it's a given that the angle changes from start to finish. the question I ask is why would you not choose the method that has more advantages?
See, right here is where it seems, that you prove the other point. You admit, the angle changes as the car moves, so I fail to see how going to all the trouble to check all that other stuff has any advantage. Any advantage, if there was any to start, is immediately gone, as soon as the car moves. As soon as the rear moves ANY, the tranny and rear are no longer on the same angle plane, if you went to the trouble to set that, because, as stated, the rear swings in an arc. As SOON as that happens, that blows your whole theory, about matching angles and equal joint speed, because those parameters no longer exist. Equal angles and joint speed is important for a road car, that you want to ride super smooth, the joints to last 100,000 miles and so forth. Those type vehicles remain in the same position as where they were set up, 90% of the time and you only worry about road jounce or a heavy load. A drag car is only in the set up position, sitting in the pits, or on the return road. You are not likely to notice a less than smooth ride, or throw the shaft out, while towing or driving the car here.
Monte
well I agree with that but why not if it doesn't hurt anything? like I said rossler has solved many tailshaft and tranny problems (according to them) by doing it this way. if there is no down fall why not? does a 4 link cars rear travel as much as a leaf spring car? you are the expert not me but in my tiny mind (according to BG ) it just seems like a better way. and why do the guys I mention recommend this method?
) it just seems like a better way. and why do the guys I mention recommend this method?
