soft RF why and what.

[4bangerhotrod]

im not looking for a answer im just asking to to see what everyones ideas are. what does the soft spring in the RF actually do, why do you think it makes the car turn better and whats it doing to make the car turn better, why do you need to go softer as the track gets slicker and slower. and people work and spend alot of money to make the front end light so it can transfer weight but then you tie the RF down with a high rebound shock to keep it down on the RF. again im not looking for a answer for myself i would just like to see a good discussion on this area. i know the reasons this works and the way this works are alot different than what alot of people believe.
thanks
4bangerhotrod

[let-r-eat]

Cut out dynamic wedge to promote the car to turn by the soft spring reducing front lateral weight transfer and therefore increasing left front to right rear weight transfer. There are other reasons as well but that is the main one.

[racinjason29]

It seems that a stiffer RF would cause the car to roll onto the RR more and help the car turn, not really sure but just a thought

[steman731]

The softer RF actually loads the RF tire much less than a harder spring. When the track is heavy you go stiff on the RF because there isn't a traction issue with the RR. As it slicks, you want all the weight you can get on that RR. The tie down shock simply holds the car in the leaned state promoting more sidebite. "The stiff spring gets the weight."

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

The aero factor is very important at a lot of tracks.

[let-r-eat]

Actually this condition is also a two headed sword, really more than that but I'll mention two. The roll center location moves in an unfavorable direction as well as the weight that moves around must be controlled on corner entry. I see many cars that never reach a balanced state again after corner exit. This makes tire wear management much more difficult. I see a significant difference between the top teams and the local racers in this area.

[tbaileyjr]

Soft rf works great on a smooth momentum style track but the thought of the progressive camber increase helps the front feel secure

[Matt49]

The soft RF is nice for getting in the corner and through the center.
But if you go too soft on the RF you will lose a noticeable amount of forward drive.
This is the reason so many guys these days are running the stacked/dual-stage spring setup on the right front.

[let-r-eat]

Rear weight % requirement change with softening the RF?

[4bangerhotrod]

the soft rf lets the weight tranfer to the right side pinning the RR adding side bite and turning the car off the RR. its actually transfering less weight onto the RF because of the softer spring and its unloading the LR because of the LR unloading you have to add bite to keep your static wedge.

[powerslide]

Its been working for me since 1999.

You have been driving late models since 1999? Things that make you go HMMMM

[lovinlatemodels]

Actually I race in the late model class in 1998 thanks for caring.

Ive been running a soft rf since 98 though, unlike you I have real world experience and actually race 30-60 times a year, not TWO, lol..

We ran in our 91 Swartz car in 95 thru 98 with only a 325 right front so it's not new just been perfected over the years like the two stage RF spring i still have my Carrea catalog showing the two stage set up back in 1994 i was told not to run it, it was a way for them to sell more stuff funny how it's a big thing now, like i said not new just perfected.

[powerslide]

Actually I race in the late model class in 1998 thanks for caring.

Ive been running a soft rf since 98 though, unlike you I have real world experience and actually race 30-60 times a year, not TWO, lol..

You have experience w/ front wheel drives and stock cars, and ONE year in a late model more than 10years ago, you really think that compares to late models of today? Get real w/ your real world experience.

[powerslide]

One year? Sorry try again. 98,99,00,01,02.

Fwds were just easy money around here in 05,06,07,08 to the tune of 36-47k dollars of sales building them per year...

The class of car is irrelevant to this thread though anyways.

I could say youve raced a total of what 15 times in 10 years and you think your relevant to post anything on a racing forum, lol, but I wont, you already know your irrelevant thats why all the jealousy. Heck I could even say something about having 3 drivers in the top 20 in IMCA national pts running my rearends, over 40 feature wins between 6 cars with jnj rearends. And of course the Nascar national championship a driver with my rearend won this year in tier 3 or 4.. but again Ill let it go, your already jealous no sense fueling the fire.

If the class of car is irrelevant why did they ask it in the late model forum? Because they have a late model. By your standard's of race counts making you more in the know. Then some of the smartest people on this forum wouldn't be posting. As far as being jealous of factory stocks and front wheel drives now thats funny. I did some investigating of my own Jeffy and based on YOUR website you raced paved cars those years. You are really starting to sound like your best bud you follow around on here and hate so much. I'm done w/ this thread. Have a lovely day building FWD's

[sj valley dave]

Nice looking pavement cars though. Very cool 1999 Asphalt Street Stock and 2002 pavement late model...Not seeing very many DLM's though...

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

One year? Sorry try again. 98,99,00,01,02.

Fwds were just easy money around here in 05,06,07,08 to the tune of 36-47k dollars of sales building them per year...

The class of car is irrelevant to this thread though anyways.

I could say youve raced a total of what 15 times in 10 years and you think your relevant to post anything on a racing forum, lol, but I wont, you already know your irrelevant thats why all the jealousy. Heck I could even say something about having 3 drivers in the top 20 in IMCA national pts running my rearends, over 40 feature wins between 6 cars with jnj rearends. And of course the Nascar national championship a driver with my rearend won this year in tier 3 or 4.. but again Ill let it go, your already jealous no sense fueling the fire.

The class may be of no consequence, but the rear suspension type does matter.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

I have ran a softer rf spring since 1998. That would be with many different suspension types and classes of cars, lol.

leaf, coil, 4 link, 3 link j bar, 3 link panh behind.

The same principles seem to apply to ALL oval track cars.

powerslide, I never said I ran a dirt late model, neither did the starter of this thread. Look around there are lots of general questions like this in every catagory.

The facts are you cant contribute any more than what youve read from other people. You havent raced and tried stuff, your still struggling to get sponsors so you can race two nights a season according to your plea on fb.

My website hasnt had a update since 2009 or so, the fwd class around here ran its course I just do a few cages in them now per season. Maybe someday youll have the skills to quit your day job and make a living in your shop behind your house!

A 500/450 setup is a bit different than say a 550/250. You would be hard pressed to run the latter on a monoleaf and lift arm car.

I had a lot of success with a metric street stock with a 1400/1000 setup in 1996, but that is apples to oranges.

[Egoracing]

A 500/450 setup is a bit different than say a 550/250. You would be hard pressed to run the latter on a monoleaf and lift arm car.

I had a lot of success with a metric street stock with a 1400/1000 setup in 1996, but that is apples to oranges.

One thing that is being missed it the weights location as the chassis rolls onto the RF and the condition of the LR suspension while the RF is compressed. This is where the dirt late model or modified differ than other suspension setups. If the setup actually puts less weight on the RF how can you go from a 400RF with 2 -3 inches of travel to a 275RF and get 5 inches of travel? 2-3 on a 400 is 800-1200 lbs and 5 on a 275 is 1375. When the RF compresses the LR extends and it gets the bars into position before the application of the throttle. The body roll also raises the weight center line of the chassis which allows it to roll more weight over to the right. The Softer RF also compresses more and allows body roll without picking the LF tire off of the track.

[sj valley dave]

Just an observation...I do know that when we ran our DLM on pavement, a soft RF was the last thing the car needed or wanted. The more we ran a conventional asphalt setup with a stiff RF and kept the car flat as possible and chained down the LR to keep rear steer out of it, the quicker the lap times got according to the transponder...1/3 mile medium banked pavement track...

[4bangerhotrod]

if you have a 400lb spring thats only getting 2-3in of travel and are getting 5in travel with the softer spring then the stiffer spring is to stiff and thats the reason your swiching to a softer spring. the idea is to keep the max amount of rf travel from hot laps to feature thats the reason you have to soften as the track slicks off and slow's down. with the shocks we have now most of this is done with them, start out on the soft spring and just control it all with comp and reb as the track slicks off keep your rf travel and control when it gets there and when and if it comes off the rf.