Anti-Dive

[Engineer]

Ok, someone school me on how the anti-dive principle works.

[Admin]

Ok, someone school me on how the anti-dive principle works.

It is simple, shake your head back and forth abruptly, then smack it on the wall a few times, by then you should have forgoten about it all together, go back to designing a buggy...Hope that helps...

[Engineer]

[fabr]

Personally I swim against the stream on this so I'll stay out while others tell you why you don't want it. I'll chime in later.

[Admin]

Swim all you want, i wont tell you you wont want it, I'm only telling you your wasting your time... I personally see no way at all your gonna anti dive 20"+ of plush travel in the sand and no front brakes...

[trojan]

*clears throat. adjusts monocle with pinky extended*

As "rake" introduces more dive under brakes one can angle parallel arms so they have negative rake and get the opposite effect. BUT (yes fab) and it's a big but (bug sit back down) it prevents weight transfer to the front which is quite undesirable.

Now to use this principle in practice we only want to add a "little bit" of anti-dive so we can keep our suspension softer for better grip and not hit the bump stops when braking heavily. We only  want a little so we still get weight transfer and the grip it provides.

To my understanding to do this you start with a previously tested amount of rake and then, when looking from the side, angle the top arm back towards parallel, how much you angle it must be tested and the difficulty of having a fully adjustable front end to test is where I think bug is quite rightly coming from.

[trojan]

[Yummi]

"Sand" is not a religion....

Prior to this I was willing to forgive your condescending uptight bs attitude, but this!  This is over the top! 

Wanker.

(Oh, alright, if you promise never to speak such foul words again, I might still like you.... )

[Engineer]

Hmmmm assuming 20" of travel won't this bring about quite a bit of caster change?  And how is it different than just reducing rake?

[fabr]

[Yoshi]

Hmmmm assuming 20" of travel won't this bring about quite a bit of caster change?  And how is it different than just reducing rake?

Basic principle is simple, when you grab the front brake, the caliper locks onto the disc and tries to rotate the spindle forward, pulling the front end down. By putting less rake in the upper a-arm only, the top of the spindle is rotated back as it cycles, canceling out the diving effect.  The more upper a-arm rake you have, the less dive you get.....

[Yummi]

would not some dive be good to transfer weight for better stopping?

[Yoshi]

would not some dive be good to transfer weight for better stopping?

I prefer dive for that reason.

Antidive was designed for street cars with heavy motors in the front to keep the front end from slamming to the ground under braking, I don't see any use for it in sandrails.........

[trojan]

Yep you get castor change for free not that it's a good thing. and it will mess with bumpsteer...  everything's a compromise

The idea is that you get all the benefits of rake without so much dive.

In the blessed Sand with no front brakes I would guess there would only be room for relatively little anti-dive and the amount I'm suggesting for a racing buggy would be relatively small in the first place.

[Engineer]

Thanks Yoshi.

Without front brakes, it will do nothing but make you caster change through the travel.

With front brakes, The brakes try to force the caster change which in turn trys to lift the front of the car, counteracting the brake dive.