Page 2 of 2

Re: Rocker tower brace

Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 11:47 am
by DH2
stylussprinter wrote:The inner edge of the rear tower flat steel plate on mine has a 15mm's wide strip welded to it from top to bottom which JP obviously intended would stop flex there . Then on cars built by Tim Benbow , instead of only one piece of steel supporting the tower from the chassis --- there are two pieces , one at each side at the top edge back diagonally to the chassis rail towards the bulkhead ---- possibly these chassis towers don't flex :?: If thet were of tube rather than flat , that would stop it :roll:
Ah, different to mine then. You can see mine on the photo of the strut, on page 7 of my rebuild thread, just the one strip of flat back to the chassis. You can also see how I am going to brace the front tower, and will cut the rears off and re-make them using some steel angle. Don't seem to be making very rapid progress with the car at the moment, not had alot of garage time - not so bad though, as my pockets are empty from paying for the cylinder head and the roll cage last month!

Dave

Re: Rocker tower brace

Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 2:07 pm
by stylussprinter
:oops: :oops: :oops: Actually Dave , my memory's playing tricks with me ---- having posted about that plate being strengthened , I opened up the bonnet this morning to adjust the toe and realised it's only the front tower plate that has a 15mm's edge welded to it :shock:

Re: Rocker tower brace

Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:34 am
by stylussprinter
stylussprinter wrote:Dave DH2 will be pleased to know that the tower brace I made and fitted , albeit in a different location to his , really changes the car's behavier on turn in , very twitchy with very careful steering input required/less :!: so there's an opportunity to reduce the rake a little for even more rear grip , without inducing understeer :P
This proves that although I thought the towers weren't moving ---- however little , they definately were :wink: This obviously changes the camber but particularly castor during weight transfer/cornering :roll:
Looking at the front tyres now it's in the shed , it's clear to see why it was twitchy on turn in ----- only half the tread is heat rubbered and rolled off (the outer half) whereas previously the whole tread which shows how much the towers were allowing the camber to change/increase during weight transfer before the brace. So to get back the balance the car had , I've increased the 2deg neg to 2.7deg neg plus turned the rear coilovers down half a turn , making rake now 21mm's as opposed to 23mm's before . I may need to adjust further once I can track test it again because I've lost some weight since last year therefore ' rake ' once seated may still not be enough for more rear grip BUT it's best to make small adjustments/record then test again etc. Not sure when I'll be on track again at the moment --- depends on funds :wink:

Re: Rocker tower brace

Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 12:35 pm
by DH2
Nice to have some data to backup my finger-in-the-air engineering :)

Re: Rocker tower brace

Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:24 pm
by stylussprinter
DH2 wrote:Nice to have some data to backup my finger-in-the-air engineering :)
Don't forget though , that the data only refers to my car regarding what adjustment levels ie. turns of coilovers , mm's rake , chassis height mm's , camber etc etc ---- to achieve my own desired result.
Reason being that my setup is based on much higher spring rates and shorter lengths than most guys run --- also chassis height at the rear has been acheived by modded pickup points plus fibreglass removed/arches etc.
This being the case , any advice I may give is always that this or that direction in adjustment will change a behaviour in the cars handling '' towards '' a certain end AS OPPOSED TO -- it will behave as mine does ---- just thought I'd better say that :wink:

Re: Rocker tower brace

Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:53 pm
by DH2
stylussprinter wrote: Don't forget though , that the data only refers to my car regarding what adjustment levels ie. turns of coilovers , mm's rake , chassis height mm's , camber etc etc ---- to achieve my own desired result.
Reason being that my setup is based on much higher spring rates and shorter lengths than most guys run --- also chassis height at the rear has been acheived by modded pickup points plus fibreglass removed/arches etc.
This being the case , any advice I may give is always that this or that direction in adjustment will change a behaviour in the cars handling '' towards '' a certain end AS OPPOSED TO -- it will behave as mine does ---- just thought I'd better say that :wink:
Well yes... my point being that your findings suggest that it does make a beneficial difference.

Dave