Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ss_collins
ben the results show deep sandersons being quicker in the wet.
You have strong opinions - maybe you should write a column for us?
|
Which Lotus 18s? Are you sure that the drivers were equally talented, the tyres were the same, etc. A few ancient race results does not prove the system is fundamentally better.
However my take on this is that Lawrence had an obsession with not running ARBs. What's the first thing you're told to do in the wet? Disconnect your ARBs because the roll resistance requirement reduces due to the lower lateral accelerations. All of sudden you get better (i.e. less) load variation on each tyre and therefore more grip and more performance. Why did the Lotus's not do this? I couldn't answer that.
A more plausable explanation I think you'll agree, and nothing to do with this ridiculously over-hyped Lawrence link system.
Don't know about a column though. Would that be under my assumed name as per the letters page this month :-)
Yes I guess I have some strong opinions. The thing that bugs me is the obsession with things like the Lawrence link. You need more articles about how to deal with the multiple interactions that constitute a race car rather than panaceas that don't exist. If the Lawrence link was so good why did Lawrence not design it into the Morgan Aero 8, and for that matter why was the Aero 8 so damn slow at Le Mans last year if he's any good at what he does?
Ben