Originally Posted by InfernalVortex

Would probably be faster with the LCAs closer to level... or higher.

I need to experiment with this...

Originally Posted by Tibo

I doubt you would be faster unless it was because the turn was too tight for our turn radius and it was whip the rear end around or hit cones for a time penalty. Keeping the rear end of the LCA lower helps to keep the wheels planted. If you just wanted to make one higher to give less traction just get a peg leg differential.

Originally Posted by TEDSgrad

Here's some Dean text before he and Pablo went off the reservation and got the thread locked ("The Grip"):

Roll induced understeer is simply put= rear wheel steer. So lets just go over basics.

The rear wheels on a solid axle can change direction based on the arch of the LCA attachment arms. When the arms are out at starightest point (parallel to the ground) they are at their longest geometry.

When both lcas are at the same angle thier is no thrust angle of the axle (this is ideal with a proper alignment, given the proper aftermarker adjustments with adjustable LCA's)

However, when the car body rolls, the rear swaybar will try and keep the LCA's the same but they still differ. If you can keep the LCA geomerty on the inside wheel to articlulate to where the INSIDE LCA stays parallel to the ground while the OUTER LCA archs upward towards in geometry from the chassis mount to the axle, this parallel distance between the mount and the axle vertical centerline will decrease as the axle on that side will be pulled forward more than the other side of the axle. This causes rear steer.

Now with rear steer, the rear wheel pointing towards the corner of turning will cause the car not to rotate as the car leans to set. It wants to hold the back of the car towards the inside of the corner. Roll induced oversteer would throw the rear of the car outward and would make it harder to recover- and ths harder to retrieve the car back to straight tracking becuase of increased momentum of the chassis. So whith that said, I hope you can understand how roll UNDERsteer will resist polar motion and allow the car to hold the rearend tight, as well as help bring the rear end back staight after steadystate and going into corner exit.

The added benefit of this is the roll understeer makes a little more slip angle beause of the rear wheel steering- just like how front wheel steering does this, we are matching the rear a little closer to the front rather than the rear being neutral with only load slip angle. The rear now has load and steering angle just as the front does so the footprints are much closer if veiwed from under the road.

Please read this- It will talk about slip angles and slide angles. Remember also that the inside of the car is better weighted when the overall car gets to set mid corner chassis roll. To best example this, lets say if most cars did 100% outside and 60% inside, mine was doing 100% outside and 75% inside

http://www.mgf.ultimatemg.com/group2...slip_angle.htm

Originally Posted by Tibo

As long as the vehicle in question has a suspension system, you are going to have body roll on any and every turn. Yes that body roll will result in an acute change to the degree of the LCAs. However, that degree of change will depend upon the suspension of the vehicle, how settled the chasis is before and during the turn, how sharp the turn is and how fast you are going. It sounds like you are advocating changing the LCA angles (so that they are parallel or the rear is higher) in order to prepare for the corners/turns wherein you will be traveling the fastest and turning the most/sharpest. In turn (no pun intended) this will will then hurt you on any low speed or broad turns and all straight-a-way sections. Not to mention 99% of the driving you will do on the roads.

Originally Posted by 1991sleeper

Another thing I noticed is after installing the fat front sway bar and posi rear end the car didn't wanna bring the rear end around like I want it to in a hard corner it wanted to slide the front tires instead .. What causes this ? It seemed the bigger front sway bar caused this ... And was thinking about tuning my front sway at by cutting the spacers down by like 1/8" at a time ..

Originally Posted by InfernalVortex

To be clear, Im thinking the best thing to do is to get the rear LCA's completely level, but what Im wondering is since my car is lowered about 1 inch from stock, am I better off with them angled upwards in the factory spot, or downwards in the middle slot on the LCA's? The real solution I think is to just lower the car more. But in lieu of doing that, surely one of those two options is preferable. It does seem to me to be the case that the stock hole will lead to more stable cornering and the middle hole will lead to more responsiveness but looser cornering. I just dont know which is faster.

Originally Posted by 1991sleeper

And was thinking about tuning my front sway at by cutting the spacers down by like 1/8" at a time ..

Originally Posted by MoJoe

The length of the spacers is not a tuning aid, it just attaches the bar to the suspension. Stock/factory sway bars and the aftermarket replacements are not tunable*. You swap bars (36mm to 34mm to smaller, etc) to get softer rates as you are suggesting. * Having turnbuckles on one or both ends will give you the ability to preload one side or the other. Which will favor turning right OR left. Some aftermarket bars are adjustable: Either with multiple holes on the arms or with a sliding clamp (on each side) to lengthen or shorten the effective arm.

Originally Posted by 1991sleeper

I have another ? About the adjustable LCA's ... They have rid ends on one end and poly on other end do u think it would help my ride quality to put the rod ends on the rearend instead of on the body ?

Originally Posted by SlickTrackGod

You are suppose to mount them that way. The rod end on the axle side will allow bind free articulation the poly can not in that location.

Originally Posted by 1991sleeper

Wow there's some fancy stuff in those links .... I think the only thing I saw there possibly in my budget are the turnbuckles lol .... It just seems to me lengthening or shortening the spacers would do the same thing as lengthening or shortening the turnbuckles .... But I'm def not no suspension guru ...

Originally Posted by MoJoe

You want to keep the 36mm front sway bar? Yes, put the matching bar on the rear to balance front / rear rates. Founders camber plates and STB are independent of the sway bars. They will each improve handling, but do not directly affect each other. If you want to spend the money on the parts, they will be worthwhile. Weight removed = front end too high... you need shorter springs in front. Either buy shorter springs, or you can cut your existing springsto make them shorter. Start with 1/8 coil. I don't think you want to cut more than 1/2 coil total. Note: cutting the springs will increase the spring rate some / make them stiffer. Do not use a torch to cut them. Keep the springs as cool as possible while cutting. The high temperature will change the spring rate... in a bad way.

Originally Posted by 1991sleeper

Another thing I noticed is after installing the fat front sway bar and posi rear end the car didn't wanna bring the rear end around like I want it to in a hard corner it wanted to slide the front tires instead .. What causes this ? It seemed the bigger front sway bar caused this ... And was thinking about tuning my front sway at by cutting the spacers down by like 1/8" at a time ..

Originally Posted by 87 Camaro Dude

That's because a bigger front bar in relation to the rear will cause understeer. These cars already understeer from the factory and adding a larger front bar without changing the rear will just make it worse. With a 36 front and a 19 rear you're just asking for understeer.

Originally Posted by SlickTrackGod

So many factors that you are just giving a false blanket statement that is so wrong. A 36/19 is a very proven setup on a race course based on many given intervals. You are talking about swaybars like it is the holly grail of handling- it is not. They are 'fine tuning' tools to balance out the last little bit of balance. It is not a major suspension change tool. it is the balance the roll axis in both pitch AND canter. yuou do not metion grip, chassis stiffness, shock damper, springs rates, fornt and rear RC changes, and various other geometry that all come first in tuning before a sway bar size is changes to fit each individual chassis setup. Case in point- on most 3rd gens, the simple addition of SFC's can mean a 2mm drop in rear swaybar size.

Originally Posted by SlickTrackGod

So many factors that you are just giving a false blanket statement that is so wrong.
A 36/19 is a very proven setup on a race course based on many given intervals.

You are talking about swaybars like it is the holly grail of handling- it is not. They are 'fine tuning' tools to balance out the last little bit of balance. It is not a major suspension change tool. it is the balance the roll axis in both pitch AND canter. yuou do not metion grip, chassis stiffness, shock damper, springs rates, fornt and rear RC changes, and various other geometry that all come first in tuning before a sway bar size is changes to fit each individual chassis setup.

Case in point- on most 3rd gens, the simple addition of SFC's can mean a 2mm drop in rear swaybar size.

Originally Posted by 87 Camaro Dude

That's because a bigger front bar in relation to the rear will cause understeer. These cars already understeer from the factory and adding a larger front bar without changing the rear will just make it worse. With a 36 front and a 19 rear you're just asking for understeer.

Originally Posted by SlickTrackGod

Just one more person that feels a need to put me down when I corrected misinfo they posted. The quote from you was a "36/19 swaybar combo is just asking for understeer."

You made a blanket statement that is wrong...dude

Let me "flex my ego" (sorry, I had to laugh- I ony help people spend their money wisely).
It would be better for him to keep those bars and make further adjustments to take the understeer out of the car by purchasing things like solid bearing strut mounts, chassis bracing, etc. The 36/19 happens to be a very good setup for road course and really not too bad for agressive street use. a 2 36/21 is a little better for street use, but it all depends ont he overall choice of componants and tires size/brand choices as well as shock damper values.

So rather than tell him buy another such and such swaybar it is far better to not spend money wildly on swaybar choices right now and get the chassis balanced through education and proper part installations- then the car will fallinto the perameters of needing these swaybar sizes that ARE in fact well sorted in testing on autox and roadrace balanced V8 car setups.

How's that for an egotistical response?