Yeah, like being able to punch it around a street corner and lifting the inside front wheel. I did it only once and for a car that has an open diff, it sure did get the power down. I got stopped by a cop and he said "What the hell was all that about?" No ticket.
LS suspension design: show me/explain why it is great
- Thread starter Turboguy
- Start date
The knuckle rotating is never going to push the lower control arm down. The weight of the car is on the lower control arm along with the spring. The only thing attached to the knuckle is the control arms. It's not like there is a spring or a stop on the upper control arm or knuckle that prevents it from moving further up. If it did then you could get the effect you describe. Now if you hit the stop on the shock while breaking then you could get an effect where the lower control arm is pushed down but that's not an issue unless you hit something.
Assuming the bushings are jelly and will squish to the point that the knuckle could reach 0-degrees of camber, the lower control would only push backwards parallel to the body of the car. It would not have an up or down movement on it's own. The upper control arm would push forward while also going up to take into account for the arc of the knuckle. Since the upper arm is shorter you would also get a change in caster somewhat as it would tip the knuckle towards the centerline of the car, however slightly. The movement to 0 degree's would definitely change your camber giving you a noticeable change in steering feel.
Assuming the knuckle did somehow rotate to 0-deg camber you would actually get some lowering of the vehicle. As you move away from 0-degree's in either direction you move the hub closer to the ground. So lets make some assumptions and do math.
Lets assume the distance from the pivot point of the lower ball join to the centerline of the hub is 8" (i'm only doing simple 2D math here. I'm too lazy to do real math). Now lets assume that at idle the camber is 7-degrees.
At 0-degrees of camber the hub will be vertically 8" above the ball joint. At 7-degrees you would be 8(cos 7) or 7.9404" vertically above the ball joint. The closer the hub gets vertically to the ball joint the higher the car gets off the ground. So if anything, and assuming the suspension deflects enough to get 0-degree's of camber, you would actually be lowering the ride height of the car by 0.0506". Yes, 50-thousandths of an inch drop in ride height is what you would have by the knuckle rotating.
But this all forgets about 100 things that go into suspension geometry. But raising the ride height of the car would actually cause more nose dive and weight transfer. Lowering the ride height is what would stabilize the car while braking.
I've never been able to tripod this car on flat ground. The chassis is stiff enough that I tripod all the time on hilly cures. I've actually gotten stuck on a steep driveway where the rear wheel came up. Had to let the car roll down and then taking a faster start at it.
Well, you seem to have done your homework. Were gonna have to get together one day and investigate this further.The knuckle rotating is never going to push the lower control arm down. The weight of the car is on the lower control arm along with the spring. The only thing attached to the knuckle is the control arms. It's not like there is a spring or a stop on the upper control arm or knuckle that prevents it from moving further up. If it did then you could get the effect you describe. Now if you hit the stop on the shock while breaking then you could get an effect where the lower control arm is pushed down but that's not an issue unless you hit something.
Assuming the bushings are jelly and will squish to the point that the knuckle could reach 0-degrees of camber, the lower control would only push backwards parallel to the body of the car. It would not have an up or down movement on it's own. The upper control arm would push forward while also going up to take into account for the arc of the knuckle. Since the upper arm is shorter you would also get a change in caster somewhat as it would tip the knuckle towards the centerline of the car, however slightly. The movement to 0 degree's would definitely change your camber giving you a noticeable change in steering feel.
Assuming the knuckle did somehow rotate to 0-deg camber you would actually get some lowering of the vehicle. As you move away from 0-degree's in either direction you move the hub closer to the ground. So lets make some assumptions and do math.
Lets assume the distance from the pivot point of the lower ball join to the centerline of the hub is 8" (i'm only doing simple 2D math here. I'm too lazy to do real math). Now lets assume that at idle the camber is 7-degrees.
At 0-degrees of camber the hub will be vertically 8" above the ball joint. At 7-degrees you would be 8(cos 7) or 7.9404" vertically above the ball joint. The closer the hub gets vertically to the ball joint the higher the car gets off the ground. So if anything, and assuming the suspension deflects enough to get 0-degree's of camber, you would actually be lowering the ride height of the car by 0.0506". Yes, 50-thousandths of an inch drop in ride height is what you would have by the knuckle rotating.
But this all forgets about 100 things that go into suspension geometry. But raising the ride height of the car would actually cause more nose dive and weight transfer. Lowering the ride height is what would stabilize the car while braking.
I've never been able to tripod this car on flat ground. The chassis is stiff enough that I tripod all the time on hilly cures. I've actually gotten stuck on a steep driveway where the rear wheel came up. Had to let the car roll down and then taking a faster start at it.
Well, I believe you now. I have curious mind so I took off the left wheel and spent 2 hours looking at the components under there. I may be optimistic but I might have found part of the answer to our queries and it is something in plain sight. That component some call the the anti sway bar, the anti roll bar and in the LS it is called the stabilizer bar. Attaches to it are the links which also attach to the lower lower control arm. If these can keep the car from leaning in the corners when a downward force is applied, what will they do when a downward force is applied to both sides at the same time? I think this could be the answer?The knuckle rotating is never going to push the lower control arm down. The weight of the car is on the lower control arm along with the spring. The only thing attached to the knuckle is the control arms. It's not like there is a spring or a stop on the upper control arm or knuckle that prevents it from moving further up. If it did then you could get the effect you describe. Now if you hit the stop on the shock while breaking then you could get an effect where the lower control arm is pushed down but that's not an issue unless you hit something.
Assuming the bushings are jelly and will squish to the point that the knuckle could reach 0-degrees of camber, the lower control would only push backwards parallel to the body of the car. It would not have an up or down movement on it's own. The upper control arm would push forward while also going up to take into account for the arc of the knuckle. Since the upper arm is shorter you would also get a change in caster somewhat as it would tip the knuckle towards the centerline of the car, however slightly. The movement to 0 degree's would definitely change your camber giving you a noticeable change in steering feel.
Assuming the knuckle did somehow rotate to 0-deg camber you would actually get some lowering of the vehicle. As you move away from 0-degree's in either direction you move the hub closer to the ground. So lets make some assumptions and do math.
Lets assume the distance from the pivot point of the lower ball join to the centerline of the hub is 8" (i'm only doing simple 2D math here. I'm too lazy to do real math). Now lets assume that at idle the camber is 7-degrees.
At 0-degrees of camber the hub will be vertically 8" above the ball joint. At 7-degrees you would be 8(cos 7) or 7.9404" vertically above the ball joint. The closer the hub gets vertically to the ball joint the higher the car gets off the ground. So if anything, and assuming the suspension deflects enough to get 0-degree's of camber, you would actually be lowering the ride height of the car by 0.0506". Yes, 50-thousandths of an inch drop in ride height is what you would have by the knuckle rotating.
But this all forgets about 100 things that go into suspension geometry. But raising the ride height of the car would actually cause more nose dive and weight transfer. Lowering the ride height is what would stabilize the car while braking.
I've never been able to tripod this car on flat ground. The chassis is stiff enough that I tripod all the time on hilly cures. I've actually gotten stuck on a steep driveway where the rear wheel came up. Had to let the car roll down and then taking a faster start at it.
View attachment 828469315View attachment 828469316View attachment 828469317
AMD, what do these things do?
View attachment 828469318View attachment 828469319View attachment 828469320
Front subframe reinforcements, added towards the end of the 2000 model year. Adds rigidity, might of been for crash tests. Changed the weight distribution from 52/48 to 53/47.
The stabilizer bar only counters the lateral forces on the car. It doesn't do much of anything during a nose dive. It's purpose is to tie the two sides of the car together to that way in a turn you don't have the weight of the car being supported by just one spring/shock. Whenever you hear someone talk about body roll that is what the stabilizer bar is there to help prevent.
And what Stugots said about the front frame reinforcements.
And what Stugots said about the front frame reinforcements.
So what you're saying is it's not going to act like the old torsion bars of the old cars from the past when you hit the brakes in the car tries to dive? Damn I was gonna disconnect them and try it out.
Telco
Dedicated LVC Member
I was wondering why every car I ever owned is piled up in the street to the right of my driveway except the LS, only the LS had these passive steering links! Glory be I have seen the light, I have seen the light!!!
I just don't like them because the steering is inconsistent depending on throttle position. That the computer also has to make decisions to alter power to the wheels in response to the effects of this passive steering just makes it worse, if other posters are correct on how the systems interact. I'd rather have a slightly less capable but consistent suspension than one that changes according to squishy pieces in what should be solid links. My pickup feels more consistent in the corners than my LS does, and I feel more confident pushing the truck than I do the LS. When I drive the LS hard in the corners I feel like I have to compensate for the car, but in non-passive steering cars it doesn't feel this way. Now I'm thinking I might hire the work out just to hurry up and get them in there instead of waiting until I can get the time.
You're kidding right?I was wondering why every car I ever owned is piled up in the street to the right of my driveway except the LS, only the LS had these passive steering links! Glory be I have seen the light, I have seen the light!!!
I just don't like them because the steering is inconsistent depending on throttle position. That the computer also has to make decisions to alter power to the wheels in response to the effects of this passive steering just makes it worse, if other posters are correct on how the systems interact. I'd rather have a slightly less capable but consistent suspension than one that changes according to squishy pieces in what should be solid links. My pickup feels more consistent in the corners than my LS does, and I feel more confident pushing the truck than I do the LS. When I drive the LS hard in the corners I feel like I have to compensate for the car, but in non-passive steering cars it doesn't feel this way. Now I'm thinking I might hire the work out just to hurry up and get them in there instead of waiting until I can get the time.
Totally for crash concerns.
I was wondering why every car I ever owned is piled up in the street to the right of my driveway except the LS, only the LS had these passive steering links! Glory be I have seen the light, I have seen the light!!!
I just don't like them because the steering is inconsistent depending on throttle position. That the computer also has to make decisions to alter power to the wheels in response to the effects of this passive steering just makes it worse, if other posters are correct on how the systems interact. I'd rather have a slightly less capable but consistent suspension than one that changes according to squishy pieces in what should be solid links. My pickup feels more consistent in the corners than my LS does, and I feel more confident pushing the truck than I do the LS. When I drive the LS hard in the corners I feel like I have to compensate for the car, but in non-passive steering cars it doesn't feel this way. Now I'm thinking I might hire the work out just to hurry up and get them in there instead of waiting until I can get the time.
Don't try and out-think the computer; let it do it's job. I drove an AdvanceTrac equipped LS on a very wet (saturated), tight autocross course at the Michigan Proving Grounds. Drove with the loud pedal floored and never spun out. The rear end behaved very well and predictable. The "squishiness" of the bushing is a known quantity built into the material.
While we're on the subject of suspension, the upper control arm is mounted at an angle lower toward the back. The lower control arms appears to be mounted level longitudinally but offset laterally. I'm going to have to make a mockup of this setup to see how everything moves. I might make a go kart chassis out of it . Now, someone tell me if Timken is worth the money for the front wheel bearing hub assembly?
Telco
Dedicated LVC Member
No Robot, I'm not kidding. My 4WD pickup feels more secure in hard cornering than my LS.
And, I don't like computers deciding what the car is going to do when I'm the one driving. I expect the computer to be my servant, and I expect it to respond to specific inputs exactly the same way every time. I do NOT expect the computer to attempt to be my partner and try to anticipate what I am going to do. When the computer decides incorrectly I have to change my actions, and I don't like it.
And, I don't like computers deciding what the car is going to do when I'm the one driving. I expect the computer to be my servant, and I expect it to respond to specific inputs exactly the same way every time. I do NOT expect the computer to attempt to be my partner and try to anticipate what I am going to do. When the computer decides incorrectly I have to change my actions, and I don't like it.
That's why the LS will let the wheels spin a bit before kicking in the nanny. The LS will allow a 4-wheel drift...... Been there, done that.... a LOT!!!!!
1LoudLS
Dedicated LVC Member
I've only managed that in a AWD/4WD cars... never could really get the wheels without power to break free and spin.
1LoudLS
Dedicated LVC Member
if your truck handles better than your LS, then it sounds like your LS is due for its suspension overhaul.
I've driven quite a few trucks out there, not even an SRT10 handles as well as an LS...
I've driven quite a few trucks out there, not even an SRT10 handles as well as an LS...
Corrections in steering is all a part of the game. Some of the best handling and fastest cars around a track are unstable. I don't like a lot of understeer which most cars today have built in. The first thing I did to my LS was increase the toe. That makes it tougher to drive because its a bit unstable but, when it comes to making fast turns, I don't have to worry about it pushing even in the wet. This allows me to throttle steer and correct with the wheel.
Telco
Dedicated LVC Member
I'm glad it works for you guys, it doesn't work for me. I don't like it and will continue to not like it. These systems are designed to compensate for poor driving skills, and I don't like the interference.
I don't think we are going to see eye to eye on this, so there is no use going on about it. I will bow out of this conversation before I post something that causes someone some butt-hurt, or at least any more butt-hurt than I may already have generated.
I don't think we are going to see eye to eye on this, so there is no use going on about it. I will bow out of this conversation before I post something that causes someone some butt-hurt, or at least any more butt-hurt than I may already have generated.
Well, just turn the bloody thing off. But, you better really know how to drive or you could find yourself like some of those mid life crisis guys that buy Corvettes and end up with a mangled lump of plastic.
Telco
Dedicated LVC Member
Heh heh... funny you should mention that, because today the system decided to fault out. I'm getting a Check Advancetrac alarm on the message center and an instrument cluster light, plus an ABS system light. No codes are showing on my generic scanner. I'll be fixing it because it's on the car and broken. I'm thinking a faulted ABS sensor. In the meantime, I'm not worried about wiping the car out.
Does it reset when you restart the car?
Telco
Dedicated LVC Member
Yes, then it comes back 10-12 miles or so down the road. Doesn't seem to happen every time though.
If it happens when you go over certain bumps, you may want to check this.
View attachment 828469364View attachment 828469365
It may be my imagination but, when I started repositioning these, it stopped happening.
Telco
Dedicated LVC Member
Cool thanks. I replaced both front wheel hubs in the last 9 months, and used the factory routing but it seems like the wires were longer than stock. I had to be a bit creative with the routing. And, I did use silicone grease in the plugs so I at least know it's not a water in the connector issue. I'll have to run it up on the ramps tomorrow to check. I'll also check the rears as you showed. A quick check didn't show any problems but I couldn't get up under there far enough to check properly so I'll have to do it with the ramps as well. I'll report back what I find.
Yeah, I'm still missing one of mine but now I know what causes it. There are little white caps that cover the nut and bolt there to protect the hose from damage.
Telco
Dedicated LVC Member
Checked it out, didn't find any problems with it. I did go ahead and spray out the sensors with sensor cleaner though, so we'll see what that does for us. We had some pretty hard rains in the last week, and the car sat for a few days so I guess there might have been a bit of corrosion in there so I may need to pull the wheels and get the emery cloth out on the reluctor wheel. Also found that the brake fluid was down a bit, so I suppose that there might have been a low sensor issue causing an ABS fault, which I assume would also cause an Advancetrac fault. I'm certainly glad checking the brake fluid was a matter of checking the reservoir instead of requiring a lift and special tools to get at it like some other fluid-bearing components on the car require...