> I was assuming front and rear anti-roll bars and, because the rest of the
> car seems to be set up a bit, that they would be non-stock. Usually, in
> the world of unusual cars anyway, non-stock anti-roll bars end up being
> fabricated rather than bought off the shelf. And if they are fabricated,
> the preferred design (front and rear) is one where the lever arms can be
> grabbed at various places, making them shorter (for more stiffness) or the
> whole length can be used by grabbing at the ends.
We will have to investigate the roll-bar setup, before we eventualy change
the setup. But I suspect that we have stock roll-bars.
>
> If they aren't adjustable (they can only be grabbed at one place), I'd
> forget about trying to selected new ones for varying stiffness.... too
> cumbersome and likely to make you end up with a collection of bars you
> can't use.
We did not have in mind to buy/make a lot of different roll bars. We are
probably going the low tech rout and will tweek the chassis by
tire pressure :)
When it comes to tirepressure, I just spoke with my father about
tirepressure on the phone.
He was quite a bit sceptial about
using as high tirepressure as was recomended by you(36 front, 26-32
rear). He was worried that the contact patch of the tire would become much
smaller, and that it would speed up tirewear a lot.
He also would not buy the story that we can ignore the tirepressure
recomendation from Lotus. Because if Lotus is quoting a "suboptimal"
tirepressure, to avoid lawsuits, there must be some danger of using
"optimal" tirepressure. What can Lotus(or any other manufacturer be sued
for) if they quote "optimal" tirepressure?
Tor Hval <torhv@ifi.uio.no>
|