At what 60' do you start pulling a tire?
What about with skinnies? and no front swaybar?
Just curious about at what point you started lifting a tire at the track. I'd like to...someday <img src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" border="0">
Dope
<img src="graemlins/camaro.gif" border="0" alt="[Chevrolet]" />
later,
Steve
I finally got it on film with a 1.59 spinning....
Trending Topics
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
with a travelin suspension, ive seen a 1.77 pull a tire. with a stock suspension itll take another tenth and a half to pull one (NO swaybar and skinnies). but thats all fuzzy math.
That was with no rear air bag or bigger rear say bar. (completely stock suspension minus the front sway bar)
LOW 1.6's? "popping" the front left could happen. (IMO)
Personally I try REAL hard NOT to lift the tires. Or to just barely lift them. It's just wasted energy. IMO
I was talking with Pro Stock John a little about suspension, weight transfer and soft shocks in front. We discussed a little bit about soft HAL shocks in front to help transfer the weight..
I always thought, a lot of suspension movement is wasted energy but now I only feel that way about the rear. In the front, if you do pull the wheels, even a foot or so, the energy pull up the car could have been used to push the car forward. Yes, but what about when the car is coming back down. The weight of the car coming down will make up for the energy it took to pull it up, right?
Lets say you have a tight suspension in front, you flash your converter and the front only comes up a little. The engine has to work harder to push the car forward but if the front end came up easier, the engine would rev up faster and you would also accelerate quicker, right?
Can anyone get a little more techincal about this? Like why its wasted energy if the front end is moved up? (lets assume rear is stiff and has no movement)
Thanks. I'm wondering if I should purchase some HAL's to help drop my 60'.
<strong>
In the front, if you do pull the wheels, even a foot or so, the energy pull up the car could have been used to push the car forward.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Seems reasonable to conclude that...
[quote]
The weight of the car coming down will make up for the energy it took to pull it up, right?
<hr></blockquote>
I don't think that gives anything usable back. The energy is returned on a vertical axis, you want as much energy as possible applied to the horizontal axis (i.e. going towards the finished line).
I've seen low riders bounce up & down on the street without going anywhere fast.
----
We don't want to have the front wheels 3 feet off the ground.
But we want excellent traction. But as we modify our cars to cut 1.5's, then 1.4's, 1.3's, you get to the point where folks start to use suspenion limiters, wheelie bars, and other items and methods to keep that 1.3 60 ft but keep the front of the car down.
Some really fast cars are so fast that the car does the first half of the run on the back tires and the wheelie bars.
I don't think it's possible to cut a 1.3 and keep all four tires on the ground at the launch.
The rear tires. They just turn. They want to go forward. If the twisting motion of them is great enough to lift up the front, then the wheels are free to move more forward... but if the front won't let itself be lift up the wheels need more energy to move forward.
Don't think of it as pulling the front wheels of the ground.. Rather think of it as the rear wheels moving forward.
I agree that the energy of the front end falling back down is not returned to the drivetrain for the most part and thus helping to propell the car forward. You are better off for the tires never to leave the ground (again, assuming traction is maintained.) In a perfect world where traction is always perfect, neither the back or the front suspension would ever move and ALL power would be utilized in propelling the car forward.
Unfortunately, I am finding so far that I need the extra weight transfer to get traction so I am not takeing steps to limit front end rise...yet. I am working towards the goal of being able to have both traction and much more limited front suspension movement.
Instead of tires, they are geers.. and there are 2 lines of teeth in the strip.. so there is NO slippage at all.
You flash your converter.. your car moves forward. Those gears want to go forward as fast as possible. The fact that they are moving forward at a very rapid rate... makes them want to move underneath the car.. ie: lifing the front up.
If the front end is restricted from rising energy is lost because it will take MORE work for the gears to go forward.
But say that the front end does come up... the gears will be able to move themselves forward with ease...
Now I bring you back to the increased angle. As the front end comes down, it will twist the rear and make up for what was lost from the down/up motion in distance.
The front travels upward because the axle spins itself forward. If the axle has to fight the front end, power is lost.
Any physics guys out there understand what I'm saying and/or can help me understand a little better?
Lets keep our analasys below ... lets say 30 degree incline.



