The GGR forum has reached it's end, but posts are still available read-only for posterity. We invite you to make posts and discussions on the GGR Facebook page.

2009 Proposal: Add points for dynamic suspension control.

Use this forum to discuss rule proposals, other than the points proposal, which has its's own forum

Moderators: David Leong, Andrew Forrest

Post Reply
User avatar
itacud
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 pm
Location: norcal

2009 Proposal: Add points for dynamic suspension control.

Post by itacud » Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:43 pm

It would be logical that a modern electronically controlled adaptive suspension poses a significant advantage in allowing a vehicle to maintain traction over uneven surfaces, while permitting agile vehicle dynamics during transitions - a duality that is difficult to achieve with a base, static suspension damping adjustment. As such, I would propose that some points addition be considered for cars with real-time adaptive suspension damping, such as Porsche's PASM system or Bilstein's Damptronics. 10 points would be this feature on par with a non-stock height adjustable spring perch.
--
Image

User avatar
PAUL LARSON
Posts: 190
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: SAN CARLOS
Contact:

Re: 2009 Proposal: Add points for dynamic suspension control.

Post by PAUL LARSON » Tue Sep 16, 2008 3:41 pm

The PASM system is good but not that good. In turn
two at Thunderhill the car gets into a roll thru the
long turn. The suspension is stiff in the begining of
the turn and gets soft coming out of the turn.
The advantage of the PASM is not that great.
Paul

User avatar
itacud
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 3:03 pm
Location: norcal

Re: 2009 Proposal: Add points for dynamic suspension control.

Post by itacud » Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:36 pm

I think the important point to consider here is that it's not just how good an optional suspension is that mandates points additions. It's just the fact that it's better than stock at all. For example, for anyone driving their car daily, any suspension change has to be limited to streetable spring rates and ride heights. Still, the 40 points incurred for changes springs and perches is identical to those incurred for someone installing 1000 lb springs and dropping the car to the floor. The person who chooses to keep their car streetable and comfortable will always be faced with a compromise under the current points system.

So, to fairly evaluate PASM - which allows for a comfort setting when driving to/from the track, and a sport setting when on track - in comparison to a stock non-adjustable suspension, it isn't necessary to evaluate how good PASM is in an absolute sense, but simply whether it offers any advantage over a base suspension. This, it clearly does offer. Maybe not as much as a set of Moton Clubsports, but it is better than nothing. The points assigned should reflect that, to be fair.
--
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest