View Single Post
      01-28-2014, 01:40 AM   #122
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
463
Rep
10,408
Posts

Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bradleyland View Post
Having seen swamp2's contributions in other threads, I'm nearly positive that was just a transpositional error. He meant 60-rear, 40-front distribution.
Yes, thanks, I could have and should have been more clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss330 View Post
While 60/40 might be significantly better, do we have some independent confirmation of that?
40F:60R, yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Year's_End View Post
This creates a lighter nose with sharper turn-in, aids rear wheel traction during acceleration, and creates a more even load distribution under braking.
Bingo all three are important factors. This is why generally speaking the higher performance and more track oriented a car is, the more rear weight bias it will have compared to 50-50. F1 is not the best example since they develop absurd aero downforce, but they too must handle at low speed without crazy downforce. They too have a significant rear weight bias. Sure, you can always find cars that handle well with 50-50 or even a slight front bias but they are fighting the physics...
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK |
| Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors |
| Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels |
| XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit |

Last edited by swamp2; 01-28-2014 at 01:48 AM..