Chassis Gurus Input Requested *UPDATE 11/2/08* - 460 Ford Forum
Chilly's Garage A place for non-460 banter.

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
post #1 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-17-2008, 07:09 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
TopSportsman916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Chassis Gurus Input Requested *UPDATE 11/2/08*

Dave,Bill, Randy, I would love to get some input on the car's launch. I just saw this on OBX's website. Looks to me that the car is still bouncing some along with the spinning. Track was getting real dewey the later it got. I am at the end of the video at the 4:07 mark. The IC was 50.99" @ .35" high. Santhuff shocks were 10 from full tight on ext.(20 max) & 7 from full tight on comp(12 max). Strange struts are 2 sweeps from full loose. Tires at 6.5 lbs.Thanks for any input.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PU6VgHjMEz0

Chris

VPRC 1998 Mustang
557 CJ :1.15 60', [email protected] mph @ 2600lbs
665 C&C Hemi : To Be Determined
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/2158/ricksadql2.jpg
TopSportsman916 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-17-2008, 08:46 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: markleville indiana
Posts: 126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
it looks to me it needs more lift in the front.the IC may need to be move forward and up.put more bite in the car so you can run more air pressure
car will drive better down track then.what is the wheel base?and do you know the weight percentages front and rear.
Andy Smith
PROTREE RACE CARS
95MUSTANG is offline  
post #3 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-17-2008, 09:19 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
TopSportsman916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Andy, no I don't know the %'s. I need to buy a set of scales. The WB is 108". I was thinking about moving the 4 link back to 47.75" @ 5.25" high. Are you saying to lengthen the IC? I thought a shorter IC would help keep the power transferred to the rear wheels???

Chris

VPRC 1998 Mustang
557 CJ :1.15 60', [email protected] mph @ 2600lbs
665 C&C Hemi : To Be Determined
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/2158/ricksadql2.jpg
TopSportsman916 is offline  
 
post #4 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-17-2008, 10:25 PM
Senior Member
 
ONEBAD555NOTCH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: akron-ohio
Posts: 1,633
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
chris i have the answer 4 u call me :lol:
ONEBAD555NOTCH is offline  
post #5 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 02:28 AM
Senior Member
 
ky mustang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Benton Ky
Posts: 1,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
 
I say raise the ic to around 7" high , somewhere around 47-50".get the rear spread on the bars around 11.5 - 12". You know what they say its a love triangle,get it right and its got the bite :lol:
ky mustang is offline  
post #6 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 05:28 AM
Senior Member
 
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,960
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
 
I don't know what it is but once again I could only get youtube's normal (lower) quality version of that clip to fully load, the high quality option would only load to about 2 minutes in and then stop every time.

First off let me say that if it was getting late & the track was getting kinda damp, there's probably not much that you could have done anyway to improve the performance. The positive is even with a damp track it looked to launch/drive damn straight down the track.

So using the lower quality clip and watching it at full speed, it looks like the suspension has zero separation to plant the slicks causing a ton of spin & spring bounce. But when you blow up the video and watch it frame by frame the car definitely does have some amount of initial rim/body separation (maybe somewhere around an inch) that does plant & start to wind up the sidewall. Now when it comes to the bounce, I can't tell 100% for sure but it sure looks to me that the bounce is mostly a sidewall bounce cycle (and less of a spring bounce cycle) because it does look to me that under load the slicks need some more air pressure than just 6.5 lbs to support the sidewalls some more.

I am starting to wonder if the Hoosier CO7 rubber compound might be a little too hard for your car since you aren't using a power adder. If adding more air pressure [A] solves some of the sidewall bounce and over-winding......but [B] causes even more spin, that could be proof that the compound is a little too hard for this engine's power level. And since your not using a power adder, if your I/C is 3.5" off the ground Randy's suggestion of moving it up some amount (but not too much) might be an idea. But don't be surprised if the rear extension valving has to be increased/tightened some more at the same time to keep the leverage in check.

I'm going to try again later today to get the better quality video to load and see if I can see anything else.

D.I.L.L.I.G.A.S. Dave::
460 street '66 Ranchero.......................finished someday.
460 race '70 Maverick..........................finished someday.
All 'glass Top Sportsman '69 Mustang......ummm, check back when I win big playing the Texas Lotto, or online poker.
My youtube page. Some ancient & newer local race video.

Join the Poker Players Alliance (theppa.org). US online poker should NOT be turned into a crime.
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.S. is offline  
post #7 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 06:51 AM
Senior Member
 
bruno's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: MILLBROOK, AL.
Posts: 6,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
 
bruno is offline  
post #8 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 06:54 AM
Northwest outlaw
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
yea Nick it is almost at the end. your up a little early
post #9 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 07:51 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
TopSportsman916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Guys, thanks for the input. I was sitting here & I have come up with 3 possibilities.
Current 4 Link Setting Setting: 50.99" @ .350" high. 12" spread on bars

#1 - 47.45 @ 5.38" high. 12" spread on bars

#2 - 45.54" @ 7.65" high. 12" spread on bars.

#3 - 50.93" @ 7.68" high. 11" spread on bars.

I am using 4-link Wizard. SO I hope I didn't screw any dimensions up when loading the program. But this is what I have been going by from the start. One thing I didn't do when mapping out the 4 link was that 4 link wizard only calculates for 5 holes in the forward upper 4 link bracket. I have 9 holes.I talked to VPRC's & they said just calculate for the middle 5 holes. So I still have 2 holes higher & 2 holes lower that I haven't calculated for. I probably need to do that. Here is a picture. I think this will explain it better than I did.
[/img][img]

So does any one of those settings seem better than the others or do I just need to pick one & try it? In the picture, the 4 link is in setting #1. I have ran the car in this set up with the 4,29 gearing & Goodyear 2556 tires. This is the setting I was planning on trying again but I am open to suggestions.

Nick I am at the 4:07 mark. It is near the very end of the video. [/img]

Chris

VPRC 1998 Mustang
557 CJ :1.15 60', [email protected] mph @ 2600lbs
665 C&C Hemi : To Be Determined
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/2158/ricksadql2.jpg
TopSportsman916 is offline  
post #10 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 08:43 AM
Senior Member
 
bruno's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: MILLBROOK, AL.
Posts: 6,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
 
Chris in my "no expertice opinion" i believe your chassis needs more motor ----

it almost looks like the issues Randy was having w/ the 466 ????



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
bruno is offline  
post #11 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 08:56 AM
Senior Member
 
Doug Rahn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Springfield, GA
Posts: 1,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Chris, I don't know if you want to spend anymore money on software, but I use Performance Trends 4 Link Calculator (Plus Version), that lets you plot in up to 15 holes. http://www.performancetrends.com/4link.htm
Doug Rahn is offline  
post #12 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 09:15 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
TopSportsman916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruno
Chris in my "no expertice opinion" i believe your chassis needs more motor ----

it almost looks like the issues Randy was having w/ the 466 ????
Nick, in all seriousness, I agree with you 100%. I found that out when I put a bad 5000 rpm chip in. It didn't hold & let the motor go up on the converter @ 5700 rpm. The car really responded. It feels totally different from launching with a 4000 rpm chip. Best way I can explain it was that I could feel the chassis "hit" thru the aluminum seat. It was like I was kicked in the a$$.. :lol:

Chris

VPRC 1998 Mustang
557 CJ :1.15 60', [email protected] mph @ 2600lbs
665 C&C Hemi : To Be Determined
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/2158/ricksadql2.jpg
TopSportsman916 is offline  
post #13 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 09:16 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
TopSportsman916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 1,778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Rahn
Chris, I don't know if you want to spend anymore money on software, but I use Performance Trends 4 Link Calculator (Plus Version), that lets you plot in up to 15 holes. http://www.performancetrends.com/4link.htm
Cool !!! Thanks Doug. I am going to check it out.

Chris

VPRC 1998 Mustang
557 CJ :1.15 60', [email protected] mph @ 2600lbs
665 C&C Hemi : To Be Determined
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/2158/ricksadql2.jpg
TopSportsman916 is offline  
post #14 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 09:59 AM
Senior Member
 
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,960
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
 
Oh, Ok......the current I/C is only .350" off the ground, and not 3.50"......wow that is low.


Try #1 for starters because of the three it will be a decent jump in I/C height, but not as excessive as the other two. Don't be surprised if you end up having to tighten up the rear extension valving up closer to the full tight range of say 4 to 7 back from full tight. The rear compression could probably stay around the 50 - 60% tight range depending on how much air you run & how hard it ends up hitting the wheelie bars next time out.

Might also think about playing with the strut extension valving as well. You could try a hit at 1/4, 1/2, & 3/4 tight to see if theres any noticable difference with each course jump in adjustment. Do your struts adjuster nuts have 3 full 360* rotations from full-loose to full-tight, or is it more like 2.85 to 2.90 full rotations?

[Edit] never mind, I was thinking about full turns on Lamb struts.

D.I.L.L.I.G.A.S. Dave::
460 street '66 Ranchero.......................finished someday.
460 race '70 Maverick..........................finished someday.
All 'glass Top Sportsman '69 Mustang......ummm, check back when I win big playing the Texas Lotto, or online poker.
My youtube page. Some ancient & newer local race video.

Join the Poker Players Alliance (theppa.org). US online poker should NOT be turned into a crime.
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.S. is offline  
post #15 of 41 (permalink) Old 10-18-2008, 12:12 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: markleville indiana
Posts: 126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 
I start at haft the wheel base so i would start at 54"at around 3-5'' high
the shorter the ic the harder it will hit the tire. but less front end lift
and the leverage goes away faster.it will also be more pron to tire shake
that why i like to run the ic longer. it should get down on the wheelie bars
for about 3-5' with the front tires about 2-3" off the ground use the weight of the car to plant the tires on launch.that why i am saying more front end
lift.it doest matter if the tire are 1 inch or 1 foot off the ground once they are off the ground all the weight is on the back tires.it also looks like your
bottom bar is to high in front i normal start with the bar level with the bottom of the chassis.if the car scaled around 50/50 this is where i would start.but you have been racing the car with no problems for some time now right
95MUSTANG is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the 460 Ford Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome