now with extra oversteer!
Thanks for the responses everyone.
That is a type-o. I forgot the minus signs. the rear camber is negetive.
I just got back from driving all over the place. I put over a hundred miles on the car today. I am really liking the way it handles. Its a lot more fun. I really enjoy using the gas to rotate the car around the corners before all it would do is push.
Its kinda funny because the whole reason for getting the bigger rims in front was so i could run a non staggered 255 all around setup and eliminate the understeer. Seems like I have done that without even putting on the bigger tires.
After driving around all day im thinking you are right Danx. I cant think of any other possible explanation.
That is a type-o. I forgot the minus signs. the rear camber is negetive.
I just got back from driving all over the place. I put over a hundred miles on the car today. I am really liking the way it handles. Its a lot more fun. I really enjoy using the gas to rotate the car around the corners before all it would do is push.
Its kinda funny because the whole reason for getting the bigger rims in front was so i could run a non staggered 255 all around setup and eliminate the understeer. Seems like I have done that without even putting on the bigger tires.
After driving around all day im thinking you are right Danx. I cant think of any other possible explanation.
I was amazed at how bad the alignment had gotten. It only took 3 months to get that far out of spec. We have some good roads and some not so good roads around here.
I do not believe the bad alignment was to blame for the understeer. The car had always understeered through a many alignments and 2 sets of tires. I think its just the nature of AP2s.
sorry zoomie, no pics. check out tirerack.com its a good place to see what the rims look like on your car. Pick the rim you want then click on the little button that says view on vehicle.
I do not believe the bad alignment was to blame for the understeer. The car had always understeered through a many alignments and 2 sets of tires. I think its just the nature of AP2s.
sorry zoomie, no pics. check out tirerack.com its a good place to see what the rims look like on your car. Pick the rim you want then click on the little button that says view on vehicle.
Originally Posted by hicabi,Nov 24 2009, 01:24 PM
Going 255 all around will make your car oversteer even more...
For example right now i dont feel any loss of grip at all with the 225 fronts. So if there is 0 slippage right now you cant get less then that. No matter how big of a tire you put up front you cant get less that 0. Therefor the only way to get more oversteer would be to reduce the grip in the rear.
Like i said. Thats all speculation, but it makes sense in my head.
If i went ahead as planned and put some 255s on the front I think i would notice a change in steering feel and breaking. I think it would also make the car more predictable in a sense that it would always oversteer in all situations. Before my wheel change the car would oversteer in some situations and understeer in others. After the wheel change the car seems to oversteer in all situations, but i havent driven it enough to be sure. So maybe 255s in front would guarantee that i dont get any surprise understeer when im expecting oversteer...
What do u think?
PS: a 255/40 will fit on a 8.5 in rim no problem. Thats what Honda does on the CR.
What im trying to say is that once you have enough front grip that the front wont let go it does not matter how much more grip u can add to the front because it wont change the fact that the front isnt letting go. The relative front to rear grip is not changing.
I agree with what your saying up until the point where u have enough grip that the front will not slide. any extra grip added beyond that shouldnt affect the oversteer/understeer in any way i can think of. In other words once a tire has enough grip that it is unmovable it cant get more unmovable no matter how wide it is. Unmovable is the maximum amount of unmovableness something can obtain
So once you reach that point the only way to effect the front to rear grip ratio would be to change the size of the rears (assuming all other variables are the same).
It would not matter if you had a 10" tire on the front or a 20" tire in the front because in either case the front tire would not reach the limits of its grip before the rear let go.
Thats my theory anyways.
I agree with what your saying up until the point where u have enough grip that the front will not slide. any extra grip added beyond that shouldnt affect the oversteer/understeer in any way i can think of. In other words once a tire has enough grip that it is unmovable it cant get more unmovable no matter how wide it is. Unmovable is the maximum amount of unmovableness something can obtain
So once you reach that point the only way to effect the front to rear grip ratio would be to change the size of the rears (assuming all other variables are the same).It would not matter if you had a 10" tire on the front or a 20" tire in the front because in either case the front tire would not reach the limits of its grip before the rear let go.
Thats my theory anyways.





