> Greg, my question was neither a challenge to your
background nor your
> position, just an open question.
=====
I didn't take it as one, just a little background to
maybe add a smidgen of credibility to my opinion. I
wouldn't want you to think I just pulled them out
of thin air, as some alignment techs I've known seem
to do. :^))
=====
I wouldn't call myself an expert by any
> means, but after working with Daryl Armstrong and
Formula One,
=====
What are your area(s) of expertise?
=====
I did manage
> to pick up some information. Heck, if you can get
a Fiero to pull over 1g,
> ya oughta get some kinda award! As far as track
racing goes, you know each
> driver has their own preference and each is also
highly specialized to a
> particular track, let alone tire, wheel, and actual
geometry. Hell, tire
> pressure can play as big a roll [pun] as tread
design.
=====
Yep. A tire pressure and temperature gauge is a
powerful 'G' force tool in the right hands. :^))
=====
And numerous
> theories abound. Although to me, track and street
set -ups are like
> comparing apples to monkeys.
=====
Agreed, and I didn't. As you know, racing provides
much more insight into the dynamics of what's
happening, to better make decisions for street
applications.
As the saying goes, racing improves the breed. :^))
=====
Over 90mph, I think the last thing the Brick
> needs is less centering.
=====
The setting's won't alter it enough to be 'twitchy'.
=====
And as far as steering effort, like most cars
> that suffer from dated power steering systems, I
think the Brick needs
> *more* not less at higher speeds.
=====
In rereading my post, I see I wasn't very clear. The
slight negative camber increases 'feel' due to tire
loading. IOW, the power steering's 'vagueness' is
reduced a little because it's being slightly
overloaded.
=====
But these are just my opinions and my
> preferences. I have yet to look very closely at
the Brick's geometry though
> I suspect it's a mixed bag.
=====
Very. :^))
BTW, if the PO hasn't removed the rear traction bars,
or TT hasn't mentioned it, it's wise to do so if you
plan on doing much high speed driving.
=====
Hell, I've been too busy just getting this
> thing to move like it looks. I just spent a good
portion of the day on
> conference calls with MSD, Edelbrock, and Champion,
and research, just
> trying to determine the best spark plug for this
particular application.
=====
And the answer is?
=====
> Anyway, considering your expertise and background,
do you happen to know the
> scrub radius for the brick?
=====
No, I've never bothered to measure it since I don't
plan to significantly increase the track. It's pretty
large though based on how bad it scrubs with stock
rims. It's why I prefer the slight negative camber.
=====
If I do decide to replace the rather inexact
> OEM wheels, I'd like to know my starting points.
=====
If you plan on driving it much, replacing the rims is
mandatory, if yours are as out-of-round as mine. I
bought Shelby (now defunct AFAIK), which are almost
identical in looks to the OEM except good quality
and highly polished. Also they're 7.5"W Vs 7.0", just
enough to bring the tread out flush with the fender
lip.
Even with this small amount of increased width,
the OEM tire (current version is wider though)
scrubs the foot well at full lock in one
direction, and the front of the wheelwell in the
other direction.
=====
Now, that it looks like we
> can actually get this Brick to move, I'd like it to
go in the direction
> intended.
> And as far as changing from the original specs and
TT's input, I'm all ears.
=====
Good luck with it. You know where to find us.
GM
> stephan
> 2821
|