|
I appreciate your input on this forum, even when it opposes my own. We are looking at things from a different perspective. I've spent a lot of time analyzing the mechanics of cars to accomplish a drivers goals. Often I;ve found that a more moderate approach, based on reaching a systematic balance of sorts, was more effective than striving to reach optimum obsolute perfection in ech individual detail. I tend to assume others are striving for a similar goal, so often express ideas and concepts that are less than perfrect, but can be made a part of a larger system.
Unfortunately, when a specific detail is presented in isolation and scrutinized, it can be peeled any number of ways. Then I get defensive, which is really stupid. Of course their might be better solutions to any proposed condition...
Take the tire question. Sidewall height and width issues. Yes it would be cool to have the width without the height. Unfortunately tires are sized in finite increments of fairly large steps. 40 to 45 aspect ratios, with few 35's in 17" sizes (assuming we don't want to change wheels to change diameter and width). It would be great to have a 315/35 that fit a 9" rim, for example, but it doesn't exist. I choose to accept a slight increase in diameter, to gain the width. From 255 to 265 is a 1/2" increase in width, yet just 1/8" in rolling radius height +/-. Others might see this as the wrong way to go... cool.
Anyway, I appreciate what you said, I accept your good intentions. Thanks. sorry for not responding to your posts below. we were off in the hills, then to San Diego and just didn't get to the machine.
Good luck at the Auto-x this weekend!
© 1997 -
2009
Jump Internet Inc. All rights reserved.
