FERRARIST
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 05:15 PM |
|
|
Rear wishbone layout
Hello all...
Which layout is stiffer in your opinion - 1 ton car, RWD, i can do both but need to choose one.
|
|
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 05:26 PM |
|
|
Depends more on your chassis than anything else, (1) Is more or less what was used on the Lotus Elan, (2) is late 1960s F1 best practice.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
FERRARIST
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 05:43 PM |
|
|
Originally i have OE wishbone inboard points and it will suit variant 1, optionally for variant 2 i can use additional arm. I can do both with no
worries, just need to be safe.
|
|
|
mark chandler
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 05:55 PM |
|
|
Option 1 for me, weld it solidly with some gussets and mount the hub carrier on rose joints so you can easily adjust toe. Do not run the bars parallel
but spread across the chassis to spread the load.
Top wishbone as a simple triangle adds strength and sets camber, just make sure there is room for the shock if locating on the lower bone.
Here's mine, you cannot see the other straight tube but it's still there 
 
Description
[Edited on 12/3/14 by mark chandler]
|
|
|
FERRARIST
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 06:28 PM |
|
|
Thanks for your advice, i wont have upper wishbone on this, just lower and shock macpherson strut on upright....
Actually option 1 will be faster and easier to make.
Any advice on seamless tube size - guess 34mm OD with 3mm wall will be fine?
[Edited on 12/3/14 by FERRARIST]
|
|
|
ashg
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 06:41 PM |
|
|
option one puts the diagonal in compression in a forward motion. option two puts the diagonal in tension in a forward motion. option 2 could
theoretically be made lighter.
you could go for the ultimate and use both diagonals.
Anything With Tits or Wheels Will cost you MONEY!!
Haynes Roadster (Finished)
Exocet (Finished & Sold)
New Project (Started)
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 07:07 PM |
|
|
Two diagonals has potential problems to cause problems.
Option (2) is very easy do do using separate links, doing it this way allows for easy adjustment of rear castor, strange as it may seem there is
such a thing.
Option (1) can either be as wishbone + single link or as complete suspension arm but former is a better option.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 07:26 PM |
|
|
This might be of interest --- http://www.spydercars.co.uk/lotus-elan-2-wishbones/
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
FERRARIST
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 07:31 PM |
|
|
Maybe it's worth to mention that:
- Car is RWD
- 1050kg
- Setup in question is for rear axle
- 580 kg weight on rear
- 250bhp......
- 250/64/18 - 270/65/16 full slicks used all time.....
[Edited on 12/3/14 by FERRARIST]
|
|
|
redturner
|
| posted on 12/3/14 at 07:47 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by FERRARIST
Thanks for your advice, i wont have upper wishbone on this, just lower and shock macpherson strut on upright....
Actually option 1 will be faster and easier to make.
Any advice on seamless tube size - guess 34mm OD with 3mm wall will be fine?
[Edited on 12/3/14 by FERRARIST]
You don't need to resort to seamless tube. erw is more than adequate for suspension units.....
|
|
|
FERRARIST
|
| posted on 21/5/14 at 04:46 PM |
|
|
Well neither of above layouts used, i choose another option. purely because there is no need to modify rear subframe or original mounting points.
Trailing arm, and 2 transverse arms, rear arm used for toe, front and rear for camber......trailing arm length can vary and i can adjust inboard
height of the arms in order to experiment with different roll center. 18mm rose joints all around.....
I wish both arms to be 5-6cm longer than that, but camber did not changes more than 0.2 degrees top to bottom wheel travel.
Any suggestions or cons that you can advice?
[Edited on 21/5/14 by FERRARIST]
|
|
|
43655
|
| posted on 21/5/14 at 06:34 PM |
|
|
you should have a longer bolt there, so it protrudes through the nylon of the nut.
single shear on the trailing arm not ideal, but given the size and very little moment on it, no problem.
Also have you checked clearance of the sphhericals through the suspension range?
Again, the front one looks pretty close to the chassis already, much droop and it looks like it'd bind on the body
|
|
|
FERRARIST
|
| posted on 21/5/14 at 09:58 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by 43655
you should have a longer bolt there, so it protrudes through the nylon of the nut.
There is 4 metal washers on both sides of the bolt - these days i refitted this arms milion times, and it was easy for me to tight the nut without
wearing the nylon......when on road washers will be removed........
quote:
Originally posted by 43655Also have you checked clearance of the sphhericals through the suspension range?
Again, the front one looks pretty close to the chassis already, much droop and it looks like it'd bind on the body
Many times clearance was checked, i can even try different mounting points......maybe picture is from a bad angle but no worry on this.....
Thanks for your notes...
|
|
|
