning into a sort of non-sense poem contest... for crying out loud!
Pavlo... papers, essays, I have called them both... but the truth is they are better than anything seen on here.
That hurts doesn't it Pavlo, I have read your posts on the GTR and I think that serious scrutiny would show what a bitter little soul you are...
I am still looking forward to mr felsteads answers.
Is it me or is he hiding, pretending to be non-chalant...
Pavlo... papers, essays, I have called them both... but the truth is they are better than anything seen on here.
That hurts doesn't it Pavlo, I have read your posts on the GTR and I think that serious scrutiny would show what a bitter little soul you are...
I am still looking forward to mr felsteads answers.
Is it me or is he hiding, pretending to be non-chalant...
16 April 2003, 01:13 PM
#93
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paul,
dont get upset by him.
people have respect for what you have done, even if he doesnt agree with it.
I used to think a lot of Iain as I learned much from his posts on gtr, but having seen this appalling display of arrogance, I would rather nopt learn anything more from him at all, in fear that his personality might grow on me.
Mycroft, I know you dont care about the little people, but I was one of the few who thought very highly of your abilities. I still do, but am sad to say I am dissapointed at your lack of respect for other people trying to help eachother.
Your choice of words suggest you see fit to call yourself g-d and judge all others. I dont see why anyone should feel obliged to answer your questions, no more than you are obliged to answer theirs.
I hope no one does reply to you, yes there is a lot of crap on this board compared with a few other bbs, which admittedly I prefer, but you have singled out the people on this bbs who go someway to adressing the quality difference.
I wouldnt mind if you were attempting to eductae but you have made it clear that you are trying to humiliate. If you are going to depose the "experts", then I suggest you make sure you are available to fill their shoes. Is that a role you are prepared to take on, because if it is not, this bbs for one would be better off without your additions.
Perhaps you should consider a law that as an engineer you may not have come across yet.
Coughlins' law: Don't talk if you cant improve the silence.
dont get upset by him.
people have respect for what you have done, even if he doesnt agree with it.
I used to think a lot of Iain as I learned much from his posts on gtr, but having seen this appalling display of arrogance, I would rather nopt learn anything more from him at all, in fear that his personality might grow on me.
Mycroft, I know you dont care about the little people, but I was one of the few who thought very highly of your abilities. I still do, but am sad to say I am dissapointed at your lack of respect for other people trying to help eachother.
Your choice of words suggest you see fit to call yourself g-d and judge all others. I dont see why anyone should feel obliged to answer your questions, no more than you are obliged to answer theirs.
I hope no one does reply to you, yes there is a lot of crap on this board compared with a few other bbs, which admittedly I prefer, but you have singled out the people on this bbs who go someway to adressing the quality difference.
I wouldnt mind if you were attempting to eductae but you have made it clear that you are trying to humiliate. If you are going to depose the "experts", then I suggest you make sure you are available to fill their shoes. Is that a role you are prepared to take on, because if it is not, this bbs for one would be better off without your additions.
Perhaps you should consider a law that as an engineer you may not have come across yet.
Coughlins' law: Don't talk if you cant improve the silence.
16 April 2003, 01:23 PM
#94
"JF, what on earth havbe you done to upset this gimp so much ?"
Just shown people what a fraud he is by passing off others work for his own. Also for telling him to respect other people, a concept he doesnt understand. He seems to have many issues....
Mycroft, i have no need and certainly no intent to give you any answers to any questions you pose. I am in no need to prove or disprove anything. If people take what i say as helpfull/usefull then marvelous, if they dont then fine, it's not a problem to me.
Compared to some of the things going on in my life right now, pleasing you and pandering to your wants, flatering as it may be
, scores 0 on a scale of 0-100 in terms of importance or significance.
I have never had a stalker before, you have issues, go see a doctor before you implode and make an even bigger fool of yourself than you already have.
Just shown people what a fraud he is by passing off others work for his own. Also for telling him to respect other people, a concept he doesnt understand. He seems to have many issues....
Mycroft, i have no need and certainly no intent to give you any answers to any questions you pose. I am in no need to prove or disprove anything. If people take what i say as helpfull/usefull then marvelous, if they dont then fine, it's not a problem to me.
Compared to some of the things going on in my life right now, pleasing you and pandering to your wants, flatering as it may be
, scores 0 on a scale of 0-100 in terms of importance or significance.I have never had a stalker before, you have issues, go see a doctor before you implode and make an even bigger fool of yourself than you already have.
16 April 2003, 01:33 PM
#95
You really have your head up your own **** don't you. I wouldn't mind reading some of your papers tho.... which of the engineering journals/magazines have published these? Professional Engineer, Automotive Engineer, Design, Eureka, Enginnering Magazine etc ? Put your money where your mouth is or shout up..... for crying out loud!Tony.
[Edited by Tone Loc - 4/16/2003 1:33:45 PM]
16 April 2003, 01:43 PM
#96
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adam...
Please don't put your faith in the hand,
of a rock'n'rol band,
who'll throw it all away.
I post appropriately to the forum... if you are faulted in your ability to see this then your sudden disallusionment is no loss to me...
mr felstead... why didn't you just say that you were too busy and not spend so much time posting drivel during the last few days... the answers to my questions would have taken 1/10 of the time you wasted... doesn't really ring true... so I will end this here.
Please don't put your faith in the hand,
of a rock'n'rol band,
who'll throw it all away.
I post appropriately to the forum... if you are faulted in your ability to see this then your sudden disallusionment is no loss to me...
mr felstead... why didn't you just say that you were too busy and not spend so much time posting drivel during the last few days... the answers to my questions would have taken 1/10 of the time you wasted... doesn't really ring true... so I will end this here.
16 April 2003, 02:07 PM
#98
Just to put the record straight, otherwise people reading this may become confused (I would not answer this part of the question otherwise). Pavlo answered your question incorrectly. Being such an **** person I would have expected you to have corrected him, given the opportunity, but you didn’t.
Your question was………
“Q3/. What effect can be traced directly to wheel offsets... for example on an IFS car what would be the apparent change to the handling and roadholding if the OS of an 8" rim was changed from 50mm to 32mm... that shouldn't prove too hard.”
Pavlo answered saying
“And to partially answer question 3, a loss of front lateral grip for starters, as you just reduced the front track by 36mm.”
Changing the offset of a wheel from ET50 to ET32 (I assume you are using this measurement as that is what industry uses, although you aren’t specific enough for me to be 100% certain) will increase the track by 18mm either side, giving a 36mm increase in total track, not a reduction in track as Pavlo states. That is why the 22B uses 35mm offset rather than 52mm used on other Impreza’s, to increase its track and cater for the extra 1.5” of wheel rim width yet clear the strut.
I won’t answer the rest of the question relating to the effect of this, as that would be pandering to your whims, rather than correcting a mistake. Sorry Pavlo, not trying to show you as wrong etc. Just correcting a bit of technical info.
Your question was………
“Q3/. What effect can be traced directly to wheel offsets... for example on an IFS car what would be the apparent change to the handling and roadholding if the OS of an 8" rim was changed from 50mm to 32mm... that shouldn't prove too hard.”
Pavlo answered saying
“And to partially answer question 3, a loss of front lateral grip for starters, as you just reduced the front track by 36mm.”
Changing the offset of a wheel from ET50 to ET32 (I assume you are using this measurement as that is what industry uses, although you aren’t specific enough for me to be 100% certain) will increase the track by 18mm either side, giving a 36mm increase in total track, not a reduction in track as Pavlo states. That is why the 22B uses 35mm offset rather than 52mm used on other Impreza’s, to increase its track and cater for the extra 1.5” of wheel rim width yet clear the strut.
I won’t answer the rest of the question relating to the effect of this, as that would be pandering to your whims, rather than correcting a mistake. Sorry Pavlo, not trying to show you as wrong etc. Just correcting a bit of technical info.
16 April 2003, 02:09 PM
#99
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 17,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't be daft, Tone Loc. That was a question and Mycroft doesn't answer questions. D
Pinning him down to a specific answer is like catching half set jelly in a fisherman's net.
Have to say, this thread is hilarious. Mycroft yet again not being able to answer anything and having his own little tantrum saying "Answers, please" at every point.
DPinning him down to a specific answer is like catching half set jelly in a fisherman's net.
Have to say, this thread is hilarious. Mycroft yet again not being able to answer anything and having his own little tantrum saying "Answers, please" at every point.
16 April 2003, 02:11 PM
#100
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 17,199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
16 April 2003, 02:42 PM
#102
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh well, I don't think this will be answered (people to busy shouting at each other). But here goes anyway (seems all the people in the know are here):
What's the meaning of "Hysteresis Loop" as far as tyres are concerned? (I know what hysteresis means).
I can only take a wild guess that it must have something to do with the static vs dynamic coefficients of friction between tyre and road surface. Mycroft? It was mentioned in that article of yours, but the meaning wasn't made very clear.
This is not a trick question. The answer would really interest me.
thanks!
What's the meaning of "Hysteresis Loop" as far as tyres are concerned? (I know what hysteresis means).
I can only take a wild guess that it must have something to do with the static vs dynamic coefficients of friction between tyre and road surface. Mycroft? It was mentioned in that article of yours, but the meaning wasn't made very clear.
This is not a trick question. The answer would really interest me.
thanks!
16 April 2003, 02:49 PM
#103
thanks john, but I knew there was change of track somewhere, but for some reason I pictured the hubs moving and not the rims! Too much red wine to think properly.
I figured he was probably going to get at things like torque steer, increased jacking similar to castor increases, sharper initial turn in and stuff. But to be honest, I see all the time Mycroft's attempts are turning questions around. People are keen to give answers to prove him wrong, but then he turns around with that classic "you're close, but you have much to learn" **** and it never goes any further. Best not to humour him I've found as you only end up wasting even more time.
I've got it out my system now, satisfied that Mycroft is one of the many internet fakes. We've had fake policemen, fake Ferrari buyers and now a fake petrochemist/aerodynamicist/NVH engineer/tyre engineer. As for the super secret Institute of Tyre Technology I am sure that Mycroft is most definitely a member.
Paul
I figured he was probably going to get at things like torque steer, increased jacking similar to castor increases, sharper initial turn in and stuff. But to be honest, I see all the time Mycroft's attempts are turning questions around. People are keen to give answers to prove him wrong, but then he turns around with that classic "you're close, but you have much to learn" **** and it never goes any further. Best not to humour him I've found as you only end up wasting even more time.
I've got it out my system now, satisfied that Mycroft is one of the many internet fakes. We've had fake policemen, fake Ferrari buyers and now a fake petrochemist/aerodynamicist/NVH engineer/tyre engineer. As for the super secret Institute of Tyre Technology I am sure that Mycroft is most definitely a member.
Paul
16 April 2003, 04:56 PM
#106
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be fair, Mycroft started this thread asking questions. It's hardly an answer to his question by pointing out he has refused to answer questions himself.
Perhaps the questions that are being asked of Mycroft should be started in a separate thread (if it hasn't been done so).
Perhaps the questions that are being asked of Mycroft should be started in a separate thread (if it hasn't been done so).
16 April 2003, 05:11 PM
#107
akshay,
this thread was started as a response to another thread, the one in which he failed to answer a number of questions. It was in this earlier thread that mycroft first asked the questions.
anyway if you really to want to see where the sort of started check this thread.
however, mycroft's history of posting such rubbish extends far into the past across quite a few forums
Paul
this thread was started as a response to another thread, the one in which he failed to answer a number of questions. It was in this earlier thread that mycroft first asked the questions.
anyway if you really to want to see where the sort of started check this thread.
however, mycroft's history of posting such rubbish extends far into the past across quite a few forums
Paul
16 April 2003, 05:19 PM
#108
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 7,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
probably not the best place to say that the stanmdard offset of the 22B is actually 48mm, not 35mm.
35mm is what I managed to fit on my car.
I have one of anders' wheels off the car which has the offset forged in the back of it, can take a piccie if you like.
35mm is what I managed to fit on my car.
I have one of anders' wheels off the car which has the offset forged in the back of it, can take a piccie if you like.
16 April 2003, 05:39 PM
#109
no, thats fine adam. I remembered 35mm from talking with anders here last friday and looking at his new wheels. Thats acedemic to the question posted however, on the effect of a reduction in offset value increasing the track, which was the question i was answering.
Thats acedemic to the question posted however, on the effect of a reduction in offset value increasing the track, which was the question i was answering.
16 April 2003, 08:30 PM
#110
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What does he mean that the internet isn't real?
You mean this is all simply a work of fiction created for my delictation!
And there was me thinking I might have to buy you guys a pint if I met you! Cool!
You mean this is all simply a work of fiction created for my delictation!
And there was me thinking I might have to buy you guys a pint if I met you! Cool!
17 April 2003, 12:16 AM
#112
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andy,
I am seriously contemplating turning up just to see you driving around in a 4000 horsepower V12 Reliant Kitten (or whatever it is you are building! )
You could use a 4x4 SVX with a legacy H6 3.0litre engine and a pair of TD06's (one per bank) on it? With NOS?
-shrug- I dunno
I am seriously contemplating turning up just to see you driving around in a 4000 horsepower V12 Reliant Kitten (or whatever it is you are building!
)You could use a 4x4 SVX with a legacy H6 3.0litre engine and a pair of TD06's (one per bank) on it? With NOS?
-shrug- I dunno
17 April 2003, 02:20 PM
#113
Why didn't I spot this earlier?!?!?
My compliments to John in handling himself so well in the face of such childishness.
I would just like to point out, for anyone who has read Mycroft's post and thought he actually knows what he's talking about (and for Mycroft if he's still here) a few innacuracies and sweeping generalisations (showing lack of understanding) I've noticed in his Problem & Cure Sheet (incidentally, they look very similar in structure and response to a text book I read a few years back, which was also innacurate in a few subtle ways)...
Firstly, I would be interested whether Mycroft was talking about stage 1 entry or stage 2 entry. The answers look like they mean stage 1 entry, but are partly wrong (If it is stage 2 entry, the whole thing is wrong).
I fail to see how decreasing the bump rate of the front dampers (nobody in vehicle dynamics calls them shocks, as they are NOT "shock absorbers" - quite the oposite) would would improve front end grip on turn in. I would personally tweak them up a bit instead. In some ways, decreasing the bump rate of the front would have a counter productive effect on the increased rebound rate of the rear.
Of course, all things are "testable" in that you never know for sure what a tweak will do, but I certainly wouldn't start off with this assumption.
Obviously the above goes in oposite for this one... front bump rate should be reduced to reduce stage 1 oversteer. But in addition, why would braking later reduce stage 1 oversteer? or stage 2 oversteer for that matter? It would do precisely the oposite. Know as trail braking.
You should Decrease rebound setting of front dampers, not increase.
Again.. should Increase rebound setting of front dampers, not descrease.
This last two are the absolute worst of the sweeping generalisations. The symptoms above could be caused by any number of things, from bump-steer, to caster, toe, camber.. and they would always be the first things that an engineer would look at prior to going to the crude and drastic steps of adjusting springs, bars and dampers.
----
I think we have a case of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
All the best
Simon
My compliments to John in handling himself so well in the face of such childishness.
I would just like to point out, for anyone who has read Mycroft's post and thought he actually knows what he's talking about (and for Mycroft if he's still here) a few innacuracies and sweeping generalisations (showing lack of understanding) I've noticed in his Problem & Cure Sheet (incidentally, they look very similar in structure and response to a text book I read a few years back, which was also innacurate in a few subtle ways)...
Understeer on entry to a bend - Increase the 'rebound rate' of rear shocks. Decrease the 'bump rate' of front shocks. Increase the rear brake bias or just brake earlier!
I fail to see how decreasing the bump rate of the front dampers (nobody in vehicle dynamics calls them shocks, as they are NOT "shock absorbers" - quite the oposite) would would improve front end grip on turn in. I would personally tweak them up a bit instead. In some ways, decreasing the bump rate of the front would have a counter productive effect on the increased rebound rate of the rear.
Of course, all things are "testable" in that you never know for sure what a tweak will do, but I certainly wouldn't start off with this assumption.
Oversteer on entry to a bend - Decrease the 'rebound rate' of rear shocks. Increase the 'bump rate' of front shocks. Decrease the rear brake bias, or brake later!
Exit Understeer - Increase rebound of front shocks. Decrease bump of rear shocks. Stiffen rear springs/anti-roll bar. Soften front springs/anti-roll bar.
Exit Oversteer - Decrease rebound of front shocks. Increase bump of rear shocks. Soften rear springs/anti-roll bar. Stiffen front springs/anti-roll bar.
Car is slow to respond to driver's input - Stiffen the car by (in this order) springs then anti-rollbars then shocks. Increase tyre pressure check heat spread.
Car hops over the bump - reverse of the above.
----
I think we have a case of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
All the best
Simon
17 April 2003, 02:53 PM
#114
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MYCROFT, I have an escort that i set up by eye in my garage and i never have any of the issues with it that you seem to with yours.
I will put my 28 year old RWD **** heap on any track in the country and still come out the last bend full on oversteer before you do with all the G's in the world with you...
HE HE HE
Nice reply simon.......just off to the library to do some studying
I will put my 28 year old RWD **** heap on any track in the country and still come out the last bend full on oversteer before you do with all the G's in the world with you...
HE HE HE
Nice reply simon.......just off to the library to do some studying
17 April 2003, 04:44 PM
#117
Right..
I am not going to get in to a slanging match, and I'm sure you don't want to either.
So.. Let's just pick one and give you an opportunity explain.
Could you explain to me how Increasing the rebound rate of front dampers would reduce exit understeer?
Also, please do it in your own words and in layman's terms. Being able to explain something complex in simple layman's terms is a sure fire way of showing that you fully understand the problem.
Like I said, I won't get in to a "you're wrong" "no you're wrong!" argument. Just explain that and we'll have something to talk about.
All the best
Simon
I am not going to get in to a slanging match, and I'm sure you don't want to either.
So.. Let's just pick one and give you an opportunity explain.
Could you explain to me how Increasing the rebound rate of front dampers would reduce exit understeer?
Also, please do it in your own words and in layman's terms. Being able to explain something complex in simple layman's terms is a sure fire way of showing that you fully understand the problem.
Like I said, I won't get in to a "you're wrong" "no you're wrong!" argument. Just explain that and we'll have something to talk about.
All the best
Simon
17 April 2003, 05:27 PM
#119
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simon,
Forgive my asking but what is your post got to do with this:-
Q1/. mr felstead in what circumstances would you dispense with the ARB at the rear of a car and what would be the effect on a simple RWD motor?
Q2/.mr felstead, if you were to be asked to give your preference which of these IFS/IRS systems would you prefer for a FAST ROAD car and which for a RACE CAR...
The car is FE RWD and weighs 1 tonne and has 400hp & 400ft/lbs NA
A/. Notional axis 4 link system.
B/. Twinned Wishbones.
C/. Notional axis twin link top and single lower wishbone.
Answers please.
I only ask out of politeness and etiquette.
Forgive my asking but what is your post got to do with this:-
Q1/. mr felstead in what circumstances would you dispense with the ARB at the rear of a car and what would be the effect on a simple RWD motor?
Q2/.mr felstead, if you were to be asked to give your preference which of these IFS/IRS systems would you prefer for a FAST ROAD car and which for a RACE CAR...
The car is FE RWD and weighs 1 tonne and has 400hp & 400ft/lbs NA
A/. Notional axis 4 link system.
B/. Twinned Wishbones.
C/. Notional axis twin link top and single lower wishbone.
Answers please.
I only ask out of politeness and etiquette.
17 April 2003, 05:34 PM
#120
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That action will transfer less weight to the rear, promoting more oversteer. Best done at the same time as increasing rear bump rate.
It maintains the set-ups stabilty.
Would you care now to answer my questions?
(that took me 60 seconds max... damned flood control stopped me and then removed my password!, if but everyone else was so quick with there replies.)
[Edited by Mycroft - 17/04/2003 17:36:48]
It maintains the set-ups stabilty.
Would you care now to answer my questions?
(that took me 60 seconds max... damned flood control stopped me and then removed my password!, if but everyone else was so quick with there replies.)
[Edited by Mycroft - 17/04/2003 17:36:48]