• The site migration is complete! Hopefully everything transferred properly from the multiple decades old software we were using before. If you notice any issues please let me know, thanks! Also, I'm still working on things like chatbox, etc so hopefully those will be working in the next week or two.

Suspension natual frequencies

M

matt5112

New member
Does anyone have some insight into this?

It appears there are two main philosophies here.

The first being, higher natural frequency out front than out back.

The second being higher out back than out front.

http://farnorthracing.com/autocross_secrets5.html

Suggests the higher out back method, as does this guy:

http://consummatedriver.blogspot.ca/2012/02/how-to-choose-spring-rates.html

Neither seem to discuss much about it, but rather glance over that you should simply accept it.

I understand they shouldn't match to ensure the vehicle doesn't pogo about, but I'm looking for a reason as to which one should be higher.

Seems this guy suggests going higher out front than out back.

http://fatcatmotorsports.com/index.htm

I think I need to consider the weight distribution, and the drivetrain. It makes sense for a FWD, go higher out back to minimize F/R weight transfer.

Threads like the following lead me to the conclusion I should just put together 2500 and give this guy a shot: http://www.miataturbo.net/suspensio...at-motorsports-spreadsheets-grain-salt-71140/
 
Last edited:


Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness is one place to start :th_biggrin2:Seems if one wanted to take the time to find the "correct" balance of natural frequencies within the suspension of the Grand Prix, they wouldn't be starting with a Grand Prix.

Just my two pennies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top