Quote:
Originally Posted by evilC
I agree with all of that and Rob's compression strut. But just to add my 2p worth; I don't feel comfortable with the butt joints either side of the anti-roll bar bush housing that will be weaker than the plain tube. The TCA has really only an axial load (horizontal for most of the time) so the tube can be light. But the antiroll bar exerts a bending moment at the point of the bush within the bar. Add in the fatigue factor of many load applications and it does seem weak although no figures have been applied. The solution would be to take the bush out of the centreline of the TCA - put it above or below with a speader to prevent local distortion. Put it below and it realigns the anti-roll bar towards a standard geometry. However, put it above the TCA and you have reduced the pitch forward, creating more anti-dive. Classically, you would have done this by dropping the pivots down on a strut car but there is nothing stopping the other end going up instead. You can't drop the anti-roll bar bushes down because of ground clearance issues on a lowered car.
Is that logic correct?
Clive
|
This is a PROTOTYPE it is not the finished article , i love the way some people always got plenty to say about others work like oh iam not happy about butt joints. just give it some time the finished article will work and will not be sold until its had a right good hammering on our test cars, unlike some folks that spend all there time on internet forums i drive my cars to the limit on the road and try to brake every thing we do way before it goes public. rant over
, The finished product will be bigger od tube and one piece with an incert for the antiroll bar rather than butt welds also will have diamond shape strength plates top and bottom.