skull... you didn't understand my question. these cars went out on the track like that! mine was 0 to -1 ounces of wedge before it hit the track.mikes car was -5 ounces of wedge and was blazing fast on the track..mike ran trc tires pink left sides black rr and a purple rf...i think...i used 3 pinks and a black all jacos...the other guy used a ksg with the front sway bar..he was fast as well..the rocket sort of tipped your hand..i think i have an idea who i am asking questions to now..i also hope all this makes it to our web site soon? thanks again

Katfish , If your car is looseing Left side weight on a 4 minute run something is wrong with the scales you are useing ..... Just an opinion

A car will never lose that kinds of LR on a normal run .....Another thought is that your side shocks 1 have bad foam in them or 2 leak oil like the exxon valdez.......

Scull and Bones is the best chassis tuner I have ever known and will be at the BIRDS sitting next to me and the boyz....


SRM :eek:

I am in the process of putting some of the Q&A on the HobbyTalk home page. You can find it at http://www.hobbytalk.com

You will be able to find a list of these Oval Tips at http://www.hobbytalk.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=index&catid=11

hope none of the racing city guys see this thread :p Thanks S&B alot man i have learned so much in the past half hour.

To further clear up what you are say Kat, the number (say -5), what does that stand for? Is it the weight split across the rear tires or the amount of (RF+LR)-(RR+LF). Is a negative a sign of more wedge or less wedge. Once I can understand what your wedge "number" is, I can help you more.

For everyone, BTW, any feedback on the geometry spreadsheet. If you have any adjustments that I need to make to some of the standardized dimensions for a different type of chassis just tell me.

S & B

S+B............I would like to pick your brain on a few topics:

1. Longer Upper left front camber arm.
What affects will this have on a car if you were lengthen the upper left front arm?

2. Swaybars on the front.
Will this be better for an oval car?

3. Center and side shock angle.
When do you change the center shock angle?
When do you change the side shock angle?

4. Unsprung weight.
Lightweight suspension parts?

5. Too much left side weight.
Can too much left side weight hurt you?

Assume all of these questions are for an Associated L4 oval.

Please advise.

S&B What will more rear shock rebound do?? If I put the #1 piston in and heavier shock oil, so the shock shaft rebounds slower??? What effects will this do to the chassis. I run flat carpet oval.

#2 If the ozite carpet we race on, is only taped down on the edges, Will this make the cars loose or what will this do, if anything??

I run a KSG car, 4-cell 19 turn

Thanks

dbr

DOM-19, Anti-squat it is an interesting topic of set-up that is rarely talked about or knowingly changed on a RC car rear suspension. Anti-squat is defined as the ratio (height of rear suspension pivot/longitudinal distance from the center of the tires contact patch the rear suspension pivot). This is .375/2=.187 (rough) on our cars. One thing that nobody has ever offered up a good explanation for, is why a t-plate car handles differently from a pivot ball car. The reason for this is that the location at which the rear pod pivots at.

For a pivot ball car, this location is at the pivot. But, is more like in the center of the t-plate for a t-plate car. This of course adjust two things:

1. The anti-squat of the rear suspension
2. The motion ratio for the center shock

So as a rule of thumb (I wish I had a car with me here) a pivot ball car has more anti-squat, say .375/1.5=.25 or 25 % anti-squat, where as a t-plate maybe more like .375/2.5=.15 or 15% anti-squat.

As for the motion/leverage ratio of the rear shock. This is defined as the amount of movement of the rear tires for a given movement of the center shocks shaft. This also changes based on where the rear pod is pivoting about. I can't really figure exact values with out a car, but it might be a good experiment for someone to measure and to see how it changes with various types and shapes of t-plates???

S & B

isnt the difference between a t-plate car and a pivot ball car the fact that the pivot car doesnt have a spring for when the pod moves downward? unless you where to put one in the center shock, or make an external seperate device for this.

wouldnt you agree that the t-plate car is pivoting around the rear pivot just the same?

the difference is that you dont have a fiberglass spring attached to the pod that works both directions...right?

i mean the t-plate at both the front and rear pivots is restricted to stay at teh same height so how can the pivot be a point other than 1 of those....and its intuitive that its not the front one....so it must be the rear one...which is also logical.

doesnt the rear suspension act like a ladder bar with only a single pivot point (the rear t-plate ball) with a spring hanging off the other side (the front of the pivot)????

kewlies

lol both you and steve are confused.

ok we used a 2 scale set-up . "BEFORE" the cars hit the track! again before the cars hit the track!

ok lets say my rear tires on the scale were something like 9.8 ounces lr 10.4 rr on the scales 9.8=ounces 10.4 = ounces

mike boylans 10L scaled at 9.8 ounces lr and 14.02 ounces rr

i would have HIT the track with something like a .5 ounce - tweak or rr weight.

mike's car HIT the track with roughly 5 ounces of negative tweak or pre load on his RR tire.

HOW DID HIS CAR GO AROUND THE TRACK? like i said i have had it pounded into my head that the lr tire does most of the work? with no weight on the lr and 5 ounces on the right rear of mikes car i figure he would be ice skating? i understand off-set rear pod and trc tires throw some of this off? but damn son even he didn't know why it worked so well. REMEMBER WE BOTH USED THE SAME SCALES. AGAIN THIS WAS BEFORE THEY HIT THE TRACK..NO CHANCE FOR TIRE WEAR YET..EVEN BILLY SAW IT WITH HIS OWN 2 EYES..WAS IT MAGIC? LOL :drunk:

HOW DID HIS CAR GO AROUND THE TRACK?

I remember reading an article in circle track magazine either interviewing or written by Bob East (BEAST chassis in USAC). When Tony Stewart and somebody else I can't remember were teammates, they went to IRP and tried changing the crossweight to see how it effected the car. They started at like +200 LR and (in 50 pound increments) got to -200 LR. Bob said that it took Tony (and whoever the other driver I can't remember was) like 2 or 3 laps and they'd be right back to the exact same lap times they were running before.

Those guys have to run a 100 lap feature and take care of the tires (we have no such problems over 4 minutes) so I guess the answer is whatever you like for LR weight is OK so long as you like it. We can't cook the tires like they can.

i have heard that about stewart and newman.. good info thanx

Kat
one or both of those scales must be bad or need a battery or something?
i've never seen those kind of backwards #'s on any scale including my own?
#'s wise that car should just sit and spin..

looking from the rear did it have negative tweak?

super curious.. and completly goes against anything i've known..

I know he means negative tweek, meaning if you viewed the car unloaded from the rear, the RR is lower than the LR.........

Tornado_Racing , wow that's a lot of questions. I'll try to be briefer than I have been to further prevent people's eyes from bleeding. I do want to start off by saying, and this might seem as if it is a little bit of cop-out, it is harder to answer the questions such as:

"What is better?"
"Is this or that better?"

The only reason I say this, is you can go to any given track and find 5 equally fast guys with completely separate philosophies on what things are better. When it comes down to specifics, a lot of it comes down to your own preference, and what you feel comfortable in working with in your set-ups. I'll tray to stick with an explanation of theory, and let you guys make the conclusions on what you think is better.

1. First off, I apologize that in the sample of the sus. geometry calculator, a-frame length is not an adjustable variable, mostly because we typically don't vary these values drastically other than when we adjust camber.

As for a longer A-frame, it behaves similar but not exactly the same as raising the inner pivot of the left front a-frame. The most important aspect of the geometry to look at is the instantaneous center positions. These individual I.C.s determine not only the geometrical jacking forces in the front suspension but the camber gains in ride and roll.

The longer the distance is between the center of the tire and its respective I.C. location, the less the camber gain there will be in bump and the more camber gain there will be in roll. So lengthening the arm but keeping the pivots at the same heights, it will have the same effect on the I.C. as would raising the inner pivot up.

The difference between flattening the arm and making it longer (and keeping the same I.C. distance) is that with the longer arm the arc change of the upper A-frame is reduced, which will slow down I.C. migration.

Later, I will touch more what it means to have different IC positions when it come to their jacking properties as well as what geometrical jacking and camber change does to the handling balance of a car.

2. A front bar provides increased roll stiffness to the front suspension and therefore increased lateral load transfer across the front tire pair. As you know the total roll resistance would be a function of front springs and anti-roll bar.

With that said, one can conceivably come up with applications where a front bar might be warranted. First, in the case when a bumpy racing surface warrants having to run extremely soft front springs for grip, yet at the same time one needs to add roll stability for corner entry security on an extremely high bite racing surface.

Second, I would state that it is possible that a FARB could be used all the time with the right compensation of the rest of the set-up. Ten years ago, no one would have thought races would have been won (in NASCAR) at a track like Dover with 1/2 the front spring rate and a full sized 2" front anti-roll bar. But, that progression didn't happen over night, and I am not saying that this will necessarily ever occur in RC cars, but anything is possible with enough time and tuning.

One last note on the FARB, anytime one removes independence from a suspension (considering the suspension is non-active), one inherently increases the warp stiffness of a car. Increasing warp stiffness usually results in less overall grip in a car, especially on a bumpy surface.

3. Changing shock angles is changing the progressiveness, digressiveness of the respective wheel rates that the spring acts on. I have seen all settings work in different applications. Just one quick example, when one needs to hold the car up off one bump in the track without sacrificing grip everywhere else, this would warrant a softer spring with a more progressive setting.

4. Usprung weight??? Always bad?? I am really not sure, as a generality, unsprung weight is bad. However, there are circumstances where one could lower the rear pods axle hop frequency, which depending upon the type of bumps in a track, could possibly help in creating rear end grip. I have heard rumors that a specific cup team, who was extremely successful on the shortest, tightest track, was actually adding unsprung weight ballast the rear end of the car (probably for added rear grip on power by reducing axle shake?) This is an unfounded rumor at this point. So there are no absolutes in racing, there is a time and a place when all things might work, regardless of whether they are opposite of convention.

5. Left side weight, I'll get back to this one, because it is a pretty involved answer. A quick answer, I would say in modern day four cell flat track high bite carpet racing, there is probably never too much left side weight. More on this later.

S & B

danbracing, You pointed out a common misconception when it comes to shocks. The rebounding action you see by the shock shaft rebounding has nothing to do with what the rebound damping is. That rebounding action is related to what the internal gas pressure is with-in the shock.

Shock oil naturally has air dissolved in it, much like soda in an unopened can. So pressurizing a shock, you are pressurizing the gases in the oil. Too much pressure, as I am sure you all have experienced, can actually lead to a shock hydraulically locking up.

A modern standard racing shock uses gasses pressurized in an isolated canister (this is similar to what the Assc. VC foams are doing). What that gas pressure does is keeps the dissolved air in the oil, from boiling out or cavitating at local low pressure regions with in the shock. Just like when the soda can is cracked open, all of the air bubbles come to the top or the low pressure atmosphere. Cavitation (or aeration, air bubbles in the oil) is obviously destructive to the damping properties of the shock.

With that understood, the ideal condition is to make sure that a shock always has enough gas pressure as to avoid cavitation. On the other side of this, there are consequences in having too much gas pressure. The largest of these is that one has to run tighter seals to prevent oil leak-through. These tighter seals, create more seal friction. Anytime one adds kinetic friction to the suspension, you sacrifice overall grip and the overall driving consistency of the car. You can see this on the scales, more friction makes it difficult for the car to hold the same wedge number after pushing down on it at various areas of the chassis.

There are several tricks on current racing shocks to allow one to run a shock with gas less pressure, such as base valves. Right now, it is rare to find a shock in Winston Cup shock tear down that doesn't have base valves on it for the reasons listed above.

As for our RC car side shocks. You should build them so that the have minimum pressure without them aerating. There are two reasons for this.

1. For the reasons list above.
2. Because the little VC foams will be killed by over pressurizing the shock.

S & B

kgbracing, in a way you are correct. But the flexure point of the t-plate in front of the rear pivot ball influences the flexure arc of the rear pod behind the rear pivot ball. An easy way of looking at this is in terms of what anti-squat really is. Anti-squat is the geometric jacking of the car due to longitudinal tire contact patch forces. In a single pivot ball car, all these forces act through the single ball. With a t-plate those forces are distributed to both the balls through the tensional and compression forces acting on the balls due to the t-plate flexing.

That is a good point that a t-plate creates added droop stiffness.

S & B

katf1sh, doing a rough quick calculation, Mike's car was running with approximately 40 % wedge, where your car was closer to 50 % wedge. My guess is the other differences in your guy's set-ups, allowed Mike to run 10 percent less static wedge. He might have had a more roll-balance "tight" set-up (more dynamic wedge build up), more nose weight percentage, or a more aero tight set-up. Not to mention, he was running a different tire set-up.

If all other aspects of the set-up were the same, he can simply wheel a looser car than you ;) .

S & B

:tongue:

s and b

so back to anti squat, is it reqquired to have more to be fast or less to be fast on crapet

drewpeacock
drewpeacock
drewpeacock

-------------------------------------------------

to bad scott got my name stuck in his throat, and couldn't acknowledge me

fred..... we still call it carpet

I know who the Skull & Bones is.....returning at long last.....

I think I have a clue..................wow thats a first! LMAO!!!!! :D

I know who Mr.Bones is too I think. :D

DrewPeacock , I would say as a rule of thumb. The more bite there is in a track the more anti-squat you would want to run.

S & B

katf1sh, doing a rough quick calculation, Mike's car was running with approximately 40 % wedge, where your car was closer to 50 % wedge. My guess is the other differences in your guy's set-ups, allowed Mike to run 10 percent less static wedge. He might have had a more roll-balance "tight" set-up (more dynamic wedge build up), more nose weight percentage, or a more aero tight set-up. Not to mention, he was running a different tire set-up.

If all other aspects of the set-up were the same, he can simply wheel a looser car than you ;) .

S & B

yeah ok that makes sense......like on a 3link setup the lower control arms have fixed pivots, but in this case we have flexible control arms that extend past a pivot to another pivot.

yeah i think its hard to simulate fiberglass as a springing medium anyway :(

keep up this work man!@

Attached is an updated version of the Suspension Geometry spreadsheet. You will need Excel to use it. The attached version is zipped. You can download an unzipped version from our ftp server at ftp://ftp.hobbie.com/RC-GeometryCalculator-Sample.V2.xls

This is only a sample of the Scull and BOnes complete chassis turning program .....Would anyone want the complete chassis guide for their laptops so carry from track to track ..... Sand B has alot more programs to be able to fully achieve the complete package.......

I am sure feed back would move this project along !!!!!!!!!!!!


SRM :thumbsup:

I think a complete front-end geometry program would sell VERY well. They have these for full size race cars, I have a few now, but it would have to use a fixed lower a frame. Since that is the standard we have on pancars.
Another seperate program would be good for touring since they use upper and lower arms/links.
Also a program to figure rear roll center and CG would be nice for oval cars as well.
Question: I have seen mentioned that side shock angle effects if it is progressive, linear, or digressive. How is this? From full size cars I know that the type of valving usually determines this. I thought that changing the shocks angle would influence the shocks effective percentage.

2nd: As far as getting the car to roll through the corner on flat tight tracks. With softer side springs, do you mean that the car will rotate easier because it gets to a steady state quicker with the softer spring?

Hi S and B! I have a pretty loose exit and was wondering if you could aid in the diagnaosis.......I am running a pro parts car in 4 cell stock on a small bullring, bsr black fronts and bsr white rears, wolfe bubba gold front springs, 3.5 caster -1.5 camber RF, 2 caster and -.5 camber LF, blue side springs and 30 wt oil, .063 t plate, no stiffener or center washer or screw on pod, silver center spring with 25 wt oil on a Macro tc3 shock, battery in middle of chassis(front to back) and is all the way in....on the scales the front end is ballanced out and the rear has 2.5 oz of tweak....any help is great
Dave

Kat
one or both of those scales must be bad or need a battery or something?
i've never seen those kind of backwards #'s on any scale including my own?
#'s wise that car should just sit and spin..

looking from the rear did it have negative tweak?

super curious.. and completly goes against anything i've known..

koz scales worked perfect! my car scaled out on it fine..but you and i were thinking the same thing.

At Showtime in CA, the fast guys have been running reverse tweek for a while.

S&B,

Thank you. You, in one evening, have made me want to buy another oval car. You have anwsered questions here, that other people have never been able to. Atleast not gor me.

My question on the reverse tweak subject:

Wouldn't the front weights also need to be know to really calculate the tweak of both cars? Isn't this really the flaw to using a two scale set-up board?

S & B, What effects will leading the left front wheel base on these oval have? Or leading the right front. In our full size stuff we lead the left front(Longer Wheelbase), but with these alot of guys are saying to lead the right front. Just wondering if there is something there i am missing.
Thanks

jbm38 , If I were to sell a full blown geometry program, it would be much more refined than that sample. It would also include modules for all types of front suspensions.

You also brought up a good point, the shock's angle does change the damping rate at the wheel, from a progressive and digressive stand point. With out actually being able to dyno our shocks, I would guess that we would find that they are naturally progressive in their damping curves. Running more digressive in their motion ratio might assist in linerizing the damping curves.

Softer springs would actually lower the roll frequency and roll response rate of a car. This is a complete function of roll inertia and roll damping as well. Response time is not an easy calculation and requires high level calculus to do even a simple analysis. The outputs for this analysis are response time to 90 percent of steady state, over shoot past steady state and the amount of ringing or oscillations that occur before reaching final steady state.

So being less damp might get you to the 90 percent time quicker, but get you to final steady state slower. A car has the same response characteristics in what is called yaw velocity and side-slip(yaw angle). The response rates in yaw velocity and side-slip, are mainly functions of tire grip (cornering stiffness= lat force/slip angle) and the yaw inertia of the car. The more grip and the lower the inertia, the higher the yaw velocity and sideslip frequencies will be. Therefore, the higher the cars response rates will be in yaw velocity and side-slip.

As one turns the steering wheel on entry to a corner, he creates a lateral force at the front tires(front slip angle). This lateral force begins to rotate the car. As the car begins to rotate, the car gains yaw velocity. At the same time the car goes into side slip or a yaw angle. The yaw angle or side-slip angle of the car is the car trying to reach a rear slip angle to form the lateral force needed to balance out the front lateral force.

At the same time the lateral forces are acting on the chassis to form a roll angle. All of this time, weight is beginning to transfer from inside tire to outside tires, which proportions front and rear based on roll center positions, roll stiffness distributions and unspung mass transfer (just think of this as the weight that transfer across the rear pod).

The car is considered in steady state, when the rear slip angle catches up to the front slip angle and all forces in the car are balanced. The thing must remember in all of this is that there is a momentum (yaw velocity*yaw inertia) factor that determines when the car reaches a steady state. The more this yaw momentum is created on entry the more the car will have a tendency to continue yawing.

So in conclusion, if I haven't lost all of you yet. With more grip in the track, the yaw responses will increases. Therefore, in order for the chassis responses to keep up, the car has to be corresponding stiffened. When the track is slick, the chassis responses have to be slowed in order for the car to be drivable and predictable.

I can think of millions of examples of this. Dirt track cars are sprung very softly, Indy cars in the rain take their anti-roll bars off, and we as RC car racers are continually stiffening our cars up as bite comes up in the track.

So to say that softer springs are really making the car turn more, is a little bit of stretch. The softer springs are adding overall grip to the car making the car build yaw velocity faster on entry. I still feel like I am not really explaining this well, so ask me more specific questions as to what part of this doesn’t make sense.

S & B

highster, to know the wedge distributions exactly, you would need the front tires scale weight as well. I was making a general asumption in wedge numbers based off just their rear splits. What really matters is the wedge percentage. But since most RC racers rarely move weight percentages fore and aft. You can simply look at the weight split across just the rear tires as a wedge simplication.

Buy a car, and tell ten other friends to buy one also. Oval racing needs to get get back to where it was in the very early nineties. We just need more manufacture support from Trinity and Asscociated, and a real oval organization, not run by idiots! BTW, shot out to ThunderRC, for doing more for oval racing than anybody in the last 8 years!!

S & B

Mike Wilson , Leading the left front wheelbase moves the left front tire further away from the CG of the car in the longitudinal plane. This will give this tire more leverage for rotating the car. This should help initial turn-in. On exit, when weight begins transfering rearward, I believe it would unload the LF more and more than likely make the car tighter on power. I'll have to try next time I go to the track. What have your expereinces been?

It also, in a complicated way, adds effective anti-Ackerman (more RF slip angle than LF slip angle). Which will effect the car differently depending on what tires the car has on it.

S & B

P.S. In full size cars, how much lead are you talking about. It is interesting that we'll lead a full size car 1/4 to 1/2 (scale .025 to .050 in), yet we'll lead an 1/10th scale rc car a 1/4 to 1/2 inch????

S & B, My current car only has adjustable tread width (Hyperdrive SSE Pro2) But a buddy has the KSG with adjustable slots for front wheelbase. Have heard to go with lead in both sides just trying to figure out why leading the RF would be better. Ofcourse looking at it from a full size view.

We generally lead our Trucks LF longer about 1/4 to 3/8. Not sure what the Busch cars are doing.

When talking about anti-squat on a pan car, how is this changed? By adding shims under the front pivot ball?

Hey S&B, I am interested in the complete package of the geometry stuff!!!!

S&B, I don't race oval but recently have been running 1/12th scale in the offroad "off season" so I could keep my skills sharp and have some fun.

Some of your posts last week was very helpful in setting up my car this past weekend. I especially liked the detailed explanations on softer side springs and spur gear sizes. Both of which I felt was the correct answers long before your posts but it's nice to see the theories involved.

I experimented with increasing the "yaw velocity" on corner entry to assist on "laying down power earlier and more efficiently off the corner." The results gave faster laptimes and was way more consistant for me to drive.

In the offroad cars I can feel the differences in moving the motor forward or back by changing the spur gear size. I would only imagine that the effects would be similar to the oval cars.

Thanks again.

S+B, On the Anti-squat subject, what does more anti-squat or less anti-squat do to the cars. As far as handling/feel of the car on the track?

And when you say suspension height where are you measuring from and to.

Thank you
Brooks

S&B, On the subject of a shock dyno. What do the real ones tell you? I have never seen one but I'm sure they are computer driven. I have been thinking about this for a while now and don't know if our shocks are sophisticated enough to warrant trying to create one for RC. What do you think?

BTW, I agree with you when you were talking about "big spur, little spur", a ratio is a ratio, all the rest is just shifting weight. I run the largest spur that I can so that pinion changes will not be so dramatic.

So I am curious as to how to figure the rear roll center on a t bar car and also how to adjust it. I may be wrong but I have always thought the rear RC needed to be higher than the front? Also on the soft springs and big bar stuff on the big cars, is that not more or less to keep the LF down on the track so the air helps it turn?? I just don't see aero being a big enough part of RC to matter that much, but maybe I am missing something here!!! Also, anti squat, how do you change that on an oval car too?? Is that something easily done, I am getting somewhat confused about some of this stuff, I need to go back throught a few dozen times and then I will understand. Thanks.

Also I am sure our shocks are progressive. Someone needs to take a piggy back shock and put a schrader valve on it so we can change the gas pressure. And by base valve in the big car stuff so you mean that they use more of a control of oil though the outer tube of the shock then through or around the piston, like Pro shocks do?? The info is great, I am tyring to kill two birds with one stone here and get me some big car info too!!!!!!! Thanks.

What is your input on moving the battery forward or back? I use a six cell tray and place two batteries in the forward slots and two in the back slots. The back battery slot is 1/4" from left rear tire. Left rear all the way in. I have to run alot of tweak or the car is loose.
This has been very interesting to read. Thanks!

i'm still waiting on my tootsie pop question! lol

this problem arrises when everyone and there grandmom thinks they know who this person is.. the todd bodine humor was good though,lol. and yes money goes along way when it comes to any form of racing. i admire the few teams who do well on a tight budget. it's nice to know sometimes a good wheel can compete with a big wallet!

keep up the great info S&B :thumbsup:

is there a way to measure ackerman?? or bumpsteer??

And also, why hasn't anybody tried a 4 link rear suspension?

Keith Fortier

PBRacing had a 4 link suspension over 10 years ago.

S&B, yes, please help us understand the anti-squat answer....

I understand what it is and what it does for the most part as it used or changed a lot in off-road cars...

Also, thanks for the all great post.
FYI: It seems oval is picking up in the Mid-West....

We just started running 12th scale oval at our carpet track which had NEVER had a 12th oval car on it, let alone enough to race....

Anti Squat can be adjusted on our oval cars by putting a shim under the front, only the front, pivot ball on the t-bar. By adding shims you are increasing the anti-squat capablities of the car. Meaning that the rear end wont squat as much during acceleration which can lead to a loss of traction rear, forward, traction when the throttle is applied.

I use it as a last resort when I cant get a car to turn coming off of a corner. I will only go like 0.005-0.010" thick of a shim at a time If I do use it. It can make a big difference in mod.

The roll center on the rear end of our cars is the plane that crosses the center of the t-bar pivot balls. It can be raised by putting equal thickness shims under the front and rear t-bar pivot balls.

David
Maverick Oval Chassis
Silva Concepts
KC Racing

FroDaddyy, We'll see what we can come up with for some sort of package. I hope to have something maybe availible by Snowbirds.

Jared Kirkwood , glad I could help in anyway. 90 percent of this is just getting people to think more openly about the handling of their cars, and how it interacts with driving styles and track conditions.