![]() |
|
|
|
||||||
|
just out of curiosity, what is anti-squat? punched it up on google, but couldn't find anything good.
ok, so now we all know i'm clueless, i might think that, from very basic understanding, that it has to do with suspension movement, in 4x4's you want lots, the more the merrier sway-bars are evil. in hotrod's you want stiff suspension, for better handling, cornering and the like. could that be it? or am i way way off? |
|
||||||
|
When a car launches, the front end always rises. Nothing you can do about that. But, the rear of the car can squat, rise, or do neither. If it neither squats nor rises, the suspension is said to have 100% anti-squat. It's somewhat of a misnomer, for you could just as well say it has 100% anti-rise, but that's what it's called.
Anyway, if you're trying to avoid variable loading of the rear tires (the rear of the car bouncing up and down) and, also, if you have some kind of trick asymmetric setup with which you're hoping to get equal rear tire loading (with a beam axle and RWD), it's important that the rear suspension link angles don't change. For this reason, 100% anti-squat is recommended. There are those, however, who feel their car launches better with a certain amount of squat or rise, so they purposely avoid 100% anti-squat. The 100% anti-squat condition exists when the instant center of the rear suspension, when viewed from the side, is situated on a line which passes throught the rear tire patch and has a slope equal to the center of gravity height divided by the wheelbase. (On an IRS RWD car, this line is displaced upwards by a distance equal to the effective radius of the rear tire.) If the IC is above the line, the car rises; if below, it squats. (This is assuming the IC is forward of the rear tire patch. If behind, the situations are reversed.) |
|
||||
|
That was my calculator that they used. I still haven't seen the show...I need cable
For a 4x4 the design will be quite different then for a car...but there is no reason you can't use the same design tool. With a 4x4 you have to worry about driving up things that aren't flat. You also want the links to be up as high as possible so that they don't become "rock magnets". Many people on pirate4x4.com who made their suspensions without putting any thought into how much anti-squat (AS) they would have ended up with something like 200% AS and wondered why their suspension would droop out when they tried to climb over something and would hop like mad on hill climbs. If you look at the new comp buggies (aka moon buggies) they are running very close to 0% AS (links parallel with each other and the ground). Some guys are now making their links out of 2" OD x .500" wall thickness heat treated chro-moly so they don't bend them...DIFFERENT SPORT ENTIRELY!!! Obviously you have to deal with none of this with a car (at least I hope so ).
|
|
|
| Recent Suspension - Brakes - Steering posts with photos |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 4 Bar que. | 39chevy | General Rodding Tech | 3 | 10-18-2004 05:21 PM |
| Roll bar design questions | Dubz | General Rodding Tech | 10 | 05-31-2004 03:23 AM |
| Panhard bar revision | 5window | Suspension - Brakes - Steering | 2 | 11-06-2003 04:31 AM |
| front sway bar mount location | fire power | Suspension - Brakes - Steering | 2 | 05-17-2003 07:10 AM |
| rear sway bar | DeathByGreaser | Transmission - Rearend | 2 | 02-07-2003 02:25 PM |