Do all 110s understeer?

[isuzurover]

Or just 3.9's?

All the 4BD1 powered 110s I have owned/driven have a tendency to understeer when pushed hard (especially on wet roads). I have assumed this is due to the big heavy engine up front.

I have driven a few tdis, and a V8 county - but haven't ever wanted to push a borrowed vehicle hard enough to find out. So do they all do it?

[Blknight.aus]

in my experience, yes some not as bad as others and it gets worse if you drive with the difflock in...

that said oversteer can be induced if you want it.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

not just 3.9s I would think,,
(from a control point of view) constant 4wds have the inherint(RON!!!) problem--you are never sure where exactly the power is going. front?? back??

add some unintended weight up the front,,,,

its the formula for changing direction of mass,,


LR's tend to lack the power/energy bit:p

[isuzurover]

in my experience, yes some not as bad as others and it gets worse if you drive with the difflock in...

that said oversteer can be induced if you want it.

I know that well, when I am being silly on (deserted) wet roads I find it switches from under to over steer VERY quickly. The crappy falken AT tyres don't help though - worst tyres I have ever owned, wear quickly, AND have less grip than a mud terrain.

Oversteer is when the passengers are scared, understeer is when the driver is scared. :eek::D

[harry]

i'd guess that all understeer. it's a product of weight and speed versus change of direction.
you are pushing near two tons into a corner
there is a simple cure to the problem, if it is a problem,
slow down.

[vnx205]

(from a control point of view) constant 4wds have the inherint(RON!!!) problem--you are never sure where exactly the power is going. front?? back??

Are you saying constant 4WD has inherent understeer? My impression (as a fairly sedate driver) is that the Defender doesn't seem to understeer at all on loose gravel whereas the Series III understeered quite easily.
I am thinking of quite slow speeds on very windy roads. Maybe things are different at speeds I don't want to get up to in the Defender and couldn't get up to in the Series III.

[Blknight.aus]

i'd guess that all understeer. it's a product of weight and speed versus change of direction.
you are pushing near two tons into a corner
there is a simple cure to the problem, if it is a problem,
slow down.

while thats the correct solution the blue stripey has thus to say....

Nahh, just dab the brakes on the way in to get the weight on the steers then noisey pedal it to the point of balance... you can race RWD falcons and commodores through rounda bouts like that, 3rds a good gear for it and you can do it at ohh 70-80kph without too much hassle.... Just gotta watch the tyre rotation tho, they tend to scallop the fronts a bit doing it...........


Are you saying constant 4WD has inherent understeer? My impression (as a fairly sedate driver) is that the Defender doesn't seem to understeer at all on loose gravel whereas the Series III understeered quite easily.
I am thinking of quite slow speeds on very windy roads. Maybe things are different at speeds I don't want to get up to in the Defender and couldn't get up to in the Series III.

thers a reason for that Its called live beam axles on spring leaves. The series suspension was never ment for fast handling and the springs have the reaction time of a politician whose been ordered to sign his own pay cut authorisation forms.. When they get to cornering they lighten up considerabley on the inside and over force the outside edge which means no grip on the front.. The problem is further exasperated by the rotational mass, unsprung mass at the front end and the fact that the fronts run a higher pressure to make it easier to turn on road pressure tyres....

Blue stripey says this....

its just the lack of powersteering to let you flick the front round and the lack of power to get the tail to step out.....

[Pedro_The_Swift]

it's a product of weight and speed versus change of direction.
you are pushing near two tons into a corner


its why race cars are mid-engined,,

yes, in the end all front engined cars understeer.

( and Porches ;))

[vnx205]

its why race cars are mid-engined,,

yes, in the end all front engined cars understeer.

( and Porches ;))
Wasn't the car with the most chronic terminal understeer ever the Hillman Imp from the 1960s?
It had a rear engine, but with nothing in the (front) boot, on a wet road the front wheels had no grip at all.
So there is more to it than where you put the engine, although mid-engine probably make it a lot easier to get it right.

[rick130]

its why race cars are mid-engined,,

yes, in the end all front engined cars understeer.

( and Porches ;))

Pedro, you should have said "real race cars are...."

:D:D

Actually they are mid engined for better traction, without the evil handling trade-off you get with dak daks and their bigger rear engined cousins from Zuffenhausen.
The little buggers still understeer too, to greater and lesser degrees. Oversteer is generally driver induced, unless you have something evil like the above mentioned rear engined abominations, or an open wheeler where the designer in his infinite wisdom has the front roll centre higher than the rear and the transition from 'balanced' to 'terminal oversteer' happens in a nano-second at 215km/h. :angel:

[rick130]

Wasn't the car with the most chronic terminal understeer ever the Hillman Imp from the 1960s?
It had a rear engine, but with nothing in the (front) boot, on a wet road the front wheels had no grip at all.
So there is more to it than where you put the engine, although mid-engine probably make it a lot easier to get it right.

there are so many variables, firstly hinging around tyre construction, that dictate what the weight distribution should be.
Most of the openwheelers I've played with we were always trying to get more weight over the nose to reduce understeer, as the tyres we were using dictated this. The batteries were moved from under the drivers thighs, and all the lead we could jam there without incurring a too great a weight penalty.

We always ran nil droop too. This kept the (unsprung) weight on the nose, or at least reduced longitudinal weight transfer under acceleration, again reducing understeer.

[loanrangie]

Might be to do with the wheel base too, i was actually thinking on the way home that i like how in my disco and previous rangies you are able to power out of a corner even on a wet road without loosing grip, i thought this as some knob in a falcon ute did a u'ey if front of me and powered too hard and fishtailed down the rd.

[rangieman]

Might be to do with the wheel base too, i was actually thinking on the way home that i like how in my disco and previous rangies you are able to power out of a corner even on a wet road without loosing grip, i thought this as some knob in a falcon ute did a u'ey if front of me and powered too hard and fishtailed down the rd.
What it had nothing to do with the fact you having equal traction to ALL wheels that are driven and he only had rear wheel drive:wallbash:

[George130]

I have been quite impressed with the handling of my 130. Only had 1 incident of over steer and that has been since I took the muds off and am rimming the baby wheels. I thought it would be much more like a barge.

[Jeff]

I like the handling characteristics of the Defender, it seems neutral to me and very controllable. The worst thing I ever drove was a leaf sprung Troop Carrier, you needed to plan well ahead or you would run off the road. I thought the driver was ****ed until we swapped drivers and it was like a barge. They have a massively heavy engine in front and it feels like it wants to just go straight.

Jeff

:rocket:

[moose]

The worst thing I ever drove was a leaf sprung Troop Carrier,
I have to agree there, my parents had one, I found the problem was that the steering was too light and had no feel to it, you had no idea where the thing wanted to go.
Was still a good 4x4 though:angel::wasntme:

[loanrangie]

What it had nothing to do with the fact you having equal traction to ALL wheels that are driven and he only had rear wheel drive:wallbash:

that was the point i was making dh.

[sclarke]

Think that is bad, try a Stock WRX on a loose road....... NASTY

[hiline]

Think that is bad, try a Stock WRX on a loose road....... NASTY


would be fun if planned first :burnrubber:;)

[p38arover]

Wasn't the car with the most chronic terminal understeer ever the Hillman Imp from the 1960s?
It had a rear engine, but with nothing in the (front) boot, on a wet road the front wheels had no grip at all

I think you are wrong. The Imp had great handling. I've considered buying one - except I've got no money.


From the Imp Site


(The Singer Chamois) took advantage of the detail improvements of the Imp's first year. It retained all the mechanics of the Hillman Imp and added a few virtues.
The Chamois differed from the early Imp in that it had Dunlop SP41 radials fitted to wider (1/2") rim wheels. These were an improvement on the C41 crossplies, which caused gradual understeer. The SPs kept handling neutral up to much higher speeds.

and


Having basic front suspension (swinging arms) but a superior rear suspension (trailing arms) fairly neutralizes the usual 'tail-happy' handling of a rear-engined car.
The problem with cars with the engine behind the compartment is often that of a heavy tail-end, causing oversteer on corners (that is: the heavy tail flies out as you drive round). This was very evident in the VW Beetle with it's swing axle rear suspension, which encouraged the back wheels to tuck in and under as the recalcitrant tail of the thing swung outwards. The Imp's light engine, in conjunction with trailing-arm rear suspension means that this potentially dangerous oversteer characteristic is not present.
The Imp's rear trailing arms were developed by Harry White and a team of chassis engineers.
The handling of the small Hillmans - even in standard form - became legendary.


Quoting from "Apex : The inside story of the Hillman Imp" by David and Peter Henshaw. They interviewed Tim Fry, who demonstrated the Imp to a bloke from Chrysler, just before the take over in 1967:
And the silly American said to me, just as we were coming up to this roundabout, 'Do these things understeer or oversteer?'. And I said, 'Well, I'll show you on this roundabout'.


'You can make it understeer like this, (and we went round the first roundabout), 'or you can make it oversteer like this.' And he was completely silent after that.

Ron

[sclarke]

Imbaressing story.....

Years back my Volvo 164 Rally Car was a pig and used to understeer stacks, everything i did gave no real luck.....
R-Sport in sweden told me i was never going to be able to get it to a stage of happy 50/50 balance.....
Anyhow some suspension clown in Melb told me he could fix it.....
i took it to him a spent over $2k on suspension and adjustments.
I picked it up, took it for a fang in this estate and i planted it into the kerb on the 1st corner. I limped back in and drove into his workshop with a bent lower control arm, bent shock and bent stub axle and in the calmest manner i told him it was worse..... he said "Hell yes, you just bent it"

The nice man removed his parts and never charged me for his time....... i fixed the broken parts and kept playing..... after i gave it 11 deg neg camber and 6 deg pos caster i got it to a point where it was the best it would be.
It used to destroy tyres, but was ok for Dirt, on Tarmac, it was still average..... some cars can never be good in factory trim..... you just have to put up with it.....
Then i built a 242 volvo, Ohh Yes....... now that handled.....

[rick130]

11 deg neggy !!!!:eek::eek::eek:

geez, that wouldn't have braked too well Clarkie, riding on that knife edge.

Nearly as bad as me winding on 15mm toe out:eek: on a few Formula Fords. Turned in bloody well, and surprisingly didn't wash off any speed down a straight. Also modified the ackerman to have the intersection point 2/3'rds the way down the chassis centreline. Another car I had had anti-ackerman from the factory. Geez that was a pig push around the pits/paddock.

One of our fixes on '93-'94 FF Swifts was to wind in 8-9* Caster. If a driver complained about heavy steering "just drive the damn thing..."

[sclarke]

11 deg neggy !!!!:eek::eek::eek:

geez, that wouldn't have braked too well Clarkie, riding on that knife edge.

Nearly as bad as me winding on 15mm toe out:eek: on a few Formula Fords. Turned in bloody well, and surprisingly didn't wash off any speed down a straight. Also modified the ackerman to have the intersection point 2/3'rds the way down the chassis centreline. Another car I had had anti-ackerman from the factory. Geez that was a pig push around the pits/paddock.

One of our fixes on '93-'94 FF Swifts was to wind in 8-9* Caster. If a driver complained about heavy steering "just drive the damn thing..."

Never had the need to stop....... Just throw it sideways into a corner and let the side walls slow you down.....lol..

I learnt the Scandinavian flick by the same style....... break hard, let it get unstable an then when the back steps out, its undercontrol...... while its light and twithy, throw it sideways then when you are facing left to turn right........ throw it back and nail it thru the corner....... many times ive gone backwards thru corners..............

[isuzurover]

whereas the Series III understeered quite easily.
I am thinking of quite slow speeds on very windy roads. Maybe things are different at speeds I don't want to get up to in the Defender and couldn't get up to in the Series III.

Interesting... I have never managed to get my IIA ute to understeer at all, but it will oversteer fairly readily.

MY (old) model subarus understeer like crazy - I always put it down to the engine being so far forward...