Need some help. The conventional wisdom on this board, and elsewhere, is that greater springrate or shock bound increases the tire downforce to that side of the car (i.e., higher springrate/higher bound in the rear = more oversteer or lesser springrate/bound = less oversteer). And less spring/bound in the front will decrease understeer (until it bottoms).
However, I've found the opposite. I bought a Supra RZ (FR), that has a default setting of:
Springs: 15.0f/7.5r (I could be off a bit by decimal points, but it's similar). This car oversteers like mad default (all ASM off). If I increase the rear stiffness to the SAME as the front, it gets rid of the oversteer and is neutral. Bound/Rebound were both at 8, and everything else equal, no camber. Shouldn't it get WORSE from an oversteer perspective?
I also tried doing the same with my DB9, and I can drift this with a 15/7 spring and oversteer like mad, but it understeers at 15/15, and at 10/20 it's an understeering train toward the wall. This effect also occurs with more modest adjustments.
And, yes, I know the difference between oversteer/understeer.
However, I've found the opposite. I bought a Supra RZ (FR), that has a default setting of:
Springs: 15.0f/7.5r (I could be off a bit by decimal points, but it's similar). This car oversteers like mad default (all ASM off). If I increase the rear stiffness to the SAME as the front, it gets rid of the oversteer and is neutral. Bound/Rebound were both at 8, and everything else equal, no camber. Shouldn't it get WORSE from an oversteer perspective?
I also tried doing the same with my DB9, and I can drift this with a 15/7 spring and oversteer like mad, but it understeers at 15/15, and at 10/20 it's an understeering train toward the wall. This effect also occurs with more modest adjustments.
And, yes, I know the difference between oversteer/understeer.