|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 919
|
911 rake front/rear
I saw Ray Scruggs' recommendation that the rear of a 911 me 3/4 to 1 inches higher than the front.
Does this sound right to the experts? My car is an 82 SC. Thanks, Olivier
__________________
Olivier Hecht 1982 911SC |
||
|
|
|
|
Binge User
|
I'm no expert, but with 60 series tires I think a slight rake looks cool on a SC. I think mines about 3/4"
__________________
Paul |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
Most 911s are set up with some amount of rake (with the rear a little higher). I haven't seen any definitive reasoning why. I had mine set up pretty much level until I put larger tires on the rear. The "no rake" set-up works well, too. I even know a knowledgeable 911 mechanic that recommends no rake.
Mike
__________________
Mike 1976 Euro 911 3.2 w/10.3 compression & SSIs 22/29 torsions, 22/22 adjustable sways, Carrera brakes |
||
|
|
|
|
Back in the saddle again
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Central TX west of Houston
Posts: 56,267
|
According to Bruce Anderson a 911 handles best with about a 1 deg rake.
Paul, why the giant tires in the back. Aren't those 16" wheels? The stock sizes (arguably the best sizes) for those are 205 55 16 and 225 50 16. Generally the US spec cars have had their rear ends jacked way up in the air (by at least an inch) due to the bumper height laws here.
__________________
Steve '08 Boxster RS60 Spyder #0099/1960 - never named a car before, but this is Charlotte. '88 targa SOLD 2004 - gone but not forgotten
|
||
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 919
|
Steve,
What does 1 degree of rake translate into in terms of how high the rear is compared to the front at the fender? Did Bruce give his recommendation in those terms as well? I am sure I could calulate it with the right measurements, but that would just add variables. Olivier
__________________
Olivier Hecht 1982 911SC |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 4,612
|
It's about 1/2" measured at the top of the fender wells. The front being higher.
__________________
Neil '73 911S targa |
||
|
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Long Beach, NY
Posts: 21,140
|
Quote:
but I believe the 1deg./1in. of rake puts the center of gravity under the dash...........Ron
__________________
Ronin LB '77 911s 2.7 PMO E 8.5 SSI Monty MSD JPI w x6 |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 8,414
|
Yep, kinda confusing, but .5" higher in front, from the fender lip to the ground, equals roughly 1 degree forward rake. However it is Ok (and desireable IMO) to run a little more forward rake. I simply set the same height on all four fender-to-ground measurments. This will give you a bit more agressive rake, and make ride-height set up easier.
|
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
Changing the rake of the car won't affect CG - the CG is "where it is" regardless of the orientation of the car.
I always suspected the rake thing was aerodynamically driven. Maybe it's for looks. :>) Mike
__________________
Mike 1976 Euro 911 3.2 w/10.3 compression & SSIs 22/29 torsions, 22/22 adjustable sways, Carrera brakes |
||
|
|
|
|
Team California
|
The slight rake is for aerodynamics/weight transfer. IROC is correct, it has no effect on CG.
pschrup, why would you put taller-than-stock tires on a 911? That's a new one. That's a good looking car you've got there, but if you got it set up right it would look a lot better. Looks like Starsky or Hutch owned it.
__________________
Denis "It won't interfere with the current building. It'll be near it but not touching it." -Grifter in Chief, July of 2025 |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Peoples Republic of Long Beach, NY
Posts: 21,140
|
Quote:
excuse my wording.. the hard info said something about air movement /lower psi maxed out under the dash..........Ron
__________________
Ronin LB '77 911s 2.7 PMO E 8.5 SSI Monty MSD JPI w x6 |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Outside Portland, OR
Posts: 583
|
Zebra Three ready to roll!
|
||
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 919
|
I thought I was sure that the rear was "supposed" to be higher, but am I wrong?
Olivier
__________________
Olivier Hecht 1982 911SC |
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
Quote:
Just trying to emulate a jacked-up hemicuda... |
||
|
|
|
|
Moderator
|
When there is a bit of forward rake the measurement from the front lip to flat horizontal surface will be ~.5" higher than at the rear lip due to their diffing shapes.
The purpose of the rake is aero. This is 25.7" f & 25.3" r
__________________
Bill Verburg '76 Carrera 3.6RS(nee C3/hotrod), '95 993RS/CS(clone) | Pelican Home |Rennlist Wheels |Rennlist Brakes | Last edited by Bill Verburg; 07-18-2003 at 01:29 PM.. |
||
|
|
|
|
Back in the saddle again
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Central TX west of Houston
Posts: 56,267
|
I think what we are looking for here is center of pressure, but I'm not certain.
More rake will create more forward weight transfer which can be used to tune handling.
__________________
Steve '08 Boxster RS60 Spyder #0099/1960 - never named a car before, but this is Charlotte. '88 targa SOLD 2004 - gone but not forgotten
|
||
|
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: AZ
Posts: 8,414
|
I think Steve is correct. Rake is not just an aero consideration.
|
||
|
|
|
|
Moderator
|
Eric, please explain your statement.
The aero benefits are the reduction of air under the car and raises the rear . These 2 effects lower lift at the front and reduce lift at the rear. That is also the effect that the front and rear spoilers have. The effect of the rear spoiler was a serendipitoius discovery, the rear lid was left raised in a wind tunnel and the reduction of rear lift was noted. The attitude of the car just enhances the effects. It is also true that the aero ctr. is moved forward which enhances stability in crosswinds. The ctr. of gravity is lowered whenever the front or rear is lowered. This is not relevant once the car is at optimal ride height Weight transfer is a function of suspension geometry and spring stiffness.
__________________
Bill Verburg '76 Carrera 3.6RS(nee C3/hotrod), '95 993RS/CS(clone) | Pelican Home |Rennlist Wheels |Rennlist Brakes | |
||
|
|
|
|
Binge User
|
Steve, my tires are 205/65/15 fr & 225/60/15 rear. The PO put those on & I have a reciept for the speedo calibration. My wife said I couldn't get new tires till those are worn out. Mission Complete
I'm buying 225/50s SO3s for all 4 corners. After I wear them out I hope for some 18" Fikses.
__________________
Paul |
||
|
|
|
|
Information Junky
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: an island, upper left coast, USA
Posts: 73,167
|
hmm.. . on Pauls 911, he clearly lists that it is a 1980 911SC Weissach Edition. This means 7&8's x 15"
I also apears to have been lowered in front, with stock (US) height in rear. (Lowering the rear would be good for various reasons.) Without a doubt, rake will infulence CG & CP. CG, center of gravity, being referenced from the ground, means the rake can have zero impact on CG only if the rake is changed by rotating about the CG (good luck with that.) For practical purposes, putting the rear in the air (like the weissach above) the rake is brought up along with the CG. Then there is CP, center of pressure, an aerodynamic center of "-gravity" . . .though here the "-gravity" is the culmination of aerodynamic lifts and drags. Rake will certainly effect this as well.
__________________
Everyone you meet knows something you don't. - - - and a whole bunch of crap that is wrong. Disclaimer: the above was 2¢ worth. More information is available as my professional opinion, which is provided for an exorbitant fee.
|
||
|
|
|