Rear stabilizer on type 44 - long

Fri Oct 4 10:44:04 EDT 2002

I've got dozens of posts on this subject on the main list.  IF you are
contemplating a rear antiroll bar for your type 44, you are at the wrong end
of the car in terms of the problem (this goes back to the beginning of the
qlist).  The problem with ARB in the rear is a couple fold (especially on the
20020vt).  First, ARB reduce effective wheel travel.  That becomes a problem
with the torsen center, cuz when the wheel lifts, torque to the ground goes
to zero = zoom-zip.  Secondly, you have the added effect of lift throttle
oversteer, which is a combination of torsen allocation in decel mode, as well
as static front heavy car weight shifting under decel.  Audi publishes 80%
front weight shift under braking, which means that a rear bar ain't gonna do
much to "help" ya turn in.

I've got a Type 44 chassis car with full coil over conversion in my shop with
the rear bar installed.  On a targetted suspension evaluation in the hills of
CO, I recommended that it be removed for better traction (big problem with
rear inside tire lift).  It stays, but I'm not impressed at all with it's
addition.  I would advocate a rear linear rate spring and a larger front ARB
is a better way to go.  I've also seen a *lot* of folks say what a "great
addition" it is, but really the only way to quantify that is to put it on a
track vs a car that is setup addressing the identified characteristics of the
type 44 chassis cars.  Here, the rear swaybar car will not show tail to
properly setup non rear swaybar car.

FYI, even audisport shuns ARB.

 A great quattro rules story yesterday.  I attended a private track session
at Gingermann Raceway (MI)with some porsche boys, and a fully caged bmw 325is
(2700lbs, mit 240hp early M3 engine, late M3 wheels, stripped, coil overed)
and I were playing chase (me with the 87 qwagon).  To detune my car for
longer lap life (RS2 is out, k24 is in), I yanked the WGFV (reducing boost
from 22peak to 15peak).  During my first session I locked the center diff
only.  BMW slowly took me in 20laps.  In deference to adding the 22psi back,
I decided to lock center AND rear diff.  Bingo = 1 very frustrated BMW 20laps
worth.  All of a sudden, a lot of interest in the paddock.

I won't say a rear ARB won't do something, I just believe it's not what going
to do what you think.  Better ways to skin that cat.

My .02 again on this subject

Scott Justusson
87 t44tqw avec mods, no rear ARB

Bernie Benz writes:
If, as you declare, "the 200 chassis is so flexible, that it should not have
a rear stabilizer", adding anti roll torque in the rear should/would make no
difference, inasmuch as chassis deflection would follow the front restricted
body roll anyway and there could/would be no rear wheel lift, with or
without.  Such is not the case.  Rear anti roll torque can only improve the
car's understeer tendicies, which is why IMO it was added in small doses
both the '92 S4 and the V8.  The S4 rear anti roll system has been added to
the 200 chassis, with posted mod descriotion and positive results.

Go for it, Eyvind and post your results.


More information about the 200q20v mailing list