Quote:
Originally Posted by lansdownplace
Principly because of a lowered center of gravitydue to the bodywork and the reinforcement in the chassis and a lower stance on the front. They dig into corners better. I notice the difference compared to my Brigand but the guys at BCL all say the same thing.
|
Okay, firstly I was talking about the 412 (as in the original 412), but I can't imagine the 412 S2 or S3 to be much different where it matters.
A slight change in centre of gravity, and a slight change is all that is achievable, will make no material difference to the car's cornering abilities.
Any gains would be far outweighed by changes fitting wider wheels and tyres.
If the chassis has been reinforced in later 412s it would only mean that BCL came to the conclusion that chassis rigidity had been compromised in the first place by losing the roof!
It is in the tyres, wheels and suspension set up where the big cornering gains can be made. But between the 411 and 412 (s1) there are no differences here, (I don't know if later 412 s2/3 differ in the suspension, but I doubt it).
Both 411 and 412 s1 will benefit from replacing the steel wheels with the lighter Avon Safety wheels and wider tyres. I noticed a marked improvement in my 411 with this change.
As for weight reduction, simply reducing
sprung weight (engine, transmission, body etc will mainly affect straight line acceleration and stopping distance. To improve cornering through weight changes you need to reduce the sprung/unsprung weight ratio by reducing the
unsprung weight (not the sprung weight). In fact reducing this ratio by reducing sprung weight can have a detrimental affect. Although the weight changes between the 400 and 360 engines would not have very much affect either way given the overall weight of these cars.