probably personal preference but it seems like prime12 prefers a tighter one. more stability in slaloms with zero loss in corner exit. I used to have suspension setup related instability in slaloms, was a nightmare. in general I imagine you want the car looser for tight stuff and tighter for loose/transition-y stuff. whichever way you get there is better.

similar goals with ACD tuning. make the car looser on corner entries, but look at the data and if the car's in a slalom/transition type situation, make sure it's tighter/doesn't go full open

 

While I don't have an answer, I think *I* will be faster with my current setup since I personally find driving cars that are loose at slaloms rather stressful. Right now I have 0.16 / 0.14 rear toe in, which I believe is pretty much OEM spec. That said I can imagine it being too much on courses with lots of steady state corners. I might try going down to ~0.1 ish on my next alignment.


Here is a side by side with Eric Simmons who won DS. Yes I got raw timed but keep in mind this is a 2 times Prosolo national champ vs. a local nobody. Plus it would not have happened had I not lost my ***** in the last section leading into finish .



Here is vs. an AS GT350. Again the driver(Ken Houseal) is usually much faster than I.

 

are you finding it to impact steady state corners? assumed the AYC would have taken care of that as well

 

No, I'm not.... it was just a guess . I'll find out later this month at a bigger venue.

But wouldn't AYC have minimal effect when the car is at steady state with no throttle input?

 

I'm assuming some throttle input I guess - idk! will look forward to hearing your reports

 

Easy to say that! Even if he could hit the same throttle input, his steering angle might be different, which could create different AYC/ACD action altogether

 

Remember also, that you can set a car up to more stable in a slalom, and use the brakes to get it rotate better on entry for the tight corners.

 

I have an interesting data point.

Yesterday at a local autocross I had a national level driver (trophied at multiple prosolos and tours this season with a Focus RS in BS and will likely trophy at the nationals this Sept) drive my minimally-prepped-for-BS Evo X, after he drove a friend's Focus RS (also in BS trim) on the course (he has moved on and doesn't own a RS anymore).

He ran a 44.3 in the RS and then a 43.7 in my X.

He commented that while my X doesn't have as much on-throttle rotation as the RS, it was much easier to drive and more composed. Mind you, he has never autocrossed an Evo X before and would likely have gone even faster if he were more used to the car, as opposed to the Focus RS that he had been actively autocrossing the entire season.

Both in BS trim, the Focus RS had 245 RE71Rs on 8 inch rims. My X has 265 RE71Rs on 8.5 inch rims with revalved MR Bilsteins and CIRO front sway bar brackets.

 

Last weekend we had another NER autoX and it started pretty good with my first run being in the lead. This is kind of rare, but Rachel wasn't there, so things got a bit easier for me!

After the run, I went out and sprayed everything and when I went back in to check my run on SoloStorm, error popped up on the dashboard:


Restarted the car and same thing was still there!

Since I got my latest ACD pump installed few weeks before that was a first suspect, but I still had no clue there. Was it coming from the trainy instead. 75k miles and I did launched this car few times here and there? Clutches being warned out and started to slips and overheated the trainy?? No clue!

So, even though car felt pretty good on the first run with a lot of places for improvement, I decided to look for something else to drive instead. Only guy I kind of knew was Dalton in his EVO 8 on fresh RE71s. He was game and let me to use his car, which was great!!

So, two more runs in EVO 8, which I didn't drive in 10 years or so. Took it easy of the line so clutch doesn't complain and started to engage those pesky cones! 255s on 8" rims felt pretty good. It didn't have as much front grip as my car, but it was obviously lighter. Similar body roll, but much slower steering, which needed some adjusting. Car rotated really nice and similar to my car, but it didn't feel as planted on the ground as X. Almost a floating feel without holding the ground as much!

Couldn't match (or better) time I did in my car, which was a bit disappointing. I did give up some time at the start by skipping launch, but not to cover all of the difference for sure. Few more runs would definitely help, but for the afternoon I didn't want to abuse that fresh set of tires any more and I planned to switch to Elise just for fun runs.

But, one of the organizers said that he knows the guy in FoRS and to cut it short, he got me a ride there instead. So, for afternoon runs it was all Ford!

He was running flipped 245 Rivals S 1.5s with gazillion runs, but still had decent grip. That was first time for me to run on them, so there was noting to compare them to. Overall, I found them pretty similar to RE71s, but that was all done in a car I have never driven as well, so take it with a grain of salt!

RS is an interesting beast! I though it would be closer to way X is due to torque vectoring and all, but they are quite different! First of all, car rotates on throttle more than anything else I have driven so far. Those engineers did a great job in that regard for sure. But, once off throttle, car felt like dead, without any tendency to do anything but going straight. But, once you applied the throttle magic begins to happen! Definitely something that you have to get used to, but it puts smiles on both driver and passenger for sure.

Throttle control software is also much quicker than one in X. It makes it feel like there is much more lag in EVO, but to me it looks like just electronics playing games. Because it reacts quicker to the pedal inputs, it also creates feel of much more power, but I don't thing that is as large as your pants trying to tell you. 1/4 mile numbers are clearly showing it not to be that much difference between the two as it feels. There is more power, but not as much.

Front grip was lower compare to my car as well, but car compensate that with extra rotation. You have to be ready for it and drive it as such in order to be at the right place on the course at the right time. Perhaps because I am used to the X, amount of rotation was a bit too much, but at the same time, X wouldn't hurt of having a bit more too. Basically, in X you have to trust the car that it will rotate enough when you get into the sweeper, which in the RS you have to trust it that it will keep the rear end under control once it swings it out. Both car do all of that, but in a completely different way. It is not an easy to trust X to do what it will and it does, while in RS you are thrown out already and rear is rotating and you are hoping you are not going to spin right there, and you don't!

Front grip numbers might be due to smaller rims (8" vs. 8.5") and lower amount of camber they can get compare to the X.

One more annoying thing was that panic break assistance. Apparently, every time you start to press the pedal a bit faster, computer locks all 4 wheels at once for a moment thinking driver wants to stop immediately even though it is not the car. Or at least, it shouldn't be the case when car is in Race Mode setting were that thing should be OFF for sure! Every time when I would try to adjust the speed between the segments it would lock all 4. And identical thing was experienced in FiST that I drove event before. If I had knew that was computer playing games, I could have don't something about it while out there, but I learned that later.

At the end, I would still take my car for B-Street compare to those two I drove. RS might have more power and feels quicker, but X was right there and it does everything much smoother and easier for the driver!


Oh, one more thing! Went to dealer today and they told me that error was for stuck AWD mode change button...go figure!

 

surprised you found the 8 to have slower steering, it's quicker than the X's? 13:1 vs 13.8:1, pretty close, but should have been nearly the same?

 

I hear you there from the numbers point of view, but I had to use more force and angles to get the same results. Perhaps, EVO X steer with the rear end much more than previous EVOs and that makes it feel like you have to turn steering wheel more...

 

Maybe it was a pre-05 without the ACD?

 

that would imply rear steering, which the X doesn't have, or constant drifting. Less force I can understand, but strange that the actual angle took more.

 

did those have a slower steering ratio? I was under the impression it never changed

 

It is listed as 2006 Mitsubishi Evolution IX

I even though it was an 8