spitfires
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Spits] [TR] spit suspension question

To: <jimmuller@rcn.com>, <spitfires@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [Spits] [TR] spit suspension question
From: "Joe Curry" <spitlist@cox.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 19:32:42 -0700
Exactly!  So adding it all up, just weighs more heavily on the conclusion
that putting a swing spring on an early spit in opposition to a camber
compensator is not an economically sound decision.

Thanks for that observation.

Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: spitfires-bounces+spitlist=cox.net@autox.team.net
[mailto:spitfires-bounces+spitlist=cox.net@autox.team.net] On Behalf Of Jim
Muller
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 7:09 PM
To: spitfires@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [Spits] [TR] spit suspension question

On 9 Nov 2007 at 18:55, Joe Curry wrote:

> But the increase in the sway bar was an effort to compensate for
> the decrease in rear roll stiffness.

Which is exactly why I brought it up.  It is yet one more necessary 
thing that that fellow has to change if he wants to go to a swing-
spring.  BL did it for a reason and so must everyone else too.
_______________________________________________

Support Team.Net  http://www.team.net/donate.html

Spitfires@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/spitfires

http://www.team.net/archive

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>