Visit The Dirt Forum for More Information

Author Topic:   wieght distribution on springs?
posted December 19, 2003 06:43 PM
If the tail is heavier than the nose.why do you run lighter springs on the rear?


posted December 20, 2003 07:40 PM
leverage (wheel rate)

posted December 20, 2003 08:27 PM
And unsprung weight.

posted December 20, 2003 10:44 PM
so lighter springs make the car get more or less traction ? in dry slick flat track. 0r do heavy springs drive the tires down to get the traction.

posted December 21, 2003 10:23 AM
It might be that the front springs are limited in length to about 9 1/2 inches because of the stock lower A arms. In order to control travel or spring compression without coil binding, the spring must be of a higher weight rating. The rear springs are usually 13 to 15 inches in length with much more travel or spring compression.
If you look at late models, the front springs are much lighter in rating, when compared to modifieds, because they are not limited in length by the stock lower A arm rules.

posted December 21, 2003 08:00 PM           
I am not a rocket scientist, but I say the fronts are stiffer due to the leverage ratio.

they are mounted much further inward from the wheels than the rears, giving them much more leverage on them.

if you look at coil over cars they get down to 300-350 fronts at times, and they are mounted much closer to the wheels.

posted December 21, 2003 08:51 PM
I agree with you Dirtracer, plus the fact that you have geometry limitations in the front.

posted December 21, 2003 11:28 PM
thanks guys for all the input. just trying to consider different pionts of view.I need
to improve with adjusting car after heat. telling the team the what i need for features.

Back to the Archives