[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [New Search]
Jim has to be right. VW wouldn't design a system where the geometry changes that much over the swing of the trailing arms. the quadrilateral must have equivalent opposite sides. hence, the use of shims to get the caster back when the front has been lowered. when some of us think that we have lowered the back and the front by the same amount, we have to remember that T3's had a B2 bomber stance (nose HIGHER than tail) to begin with, so just because the car is level with the ground, doesn't mean that we have a stock ride angle, nor that we have stock caster. any cal lookers out there who left the nose up higher than the rear? didn't think so. shims are the only way to fix the caster problem for most of us, and i don't even think that lowered spindles would help the problem. i have to go with jim on this, and like him, i would greatly appreciate any enlightenment or correction. Dan Hoopes '67 Square "Stanley" Provo, Utah ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Adney <jadney@vwtype3.org> To: <type3@vwtype3.org> Sent: Saturday, December 25, 1999 7:33 PM Subject: Re: [T3] Windy day driving > On 24 Dec 99, at 0:25, Keith Park wrote: > > > As the 2 torsion arms change angle when you lower them the 4 deg caster > > angle is reduced or made negative. The upper ball joint should sit behind > > the lower one when you draw a line between the 2 > > I had assumed that the upper and lower trainling arms were of equal > length, and that the other sides of the quadrilaterial were also > equal length thus making this a parallelogram. In that case no angles > would change. > > Which of these assumptions of mine are wrong? > > Jim > - > ******************************* > Jim Adney, jadney@vwtype3.org > Madison, Wisconsin, USA > ******************************* > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Too much? Digest! mailto:type3-d-request@vwtype3.org Subj=subscribe > >