The second installment on a miniseries about Off-Road IFS design, in this episode I dive into camber, caster, inclination/scrub, and aspects of bulkhead rake.
Awesome info!...I've built a couple LT kits for my toyota and man....wish I knew some of this more in depth lol. Got lucky enough on the basics I do know for it to work decent. And after listening to these videos makes me want to design another version to see if I can get it to work even better!
Amazing videos. So rare to see real information from someone with real knowledge and experience. Thank you! I run an ultra4 car (solid axle), and built my own knuckles so that I could design my own steering arms. I run zero Ackerman to maximize turning angle as the cvs are the limiting factor. If the inner knuckle hits the limit of the cv the outer will be less angle and it seems to me that since the outer does more of the work, I shouldn’t limit its range. What do you think?
Where can we discuss camber curves? My background is in solid axle trucks/crawlers so I'm looking at things a bit differently. In my opinion I believe camber change is beneficial when rock crawling. I get why positive camber isn't wanted at full compression, but I'm not sure why its so bad on extension other than minimizing CPTC. It seems that most situations where the tire is extending enough to get high positive camber numbers, the truck is either floating or in a turn sliding sideways, either situation wouldn't have much traction. Similar to how CPTC isn't generally a concern on extension. I guess the only situation where I can see it being a real issue is just like a beam setup when its fully drooped out and your coming down uneven with a wheel essentially underneath the rig causing it to want to stuff underneath instead of roll out, but that's usually a pretty extreme amount of camber change and I don't think your typical IFS front would get the tire that far underneath the truck. Thoughts? -Ghettofab75
If the two pivots on the upright are fixed in relation to the hub mounting surface/tire mounting surface (because upright is a solid object), why would the scrub change with a camber change? The red line and blue line should move through the travel at a fixed distance and angle to each other, so the green line would always be fixed too. The only way the green line would change with a camber change is if the upright were flexing, what am I missing? Is is scrub relative to active contact patch, so at ride height with 100% contact patch engagement you might have 1" of scrub, but with 10 degrees of camber and only inside 30% contact patch engagement, all of a sudden you'd have -1" scrub? made up numbers for example obviously but is that the theory?
![We Couldn't Believe This Was Fox Suspension! [Shock Value Ep.1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yDOyx22_Nxk/mqdefault.jpg)
Such killer stuff. Good source of info. Been trying to dig up and research info as we build our own stuff but this is awesome series of info.
Awesome info!...I've built a couple LT kits for my toyota and man....wish I knew some of this more in depth lol. Got lucky enough on the basics I do know for it to work decent. And after listening to these videos makes me want to design another version to see if I can get it to work even better!
Think it's wild what info you can get off of UA-cam now. I paid a shit ton to learn all this stuff you went over in this podcast. Mind blowing
Amazing videos. So rare to see real information from someone with real knowledge and experience. Thank you! I run an ultra4 car (solid axle), and built my own knuckles so that I could design my own steering arms. I run zero Ackerman to maximize turning angle as the cvs are the limiting factor. If the inner knuckle hits the limit of the cv the outer will be less angle and it seems to me that since the outer does more of the work, I shouldn’t limit its range. What do you think?
Where can we discuss camber curves? My background is in solid axle trucks/crawlers so I'm looking at things a bit differently. In my opinion I believe camber change is beneficial when rock crawling. I get why positive camber isn't wanted at full compression, but I'm not sure why its so bad on extension other than minimizing CPTC. It seems that most situations where the tire is extending enough to get high positive camber numbers, the truck is either floating or in a turn sliding sideways, either situation wouldn't have much traction. Similar to how CPTC isn't generally a concern on extension. I guess the only situation where I can see it being a real issue is just like a beam setup when its fully drooped out and your coming down uneven with a wheel essentially underneath the rig causing it to want to stuff underneath instead of roll out, but that's usually a pretty extreme amount of camber change and I don't think your typical IFS front would get the tire that far underneath the truck. Thoughts?
-Ghettofab75
If the two pivots on the upright are fixed in relation to the hub mounting surface/tire mounting surface (because upright is a solid object), why would the scrub change with a camber change? The red line and blue line should move through the travel at a fixed distance and angle to each other, so the green line would always be fixed too. The only way the green line would change with a camber change is if the upright were flexing, what am I missing? Is is scrub relative to active contact patch, so at ride height with 100% contact patch engagement you might have 1" of scrub, but with 10 degrees of camber and only inside 30% contact patch engagement, all of a sudden you'd have -1" scrub? made up numbers for example obviously but is that the theory?