View Single Post
      09-28-2013, 01:25 PM   #21
Racer20
Major
United_States
1030
Rep
1,190
Posts

Drives: F80 M3, 228i THP, E46 ZHP
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
Exactly.......

......the plain fact is....for a given car (sprung/unsprung mass, weight distribution, ARB stiffness, suspension design) there is ONE ideal compression and ONE rebound rate that works with a given Spring rate.
With passive dampers, there is definitely a "sweet spot," which is what you're referring to. But, the fact is when adaptive dampers are considered, this is simply not correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
Sure you can play around with fine adjustments (and I mean fine) to suit different drivers/conditions, but even these are generally REBOUND only, and also usually want to go softer rates
This is also not correct. There are lots of times that you'd want to adjust compression, and lots of times you'd want to add rebound.

Dampers (even passive ones) are one of the most complex components on a vehicle. The information that is out there an available to consumers and racers (even things like the Penske tuning manual) is stuff that you learn the first day on the job as an OEM damper tuner, then throw out the next day because you realize it's kid stuff.

Unless you've tuned shocks at either the OEM level or for an F1 team, you've only got about 5% of the picture.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NISFAN View Post
So when you realise that BMW change both compression AND rebound on the F3x, and exaggerate the settings in such a way that the driver feels the big difference, that is not a well engineered solution.
I'm not sure where this quote comes from, but it's most likely BS, either as an excuse or for some other reason. I've NEVER seen marketing dictate to chassis engineers how to tune a vehicle.
Appreciate 0