Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDementedDrummer
I dunno if this actually makes sense or no, but rolling on would reduce the load on the front tyre, which would in turn reduce the size of the contact patch on the road, and reduce available traction, which is already practically all used up.
It kinda sounds okay in my head, but yeah i dunno.  |
Your reasoning about the area is correct, Neel, but not about the overall result.
If your assumption were fully correct, the recommended 40/60 rule for weight distribution would be in contradiction with it.
......... or the front would slide just before a leaned wheelie.
The point is that as we transfer weight over one tire (CG moves aft or forward), we also transfer the percentage of the lateral force that the tire is feeling, not only the vertical force.
As I see it, keeping the recommended moderate acceleration during a turn, discharges the front contact patch some from both forces (vertical and horizontal) and puts that load on the rear contact patch, which is bigger and has higher capacity for that load.
As a bonus, the suspension re-adjusts to achieve the best stability and ground clearance during the turn.
Yes, with more or less weight on the contact patch, the area of contact grows or shrinks some, but it cannot change as much as the vertical load or force applied on the patch.
That means that if you double the load, the area does not double.
Furthermore, the area has much less influence on traction than the vertical force.
Reduce area in half and you may reduce traction in 10%; reduce vertical force in half and you reduce traction at least 50%.
The vertical force can be drastically reduced while the lateral force remains the same (bad because traction is reduced but not lateral force) when rolling over road imperfections that the suspension cannot follow impeccably: the crests are the killers because the tire and the weight that it supports float for fractions of seconds.
...........or so I believe
