on 7/3/2002 7:44 AM, josh Wyte wrote:
> Nope, more *rear* bar gives you more *front* traction!
No, strictly speaking, more rear bar gives you less rear traction.
> The front bar will increase understeer significantly,
No, it doesn't. Because VWs with stock and somewhat stiffer than stock
springs (I include the SRS street springs in this group) are *so* prone to
body roll, the front swaybar improves front traction by keeping more of the
front tires on the ground. In a car where you're able to put sufficiently
stiff springs on it, swaybars become progressively less necessary. Take a
car like Iain Mannix & Kevin Wenzel's FSP 8v Scirocco. Big front bar, *no*
rear bar, with something like 250f/400r springs. There are divergent
theories of making VWs handle- I'm absolutely not in the big-rear-bar/no
front bar camp.
> What it does do it help with camber changes...
Exactly, and that's why it works VWs, and strut suspensions in general have
absolutely dreadful camber control. The A4 cars get around this somewhat by
having a lot of caster, something like 7 degrees, but that won't help in
autocross slaloms, for instance, where you don't have a lot of steering
dialed in. Have you actually tested the bigger front bar? I've had big front
bars on my '84, '87 16v, and '97 VR6. Every one of them was more neutral
with the big bar. All had (have) stock springs, but like I said, the theory
doesn't change until you get to where you have *really* stiff springs on the
car, and then the bumpy track becomes a problem there too. I like Dick
Shine, but I just don't buy into his theory because I've seen it work the
other way when he says it won't.
Chris
