My P1 vs M3 CSL vs FQ340
23 April 2007, 10:23 PM
#122
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: From Kent to Gloucestershire to Berkshire
Posts: 2,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes perhaps it was generalistic God of the Underworld but you cannot defy physics even with your immortality. A four wheel drive chassis will have inherent understeer, a rear wheel drive chassis will have inherent oversteer. This is with a good set up on both cars, which given the nature of the discussion and the cars aforementioned was obvious(
). The four wheel drive will afford more grip but not necessarily better handling.
). The four wheel drive will afford more grip but not necessarily better handling.
Inherent understeer is only necessarily there with 4wd if too much torque bias to the front or wrong weight distribution. So whilst scoobs usually err towards inherent understeer, that's not a criticism that's often levelled at EVOs.
For ultimate handling, I'd suggest inherent neutrality is the ideal, with provokable under and oversteer to enable the better drivers to adjust the attitude as required. The laws of physics (which I never wanted to change, but I am qualified to understand) suggest that to get true neutral handling you want to distribute the power to all 4 wheels in such a manner that all are at - but not over - the limit of adhesion. This is what super-AYC etc attempt to do.
If you prefer the feel of inherent oversteer (as handling is about so much more than ultimate grip), you adjust the torque bias towards the rear so those wheels slip first. If you prefer the safety margin of understeer to protect less skilled drivers, adjust the bias to the front.
My immortality or otherwise is irrelevant.
24 April 2007, 05:50 PM
#123
"4wd not necessarilly better" is a bit of a backtrack from "rwd is always better", isn't it?
Inherent understeer is only necessarily there with 4wd if too much torque bias to the front or wrong weight distribution. So whilst scoobs usually err towards inherent understeer, that's not a criticism that's often levelled at EVOs.
For ultimate handling, I'd suggest inherent neutrality is the ideal, with provokable under and oversteer to enable the better drivers to adjust the attitude as required. The laws of physics (which I never wanted to change, but I am qualified to understand) suggest that to get true neutral handling you want to distribute the power to all 4 wheels in such a manner that all are at - but not over - the limit of adhesion. This is what super-AYC etc attempt to do.
If you prefer the feel of inherent oversteer (as handling is about so much more than ultimate grip), you adjust the torque bias towards the rear so those wheels slip first. If you prefer the safety margin of understeer to protect less skilled drivers, adjust the bias to the front.
My immortality or otherwise is irrelevant.
Inherent understeer is only necessarily there with 4wd if too much torque bias to the front or wrong weight distribution. So whilst scoobs usually err towards inherent understeer, that's not a criticism that's often levelled at EVOs.
For ultimate handling, I'd suggest inherent neutrality is the ideal, with provokable under and oversteer to enable the better drivers to adjust the attitude as required. The laws of physics (which I never wanted to change, but I am qualified to understand) suggest that to get true neutral handling you want to distribute the power to all 4 wheels in such a manner that all are at - but not over - the limit of adhesion. This is what super-AYC etc attempt to do.
If you prefer the feel of inherent oversteer (as handling is about so much more than ultimate grip), you adjust the torque bias towards the rear so those wheels slip first. If you prefer the safety margin of understeer to protect less skilled drivers, adjust the bias to the front.
My immortality or otherwise is irrelevant.
I think we both agree it is a complicated issue which is affected by a lot of variables.
Having said that you do make some clear and concise points. How is the Stix these days?
26 April 2007, 01:44 PM
#124
[quote=scubaladdie;6860089][quote]I spent two laps chasing a modded 380bhp Evo 6GSR around silverstone in my 310bhp TypeR
LMFAO he clearly couldn't drive! My Evo 6 was 340ish and ran rings round any Type-R or P1 I had a play with... getting it back on Thur 400ish bhp, should be fun
You could be right. But I doubt it.
We both overtook a lot of other cars along the way. Including EVO's and and P1 amongst the Scoobies. Im not saying they were trying hard, but... the car in front of me was.
Im sure you would have done better ~ ....
Unless it was you- Of course....
LMFAO he clearly couldn't drive! My Evo 6 was 340ish and ran rings round any Type-R or P1 I had a play with... getting it back on Thur 400ish bhp, should be fun
We both overtook a lot of other cars along the way. Including EVO's and and P1 amongst the Scoobies. Im not saying they were trying hard, but... the car in front of me was.
Im sure you would have done better ~ ....
Unless it was you- Of course....
26 April 2007, 01:52 PM
#125
[quote=scubaladdie;6860089][quote]I spent two laps chasing a modded 380bhp Evo 6GSR around silverstone in my 310bhp TypeR
LMFAO he clearly couldn't drive! My Evo 6 was 340ish and ran rings round any Type-R or P1 I had a play with... getting it back on Thur 400ish bhp, should be fun
You could be right. But I doubt it.
We both overtook a lot of other cars along the way. Including EVO's and and P1 amongst the Scoobies. Im not saying they were trying hard, but... the car in front of me was.
Im sure you would have done better ~ ....
Unless it was you- Of course....
LMFAO he clearly couldn't drive! My Evo 6 was 340ish and ran rings round any Type-R or P1 I had a play with... getting it back on Thur 400ish bhp, should be fun
We both overtook a lot of other cars along the way. Including EVO's and and P1 amongst the Scoobies. Im not saying they were trying hard, but... the car in front of me was.
Im sure you would have done better ~ ....
Unless it was you- Of course....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post