TCCoA Forums banner

1 - 20 of 49 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,432 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm curious to know if you run a staggered tire setup with a bigger rear bar, will a car handle like a balanced setup?

We know that a square setup on tires and even bars will keep a car balanced for handling. We know that having staggered tires and even bars, the car will tend to understeer. We know that having square tires and larger rear bar, the car will tend to oversteer. One of the most common sized staggered width tire combo I see are 255 (F) / 275 (R). So it makes me think about having a staggered setup with larger sway bar and how that will impact handling characteristics and is where my questions lay:

Will having a staggered tire setup with larger rear bar compensate for the smaller front tires and give the "feeling" of a "balanced" setup?

So for example, if one were to run a 255 (F) / 275 (R) and the ADDCO 1-1/4" rear sway bar, would the car feel "balanced"? If it wouldn't, would the car oversteer or would it understeer?

To here who have ran such a setup before, what were your experiences? What was your car built for?

I know that an ideal setup is to run square tires and even sized bars. The reason for the question is because there seems to be an issue with production of the ADDCO front sway bar and who knows if ADDCO will continue to support it.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,042 Posts
I would ask duffy floyd over on sccoa; since DLF passed. he's pretty much the authority, imho.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,438 Posts
I run either 245 or 255 (F) (Currently I have 255's on the front / and 285 (R) with the ADDCO 1-1/4" rear sway bar, and the stock one in the front on my car.

Q: would the car feel "balanced"?

A: Yes. it's - reasonably - "Balanced". IMHO, The steering is a bit sluggish with the bigger tires up front but nothing you can't get used to. For drag racing and occasional canyon carving the car handles fine. Having good tires makes all the difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CDsDontBurn

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,794 Posts
If i understand your question, Jonathan, you are asking about if the understeer inherent in having more grip in the rear vs the front (staggered tires) would compensate for the oversteering induced by adding a larger rear swaybar relative to the front. I suspect how much the staggered tires would compensate would depend on the weight distribution of your vehicle.

I would also think your vehicles weight distribution will come into play. A stripped down car will have much less weight over the rear tires and therefore the benefits of fatter meats will be less noticeable then in a whole milk car.

From a cost and effort to change standpoint, you may want to buy the tires/wheels you want provided they don't rub and then dial the sway bars accordingly. The front bar is PITA to install so if you are already leaning towards inducing staggered wheels which may introduce some amount of additional understeer, why not keep the stock and then dial the rear bar thickness based on your vehicle and driving style.
Just because an aftermarket part is made doesn't mean you need it.
 

·
Super Moderator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
·
18,362 Posts
I'm a fan of square setups for a few other reasons besides handling, but realistically a 255/275 stagger isnt going to make a very perceptible difference in it, not like a 205/275 front runner setup, its all a matter of traction.

The bars do more than add or reduce understeer(they're called sway/anti-roll bars for a reason) their effect on that aspect of handling is more of a side effect, and there is a lot more to handling dynamics to it, bigger bars mean less independence in the suspension, and oversteer =/= good handling.
 

·
The Parts Guy
Joined
·
7,513 Posts
As stated on the FB page, at the power level you're planning, I would recommend a "square" setup with respect to both bar and tire.

I would ask duffy floyd over on sccoa; since DLF passed. he's pretty much the authority, imho.
Duffy hasn't been on SCCoA in a decade.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,432 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
A: Yes. it's - reasonably - "Balanced". IMHO, The steering is a bit sluggish with the bigger tires up front but nothing you can't get used to. For drag racing and occasional canyon carving the car handles fine. Having good tires makes all the difference.
In my situation, I'd be doing more canyon carving and the occasional drag racing.

Do you do any canyon carving with your car in your part of the country?

If i understand your question, Jonathan, you are asking about if the understeer inherent in having more grip in the rear vs the front (staggered tires) would compensate for the oversteering induced by adding a larger rear swaybar relative to the front.
In a different set of words, yes, that's what I'm asking.

The front bar is PITA to install so if you are already leaning towards inducing staggered wheels which may introduce some amount of additional understeer, why not keep the stock and then dial the rear bar thickness based on your vehicle and driving style.
I understand the front bar is a PITA to remove with the engine still in the car. It's one of two reasons why I'm even posing this question. The other reason being is that, at least it seems to be based on a few other potential buyer statements, that ADDCO is "redesigning the front bar" but that the "new front bar is not yet available". These same people have previously stated that ADDCO keeps pushing back the ETA on the new bar design batch. Even Bill / SCP is getting the run-around on this, is my understanding.

If the bar availability becomes nil, I may have to re-think my bar and (future) wheel options.

I'm a fan of square setups for a few other reasons besides handling, but realistically a 255/275 stagger isnt going to make a very perceptible difference in it, not like a 205/275 front runner setup, its all a matter of traction.
With an exaggerated staggered setup like that, that is something that I couldn't even wrap my head around. But a 20mm difference in tire width.....how much of a difference would it make?

As stated on the FB page, at the power level you're planning, I would recommend a "square" setup with respect to both bar and tire.
I know. But as I stated above, I was looking at ADDCO bar availability. If ADDCO won't be making the bar anymore, by the time I get to work on the engine to swap the 1-1/4" bar in, it would make the difference on that decision. So long as ADDCO continues production of the 1-1/4" bar, keeping things "square" won't be an issue at that point in time.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,438 Posts
In my situation, I'd be doing more canyon carving and the occasional drag racing.

Do you do any canyon carving with your car in your part of the country?


...

If the bar availability becomes nil, I may have to re-think my bar and (future) wheel options.

...
Of course I like to carve up the roads around here. NC has some of the best roads in the country for that. Hell, we're home to the Tail of the Dragon. However, you don't have to drive all the way up there to find great roads in the mountains to have fun on. But by God you better know the road that you're driving and be on the look out for both idiots and deer. But that's a discussion for another thread. ;)

Just buy the rear bar. It's not that expensive or difficult to swap. Put it on the car and try it out for yourself. If you're not happy with it take the thing off and slap the stock one back on. Only you can decide what "feels" best to you.

Make sure you get the shorter end links. I'm pretty sure the stock ones are too long.
 

·
Super Moderator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
·
18,362 Posts
You won’t notice a measurable difference between 255 square and 255/275 staggered in terms of handling, only thing you might observe is having a harder time “steering with the throttle” with the grippier rear tires. A fatter rear bar somewhat compensates for that in that you can upset the rear traction with a Scandinavian flick if it’s big enough, but that doesn’t really equal good handling dynamics.
 

·
Registered
1991 Mercury Cougar LS 5.0 in restoration
Joined
·
551 Posts
20/255= 7.8% more tire width.

I'll likely run 1 1/4 and 1 1/8, front and rear, respectively. That's what I found used and talk of the bigger bar in the rear scared me off of it. I had a chance at a 1 1/4 rear bar at the same time.

I'm not 100% sold on size and will see how the car feels. Think I've got $200 in the pair. Watch the sites as you are not and you'll likely find a front bar soon.
 

·
The Parts Guy
Joined
·
7,513 Posts
I'll likely run 1 1/4 and 1 1/8, front and rear, respectively. That's what I found used and talk of the bigger bar in the rear scared me off of it. I had a chance at a 1 1/4 rear bar at the same time.
What talk scared you away from a 1-1/4" rear bar?
 

·
Super Moderator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
·
18,362 Posts
20/255= 7.8% more tire width.

I'll likely run 1 1/4 and 1 1/8, front and rear, respectively. That's what I found used and talk of the bigger bar in the rear scared me off of it. I had a chance at a 1 1/4 rear bar at the same time.

I'm not 100% sold on size and will see how the car feels. Think I've got $200 in the pair. Watch the sites as you are not and you'll likely find a front bar soon.
Those were the sway bar sizes used on the SCs at the bondurant driving school. MaddMartigan had come to a similar conclusion with the 1-1/4 rear bar in his auto crossing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,794 Posts
You won’t notice a measurable difference between 255 square and 255/275 staggered in terms of handling, only thing you might observe is having a harder time “steering with the throttle” with the grippier rear tires. A fatter rear bar somewhat compensates for that in that you can upset the rear traction with a Scandinavian flick if it’s big enough, but that doesn’t really equal good handling dynamics.
Esp considering how heavy the tbird chassis is.
 

·
Registered
1991 Mercury Cougar LS 5.0 in restoration
Joined
·
551 Posts
What talk scared you away from a 1-1/4" rear bar?
I think Matt is correct, it was MaddMartigan who had discussed the bigger bar causing more oversteer.

This conversation does make me wonder if I wouldn't be better off with the bigger bar, as I plan to run 285 or 305 out back.

Further question: in the canyon carving scenario with a bigger bar, would less than smooth roads be more unsettling? I think it may.
 

·
Super Moderator
1994 Cougar XR7 DOHC/5-Speed
Joined
·
18,362 Posts
I think Matt is correct, it was MaddMartigan who had discussed the bigger bar causing more oversteer.

This conversation does make me wonder if I wouldn't be better off with the bigger bar, as I plan to run 285 or 305 out back.

Further question: in the canyon carving scenario with a bigger bar, would less than smooth roads be more unsettling? I think it may.
It wasn’t just oversteer, as I recall from our conversations he found it twitchy and basically uncontrollable or at least hard to recover at the limit, he went down to a stock size bar and the car was much more controllable and put up better lap times - which is good handling.

To answer your question, yes, the bigger the sway bar, the more the suspension feels and behaves like one with a solid axle
 

·
The Parts Guy
Joined
·
7,513 Posts
I can only speak to my experience with 1-1/4 bars at both ends, 255/275 tires, ST's with Tokico Illumina II's up front and Vogtland 1" with Bilstein B8 SP's in the rear, Delrin bushings, SFC's, and a boatload of torque...the car is VERY neutral. I've been pushing this car very hard in the corners for over 15 years now, to the point that I only averaged a few thousand miles out of a set of Porterfield R4S pads and only 7k miles out of a set of tires. Even though it's far heavier than my SN95, it's lightyears ahead in ability to carry speed through a curve, and it certainly doesn't upset itself should it encounter a bump mid-turn.

41514
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,432 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Of course I like to carve up the roads around here. NC has some of the best roads in the country for that. Hell, we're home to the Tail of the Dragon. However, you don't have to drive all the way up there to find great roads in the mountains to have fun on. But by God you better know the road that you're driving and be on the look out for both idiots and deer. But that's a discussion for another thread. ;)
Hmmm......

😁😁😁😁

Just buy the rear bar. It's not that expensive or difficult to swap. Put it on the car and try it out for yourself. If you're not happy with it take the thing off and slap the stock one back on. Only you can decide what "feels" best to you.

Make sure you get the shorter end links. I'm pretty sure the stock ones are too long.
I have the 1-1/4" bar already 😃. My plan is / was for when I pull the engine to install a 1-1/4" front bar.

I have the shorter links already that I got as part of the ADDCO kit, but as I mentioned elsewhere on TCCOA (my suspension thread?), I plan on getting those Spohn end links instead since they have a Heim joint.

You won’t notice a measurable difference between 255 square and 255/275 staggered in terms of handling, only thing you might observe is having a harder time “steering with the throttle” with the grippier rear tires. A fatter rear bar somewhat compensates for that in that you can upset the rear traction with a Scandinavian flick if it’s big enough, but that doesn’t really equal good handling dynamics.
After making my last post I got to thinking about that, 255 and 275 is only 20mm difference. It wouldn't really make that much of a difference. I mean, we see stock cars out there that already come staggered from the factory and are meant for Auto-X / Circuit racing. And some of these cars have exaggerated staggers. How much of a difference would be 20mm? I'm thinking not much. Would it be noticeable? Likely, but not anything overly dramatic, I don't think.

I can only speak to my experience with 1-1/4 bars at both ends, 255/275 tires, ST's with Tokico Illumina II's up front and Vogtland 1" with Bilstein B8 SP's in the rear, Delrin bushings, SFC's, and a boatload of torque...the car is VERY neutral. I've been pushing this car very hard in the corners for over 15 years now, to the point that I only averaged a few thousand miles out of a set of Porterfield R4S pads and only 7k miles out of a set of tires. Even though it's far heavier than my SN95, it's lightyears ahead in ability to carry speed through a curve, and it certainly doesn't upset itself should it encounter a bump mid-turn.
I'm going with poly instead of Delrin. Yes, I know Delrin is better but it's a significant cost difference. Performance should be somewhat similar, right?

I hope to make my own set of SFCs as well. What kind of rear end do you have? A factory TL or something more exotic, like an Auburn or Detroit Locker?

I'm excited to hear your feedback on handling. I know this chassis does well and it excites me to hear someone else restate that every time.
 

·
The Parts Guy
Joined
·
7,513 Posts
What kind of rear end do you have? A factory TL or something more exotic, like an Auburn or Detroit Locker?
It’s a Traction-Lok with the alternate stacking method and the F-150 spring. I’m a fan of the clutch-type diff as they are quiet, have tailorable engagement, and are cheap/easy to rebuild. I’ve installed them in six of my own cars/trucks/Jeeps, and I’ve been pleased with the outcome each time.
 
1 - 20 of 49 Posts
Top