1953 handling secret

[Tmoose]

Here's a link to a Popular Science article Written by Wilbur Shaw, the race driver, 3 time INdy 500 winner, and saviour of the Indianapolis Speedway after WWII.

Bill Frick's Studillac
Concrete fixtures to make the exhaust pipes.
1700 1953 dollars to put a brand new factory Caddy engine in your Studebaker.

$250 for a "Curve MAster," a ("race winning!") device powered by engine vacuum, triggered by a mercury switch, that yanks down the suspension on the inside front wheel to keep the car more level when cornering ( I'm still thinking about the resulting roll stiffness and effect on understeer ).

http://books.google.com/books?id=Ti...MAGAZINES&cd=7#v=onepage&q=studebaker&f=false

 

[540ZCar]

Sounds to me like a glorified droop limiter.

 

[hemipanter]

The weight transfer from the inside to the outside wheels is dependent on cgh*g*w/tw, no matter if the car leans or not.
But it is an old article...
Goran

 

[FeX32]

nowadays active suspension systems can do much the same


Fe

 

[patprimmer]

Nowadays! Didn't Citrone do it in 1955 with the launch of the D series and it's hydro pneumatic self leveling suspension.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm

for site rules

 

[Tmoose]

"The weight transfer from the inside to the outside wheels is dependent on cgh*g*w/tw, no matter if the car leans or not."

True enough, (neglecting any tiny lateral motion of the CG when rolling) but if the roll is less due to increased roll stiffness, the difference in front/rear roll stiffness contribution increases the stiff end's outer tire's slip angle. Hence the "handling" change that results from varying ARB stiffnesses.

My first hasty impression was the inside front tire must be unloaded to some degree, maybe even 100%, so the already gasping for breath outer bias ply tire on a 4.5 inch rim would be asked to provide up to 100% of the lateral force for that end ( V8 Hawks are similar chassis, and had about 55-57% front weight, just like a modern Mustang ). It would probably operate at some whopping increased slip angle
for increased understeer.

My second pretty hasty impression was that since I did not see the roll reduction coming from any extra vertical stiffness from the outside front wheel, the rear roll stiffness was predominant, so the rear would operate at increased slip angle, and LESS understeer.

Then I was still not satisfied I understood what the front was really doing, so I gave up, and instead considered what fun it would be to have car lean that varied inversely with throttle position ( engine manifold vacuum ), or, if the mercury switch had enough dihedral, having a car that would suddenly un-lean at some point while cornering.

 

[FeX32]

Sorry Pat. My father was about 2 in '55.
I hear ya though.


Fe

 

[evelrod]

Don't know personally about the Citroen...First one I saw was in the 60's. I did have a schoolmate in high school that had a Packard Patrician, early 50's that had pneumatic leveling ability. I thought it "cool" at the time. You could control the cars attitude with a little "tinkering".

Rod