Jeff 4100 wrote:How do you deal with this concept in comparison of the Asimetrical 4 link setup Theory??

Regards,

Good question. The trick is to adjust the right side for more than 100% antisquat and the left side for less. The AVERAGE should be 100%.
http://www.racetec.cc/shope

Jeff 4100 wrote: - I need to get 100% of AntiSquat with the A-B line tangent equal to the CG Height/ Wheelbase.. Is it right??

Thanks,

You got it, Jeff.
Best wishes.
http://www.racetec.cc/shope

Antisquat should be 100% for dragracing.

Distance forward to instant center has nothing to do with center of gravity location. (See Page 45)
http://www.racetec.cc/shope/tim.44.htm

Many of you locate the instant center as being so many inches forward of the rear axle centerline and so many inches up from the strip surface.

Nothing wrong with this, of course, but I would encourage you to take a look at another way of doing it:

http://www.racetec.cc/shope/tim.44.htm

John_Heard wrote:

BillyShope wrote: See picture.
http://www.racetec.cc/shope

Bill there aren't any pictures of a diagonal bar or wishbone on that page?

I was referring to the picture in tigwelder's post, not to anything at my site. Sorry.
http://www.racetec.cc/shope

tigwelder wrote:...and binding is posible....

See picture.
http://www.racetec.cc/shope

I've added a spreadsheet (Page 44) which provides the new wheel loads and CG height when a component is moved, lightened, or deleted:
http://www.racetec.cc/shope

Mr. Morgan, thanks for reply. I checked again and there is absolutely no bind in suspension, all is perfect oprder and moving freely. Car did run a best of 7.08/312kph several times in Mantorp Park/Sweden with same suspension, shocks, wheels + tires sizes and ABR of course. Difference was engine/dr...

now, am I only after a certain AS value or I am after a AS value and specific angle of bottom/upper bar. As you know, the IC is determined by the intersection of the link lines. As an exercise, I once did a free body diagram of the rear axle assembly with two very different conditions. In both case...

...what IC length and position might give the most front rise? IC length has nothing to do with it. IC position (height) has nothing to do with it. But, when you divide the IC height by the IC length, then divide the result by the ratio of CG height to wheelbase, and, finally, multiply by 100, you ...

When you're that far away from 100% antisquat (50% and 160%), you're going to get some violent launch reactions. You're pushing the rear of the car either down or up. When the rear of the car is accelerated downward, the rear tires are unloaded; when accelerated upward, the loading is increased. But...

Ok you've wore me out and I have lots of work to do today, so I'm done... lol On Jeff's deal, I don't think he needs an anti-roll bar either but hey it's whatever he wants to mess with. You've certainly gave him an alternate method to try. Thanks, John. I appreciate your courtesy in hearing me out....

So on Jeff's car (which is the car in question here) that goes straight I believe.... It is not lifting up the left or right front, it's not running out of shock travel, etc. due to uneven torque being applied, etc. How is this car going to benefit from what your suggesting he do? From what I've se...

How would you go about setting up asymmetrical ic's on a leaf spring car? Leaf spring cars and ladder bar cars force us to switch our attention to the front suspensions. As you're familiar with oval track cars, you know that builders commonly use different rate springs across the front in their sea...

However if a car was unevenly loaded enough to be a problem, wouldn't it want to drive right or left when the front wheels are off the ground? With both fronts in the air, it would appear...at first glance...that unequal loading of the rear tires is of no concern. In other words, how can the rear t...