Wide front axle.
Well, you would think the car with the wider axle would be less inclined to fall over but I suspect the relative lack of roll is more related to a low c of g.
In my ignorance I might expect turn in to be sharper with the narrower front track but it's not a thing that's really impressed itself on me. What is apparent with the wider axle is the effect of inadequate damping. Is "patter" the correct expression? It seems such an inadequate term for that moment where the axle swings like a pendulum. The wider track axle is more sensitive to inadequacies of balance or damping, as seems reasonable to me intuitively.
Minor considerations: the good news is that if the front goes through a gap, the back definitely will. The bad news is you have more chances to hit a pothole.
Of the two cars, I do prefer driving the car with the wide axle on twisty roads which says something about its handling at fairly sensible speeds. Incidentally, the LMW has wider front than rear track.
Regards,
Stuart
Well, you would think the car with the wider axle would be less inclined to fall over but I suspect the relative lack of roll is more related to a low c of g.
In my ignorance I might expect turn in to be sharper with the narrower front track but it's not a thing that's really impressed itself on me. What is apparent with the wider axle is the effect of inadequate damping. Is "patter" the correct expression? It seems such an inadequate term for that moment where the axle swings like a pendulum. The wider track axle is more sensitive to inadequacies of balance or damping, as seems reasonable to me intuitively.
Minor considerations: the good news is that if the front goes through a gap, the back definitely will. The bad news is you have more chances to hit a pothole.
Of the two cars, I do prefer driving the car with the wide axle on twisty roads which says something about its handling at fairly sensible speeds. Incidentally, the LMW has wider front than rear track.
Regards,
Stuart