JordanMugen wrote: ↑
Wed Jul 07, 2021 3:17 pm
It's very good, but isn't it setup to understeer with the standard chassis settings despite being mid-engined?
I am sure the Lotus will be much more neutral out of the box in typical Lotus fashion, without having to tinker with swaybars, spring rates or the like as Corvette enthusiasts may feel they "need" to do. :)
rave more about cars that have spot-on neutral chassis settings out of the box -- be it the Alpine A110 (lift-off oversteer ahoy by L'argus at the Nordschliefe
or on Best Motoring: "very sharp handling, great fun"
), Lotus Evora, or a humble Ford Fiesta ST, EP3 Civic Type R or Peugeot 205 GTi -- so it does seem strange that a manufacturer like Chevrolet would deliberately set understeer, knowing that this will attract a lot
of criticism and reduce the fondness and hype with which the car is received.
But the journalists do have a fair point in that is annoying to have a car that needs to be modified out of the box, just to perform how it should do in the first place. So they rightly praise cars which are 'correct' with their factory settings. :)
having a little self-administered experience of modifying a car for maximum cornering capability ....
I have said a car isn't now certifiable for public road use without characteristics broadly labelled as understeer
(by analogy with the certification requirements of aircraft for the utility and public transport categories)
it seems a good time to ask outright if that is true
perverse control inputs can produce without skill an illusion liked by journalists of a non-understeer characteristic
perverse ie cornering at less than maximum capability combined with excessive rear axle torque
(in my house these perverse control inputs are known as Clarksons)