That's pretty interesting, in that with steering angle considered it’s not directly related because caster is working there too.
It also means that the curve is very specific to stock caster, so would need re-writing totally for anything with increased caster.
In terms of body roll, you’re definitely correct about the static camber vs dynamic camber, but I don’t think the figures are as high as suggested.
If we were to assume 100mm of body roll, 50mm compression on the outside and 50mm extension on the inside, that would equate to just 3.4 degrees body roll (on a 1700mm track width)
I’ve looked at a few pics, and I don’t believe the roll to be anywhere close to 100mm total,
This is the outside under heavy compression:
I’d say maybe 20-25mm max compression occurring there.
This pic of the inside on a fast (85+ bend at Bedford)
Maybe 10-15mm extension? Hard to say.
Finally this front on:
Static splitter height is around 60mm on those tyres, so looking at the level of compression / extension across the car, I’d say the above combined estimate of ~40-50mm roll is fairly accurate.
Assuming the upper end, and 50mm roll across the body, that’s still just 1.7 degrees of roll, so at worst case I’d remain 0.5 to the positive, that’s not allowing for the 9.5 degrees of caster I run either, which will keep again keep it more negative under steering angle than the stock 7 degrees.
Bodyroll has never been an issue, or the reason for wanting to change spring rates, as I feel the ARB’s control Body roll very well, or as is closer to the truth, they control it better than they should, because they’re making up for springs that are too soft. It’s pitching that is the issue with the soft springs.
I absolutely know I need stiffer springs, and will be trying some this year, I was just pleased to find that an additional 0.7 degrees of static camber is available so easily to get closer to the ball park ideal range PRE adjustment via the top mounts
Too many plans, and not enough time or money to implement even half of them
