[QUOTE=hey_i'm_new,May 8 2007, 10:24 PM]you post is beyond me and i rather not use my time to analyze.

 

Well, now I gotta run into town, in my twitchy nervous and foul handling AP1 S2000, so I guess I'm about to put my life on the line. I really hate to have to drive a car that is so hard to keep under control and such a PITA to drive, but I'll be REAL careful. I sure hope nothing breaks.

 

I always like to read these threads, and most of the time it always seems like the AP1 guys are trying so hard to defend their vehicles. I mean honestly their both great cars lets just get past it.

 

[QUOTE=__redruM,May 8 2007, 09:02 PM]When I first bought the S2000, I was really nervous about the whole snap oversteer issue.

 

Oh yea, just in case it's not obvuous, and for better or worse, I did survive the harrowing drive to town last night. The car only flew out of control for no reason a few times, and being such a numbnuts I hardly noticed at all.

 

BTW guys, the S2000 is conventional, so it responds to conventional tuning tweaks as expected. If your car is too twitchy/nervous at higher speeds you can get more stability by running more toe in at the back. Too little makes any car with IRS twitchy and nervous.

I don't know if it's more critical on the AP1 than the AP2, but an AP1 with close to zero rear toe-in is downright scary at speed, and I'd bet AP2's are the same way.

 

I still want somebody to explain to me why we need Honda to explain the design tradeoffs a suspension designer makes when designing a classical wishbone suspension system. Would it help if I posted some links so you can do your own research and prove that I'm full of carp?

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_wishbone_suspension

"Double wishbone designs allow the engineer to carefully control the motion of the wheel throughout suspension travel, controlling such parameters as camber angle, caster angle, toe pattern, roll center height, scrub radius, scuff and more."

I maintain that all of the above, including the "and more," is for the most part simply a matter of geometry, and that the decisions the designer makes are all for very specific reasons, rather than due to some deep dark black magic that only the guy making the decisions can or will understand. If I'm right then we don't need Honda engineers to explain it to us, and if I'm wrong, the somebody needs to explain it to me.

If nobody here really cares to understand how our suspension systems were designed and how they work, or if everyone already understands it, then I'm wasting my time, but if nobody responds and exposes some error in my thinking then I'm going to assume that I've got it right and so argue next time we have a thread like this one or and AP1/AP2 thread. I'd rather be corrected now, before I repeat something that might be incorrect, so if I'm wrong about any of this somebody needs to explain to me where I"ve blown it.

ANYBODY???

 

 

Besides all of this: when I read AP2 I have to think USDM AP2.
AP2's overhere, across the pond, in the old country, still have the Good Old 9000 rpm redline F20C2.


Is it vanity to think the world = USA?
Or is that just stupid?

IMO Honda made a wonderfull car.
All they messed up was the final drive ratio

 

Billman and I recently had a discussion about this very thing, and we're both trying to be sure that we say F20C/F22C when applicable, but old habits are hard to break. Just keep correcting us when we get sloppy and we'll eventually change our ways.