[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
carrol smith on u-o-u in a turn
- To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
- Subject: carrol smith on u-o-u in a turn
- From: Dave Eaton <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 21:43:50 +1200
- Autoforwarded: false
- Disclose-Recipients: prohibited
- Hop-Count: 1
- Importance: normal
- Mr-Received: by mta MOEMR0.MUAS; Relayed; Tue, 05 May 1998 21:43:50 +1200
- Mr-Received: by mta CSAV10; Relayed; Tue, 05 May 1998 21:43:50 +1200
- Sender: email@example.com
- Ua-Content-Id: 11C52D6B2F00
- X400-Mts-Identifier: [;6450432105051998/A51855/CSAV10]
pertinent to the present diatribe against u-o-u in a turn, i though i should
quote something from carrol smith's book "tune to win"
"i feel that the basic problem in understanding the subject lies not in trying
to figure out what understeer is or what oversteer is - that's pretty simple -
but in realising that the same vehicle, with nothing physically changed in it's
setup, can - and will- understeer in some corners and oversteer in others.
further, in the same corner - on the same lap - it is not only possible for the
vehicle to understeer in in one portion of the corner and oversteer in another
but, if the car is going to be really fast, it is mandatory for it to do so.
most of the printed explanations of the twin phenoma of vehicle dynamics
ignore this fact and concentrate on steady state conditions which, while easier
to explore, are of limited interest to the racer.
tune to win, page 118.