Quote:
Originally Posted by elvo
Bump stops are a no-no. The chassis has got to hit the ground before anything in the suspension starts to bind. More so, even, even with the chassis flat on the ground you need ~5mm of extra uptravel. It's easy to see why when looking at some of Jimmy's fabulous action shots: our cars roll hard and far, and tracks are not flat.
(The 1:1 dune buggy / sand rail / desert racer crew will disagree though: they'll consider it a sin if the chassis hits the ground before the shocks hit the rubber bump stops.)
Even similar things to bump stops, like increasing the spring and/or damper rates near full compression: doesn't really work. It's been tried a number of times, results have never been 100% satisfying. Often it's very nice on bumps and rough stuff, but there's always a downside when it comes to control, and 'centering up', like when lining up for jumps and flying through chicanes. It's similar to what happens if rebound and compression damping rates are too far apart: roll and pitch movements become asymmetrical and a bit weird.
This may be far out, but who says R/C cars need 'ideal' damping rates? R/C drivers' bums and spines are safely on the rostrum, they don't really care about jolts as long as the car stays in control.
|
This is a somewhat negative view of the possibilities. You need to understand what bumpstops could offer and how damper performance is not about ride it is about maximising the contact load between the tyre and track for more of the time and therefore going faster. F1 invests a lot in damper technologies for the same reason and I don't think they,re interested in smoothness of ride.