Quote:
|
Originally Posted by benebob
I know of 4 who do it but then again. They don't hang out with a bunch of idiots on NASIOC or I club either. They'd rather race then talk about it. Try
talking to others that DON'T drive subarus. You'll learn much more. about set ups then idiot subaru drivers. Remember a subaru is a very poor excuse for an autox car to begin with.
|
I'm kind of amazed by this comment as, A) you're autocrossing a subaru, and B) They tend to do fairly well in local competitions.
I think you need to take into consideration that SCCA rules are very unrelatable to many of the cars that compete under them. I'm guessing that increased spring rates aren't allowed in his class, so the only thing he can do to increase roll and bump stiffness is to increase the front bar. Turn in may suffer, however the end result may prove positive. Unless you have tried both, you don't know which works better. In classes where upgraded springs are allowed, the turn in response is needed more than the stiffness from the bar.
Heck, a second generation eclipse is a pretty crappily designed car as far as suspension goes, however Dennis Grant managed to win with one.
Plus, suspension design is a very fickle thing. many times you can design a suspension to be good at one thing, however it will be very poor at another. I'm sure Chike could make his car a autocross only car, but I'm pretty sure that's not what he wants to do. I personally couldn't understand making a car to only compete in parking lots. But that's just me.
From what I've seen, designing the suspension to handle road courses works best to create the "best overall" suspension. A road course car must handle high speed and low speed corners, and weight transfer. And how many road race cars similar to a WRX or SVX do you know that don't run swaybars? Because that's a big 0 for me.