This may be a stupid question so forgive me if it is. I know that a stock Fiero on the drift pad gets about .86 g's and I heard that Cali Kid's Fiero had 1.19. Thats a big difference. What can you put on a Fiero to get it to handle that nice?

Thank you

Lower is, better shocks and struts, sway bars, stickier tires..

Mine did .89g with cut springs, crappy tires and an alignment that was way way off....

fiero_silva what year Fiero is that? I think that the pre-88's were .84-.86g skidpad while the '88s were probably more (I've never seen the skidpad on a stock '88). I'd be interested to skidpad my '88 GT (Koni shocks on the front with lowering springs, Y-rated tires), but I don't know where I could get it done. I bet I could get above .90g if silva can get .89 with cut springs, crappy tires, and an un-aligned car.

------------------
I am the signature virus, please put me in your signature so I can spread

For the latest Fiero apparel and accessories, please visit F-I-E-R-O's online store Fiero Lives Online

an 85.. it had a re-freshed suspension.. (new bjs all around)

Lateral G-forces are a function of tire grip primarily, so bigger tires, both width and taller (makes the contact patch longer) increase raw grip. However, there's more to making a car handle than raw traction. One of the key things is the suspension. The stickiest tires in the world won't help overall handling if the suspension can't keep the tires on the ground in a predictable and useable way. In fact, with a super sticky set of tires and heavy wheels the handling can become much worse than stock because bumps cause the tire to leave the pavement longer (unsprung weight and inertia effects), meaning that if you hit a bump in a corner you're much more likely to have a loss of traction event.

My old '81 Camaro with 265/50-VR15 Comp T/As would pull way over one G, but that G better have been over a smooth road surface.

JazzMan

I agree tires are the single greatest factor, followed by alignment CG, weight and weight distribution.

Street tire technology has come a long way since the 80s. I imagine the stock skidpad would be 5 or so points higher with stock suspension and real tires. More with updated suspension, lowered, and an alignment suited for turning grip.

1.19 G's is racecar handling. There shouldn't be a set of street tires out there that would be able even come close to this. Maybe that was peak G's, but not steady. I got to measure mine ('88 GT, FS lowering springs, Koni Specials, and Poly bushings, on Dunlop Sp8000's) and pulled a .86 in a cold parking lot on a cold 40 degree morning with cold tires using a G-tech pro.

------------------

'88 Fiero GT - 3.4L GM Crate engine
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/707857
'91 GMC Syclone - #449
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2067330
'02 Yamaha V-Max - it go fast

quote Originally posted by Zewerr: 1.19 G's is racecar handling. There shouldn't be a set of street tires out there that would be able even come close to this. Maybe that was peak G's, but not steady.

The record skidpad for a set of street tires is held by BF Goodrich G-Force T/As. They managed a 1.08 on a 200 foot skidpad in a tire shootout. This is a record, so anything higher on street tires is purely bs. You would need racing slicks to achieve anything higher, how much higher, who knows.

Im going to attempt a 1.10g with my car. Thats with tubular suspension, coilovers in each corner, sway bars, poly and big a$$ sticky tires. We will see.

quote Originally posted by Hornet: This may be a stupid question so forgive me if it is. I know that a stock Fiero on the drift pad gets about .86 g's and I heard that Cali Kid's Fiero had 1.19. Thats a big difference. What can you put on a Fiero to get it to handle that nice? Thank you

Cali kid must have gotten a bad batch in his bong to "record" a number that high. ain't gona happen with any street driven Fiero, and is unlikely with a race version. perhaps he saw a spike on his G-tech .

My .89 was with a g-tech pro in a mall parking lot at 2 am... Was probably close to +25c.

i'm nearly positive cali kid did not claim that high. i actually thought i read it as 1.09, but due to an above post think that's even a bit much. anything over 1g is serious braggin rights for a street car, and i'm positive he did break that mark, so congrats on that.

anyone know the kinda lateral g's an F1 car pulls? i could have sworn i heard numbers close to 2g's on some tv show, but now i'm beginning to doubt i remembered that correctly, lol.

quote Originally posted by fierce_gt: sure didn't look like it was doing 1.17 g's when i saw it fly off the course during the 20th show, lol. i kid

At that point I doubt it was. lol111!eleventy1

I have ridden in Cali's car and it is a sweet machine. There is no question that his handling is great, but I have trouble believing 1.19 g. I would believe over 1.0. Quite frankly I would be happy with 1.19 out of my IMSA and (as many already know) it is a full race chassis with 12" slicks. I have raced 2 stroke karts that would pull 1.30 to 1.35 g. It is a very un-natural feeling.

------------------
Paul

Home Built Tube Chassis IMSA Race Car - 3.8 lb./hp | 1987 Fiero GT 119,xxx, 3.1 motor, HHP swaybar, Full poly
For more IMSA Fiero info: http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/789315

I'm not a mathematician, nor do I play one at a Holiday Inn.

But how can any car achieve more than 1 lateral G?

If the car weighs 3000lbs, there is a total of 3000 lbs of pressure pushing the tires against the pavement. If the lateral force in any way exceeds the downward force, then doesn't the car break traction?

Or is it at that point that the car goes into a drift and the lateral force is conteracted not only by the downward force, but also by the forward propulsion of the drivetrain?

Just curious - and no, I'm not calling anybody a liar or anything else - this has nothing to do with claims or proofs or any of that crap - I'm speaking mathematically here because I've always wondered about exactly this.

------------------
Patrick W. Heinske -- LZeitgeist@aol.com
1988 Red Fiero Formula Convertible
*Desktop Photo Here*

quote Originally posted by crzyone: The record skidpad for a set of street tires is held by BF Goodrich G-Force T/As. They managed a 1.08 on a 200 foot skidpad in a tire shootout. This is a record, so anything higher on street tires is purely bs. You would need racing slicks to achieve anything higher, how much higher, who knows.

They used a Skyline as a test vehicle so that they can compare tires. Modded suspensions can make a difference.
"The 1.08g cornering figure is the highest ever recorded for a street car at the Tire Rack facility. "

Mecedes Benz built a prototype car with variable camber and on street tires hit 1.28g's

In March of 2001 1FST2M6 had his car tested and it pulled a 1.13g.
https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Archives/Archive-000002/HTML/20010924-1-006283.html

I'm not saying anyones claims are accurate, Just that more than 1.08g's is possible with a modded car.

quote Originally posted by crzyone: The record skidpad for a set of street tires is held by BF Goodrich G-Force T/As. They managed a 1.08 on a 200 foot skidpad in a tire shootout .

First off. I have absolutely no clue where the Curse is when it comes to those "Lateral G #'s",
but you just made me feel a whole lot better over paying an IMO outrageous price for the rubber the thing is rolling on.

Thanks
Tina

quote Originally posted by Tina: First off. I have absolutely no clue where the Curse is when it comes to those "Lateral G #'s", but you just made me feel a whole lot better over paying an IMO outrageous price for the rubber the thing is rolling on. Thanks Tina

Do you have the G force T/As?

I think the only way to get reliable and accurate lateral G numbers, is to make a skidpad, and go by your maximum sustained speed. Gtech isn't reliable, it probably looks for spikes.

quote Originally posted by LZeitgeist: I'm not a mathematician, nor do I play one at a Holiday Inn. But how can any car achieve more than 1 lateral G? If the car weighs 3000lbs, there is a total of 3000 lbs of pressure pushing the tires against the pavement. If the lateral force in any way exceeds the downward force, then doesn't the car break traction? Or is it at that point that the car goes into a drift and the lateral force is conteracted not only by the downward force, but also by the forward propulsion of the drivetrain? Just curious - and no, I'm not calling anybody a liar or anything else - this has nothing to do with claims or proofs or any of that crap - I'm speaking mathematically here because I've always wondered about exactly this.

the really neat thing about physics when dealing with angular velocities and accelerations etc, mass does NOT matter.

when you crunch the formulas mass cancels out. so cornering has nothing to do with mass, and that is why you can achieve higher g forces.

basically, the car wants to go in a straight line because of inertia, which is directly related to mass. and the car will corner because of traction(friction) that is also directly related to mass. so basically, if you increase mass, you increase traction, AND inertia. so the car is no more likely to make that corner whether you add mass or remove it.

it's all about the coefficient of friction(tires and road surface). that is what allows you to improve traction. that coefficient will also increase with suspension mods indirectly. by keeping more of the tire in contact with the road, friction will obviously increase.

so basically, from my physics perspective. the biggest sole factor for handling is tires and road surface. but suspension work all indirectly affects it as well. i mean a tire will only be doing it's job as well as the suspension allows it to.

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: Do you have the G force T/As? .

Yeah, and it's not like I had a choice about it either.
O.K., with these wheels your tire choices are the GForce T/A's or the GForce T/A's.Which ones will it be, mam?

quote Originally posted by R Runner: Let me qualify my previous post........ If Cali said it, I believe him. However I would assume that there are conditions to expalin the high reading of 1.17 g's I would like to let Cali weigh in on this number. Tom.... you out there? Paul

Conditions were many !!! Such as ideal track conditions, tire temps, tire pressures, shock/strut adjustments, 4 wheel alignment settings, Professional Techs, and Professional Driver, just to name a few. A couple of the Tech's that did Skidpad testing had heard about my car through the "grape vine" and where interested in testing it (on the side). As I had posted quite some time ago, the car was run at the GM Milford Proving Grounds, numerous runs were made with adjustments betweens runs to dial in that number, which even amazed the Tech's performing the tests. In talking to the Tech's, they felt that the modications done to the cradle in my car contributed greatly to the rear tires maintaining a maximum contact patch. Can I explain all the dynamics of part inter-relationship that took place on my car to get it there??? Nope, I can't. Best I can say is that on a given day with the right adjustments and the right driver, the car delivered that number.

I've got an article somewhere (haven't seen the mag in a couple years, but know I haven't thrown it out), that is on the Fiero, regarding suspension parts, settings, to get it over 1.0 g. If I can locate it, I'll see if I can photocopy and post here. In the article, they G tested various parts, and suspension settings. I know this won't help you out Paul, but it might be of interest to some with stock Fiero's.

Tom

quote Originally posted by California Kid: Conditions were many !!! Such as ideal track conditions, tire temps, tire pressures, shock/strut adjustments, 4 wheel alignment settings, Professional Techs, and Professional Driver, just to name a few. A couple of the Tech's that did Skidpad testing had heard about my car through the "grape vine" and where interested in testing it (on the side). As I had posted quite some time ago, the car was run at the GM Milford Proving Grounds, numerous runs were made with adjustments betweens runs to dial in that number, which even amazed the Tech's performing the tests. In talking to the Tech's, they felt that the modications done to the cradle in my car contributed greatly to the rear tires maintaining a maximum contact patch. Can I explain all the dynamics of part inter-relationship that took place on my car to get it there??? Nope, I can't. Best I can say is that on a given day with the right adjustments and the right driver, the car delivered that number. I've got an article somewhere (haven't seen the mag in a couple years, but know I haven't thrown it out), that is on the Fiero, regarding suspension parts, settings, to get it over 1.0 g. If I can locate it, I'll see if I can photocopy and post here. In the article, they G tested various parts, and suspension settings. I know this won't help you out Paul, but it might be of interest to some with stock Fiero's. Tom

That makes sense. The 1.17 is a solid number using the method you used. Heck, I would be happy if I could get the G-Tech Pro running right and make a few passes on the track. It is unfortunate, but I have never had time (or money) to run my car enough to do any fine tuning. I'm sure it is capible of FAR more than it is set up for now and it still impresses me every time I get in.

Good to hear from you.

Paul

1.17 isnt an ourageous claim if your read up on the cars history. a guy i work with has an audi s4 and hes pulling 1.12g's.
and my froiends celica is pulling 1.1g. if you have the $$$ for sticky tires and suspension its possible

------------------

Sorry, I was .02 G's off, woops. By the way, how much would it run you to get a stock fiero up to 1 G?

I am surprised that more autocrossers or road racers haven't chimed in. But, just for info, every autocross driving school I have been to has had a 200' skid pad so that the student could learn the lateral limits of his car (and sometimes of his/her limits, also). Most regions have at least one driving school each season - - check with your local club!

My little white 2600lb street Cadero is also a daily driver like California Kid's car (but not as pretty). Anybody at Wheatstock saw what it could do - especially on that tight postage stamp size area we were given to hold the autocross. The only car to beat it was Team Python in their race-prepped 2200lb car - - and had my son had a clean run, Tom wouldn't have come close! Road Runner, in his tube framed monster would have eaten it up on a more open course, but as tight as this course was he couldn't get any momentum going.

Of course, I have a lot more $ in the suspension than I do in the powertrain, and it took several years to get it dialed in after it was built. But like Cali Kid, I also can exceed 1.1G in my street Fiero. As a side note, it runs in the family - - My son won a skidpad contest at Topeka in his Street Prepared '84 Camaro at 1.14G's (check out the 5 page article in Road and Track, Feb 1999)

Anyway, when you turn both ways as fast as you can go, even while left foot braking and accellerating at the same time - - there is no sensation like it. Just ask those that participated in the track days at the 20th or Wheatstock, or the autocross in Topeka. Going straight under acceleration (positive G's) for 12 - 15 seconds is not nearly as adrenaline generating as accellerating, braking, drifting and turning for 60 - 150 seconds on a road course, or especially the constant adrenaline for a minute or so in an autocross. The body experiences positive, negative, AND lateral G's out there - - sometimes two G forces at the same time, or even all three within a fraction of a second - nothing like it!!

G

[This message has been edited by cadero2dmax (edited 01-16-2006).]

^ Amen brutha.

I was thinking the same thing.....and its quite true what u speak of in terms of handling limits and the forces u feel when doing road/auto-X....nothing like it. i find myself even 'tired' and breathign quite heavy after a serious run of either lol. espeically since our cars take just that much more skill/coordination to drive over a fwd car.

im actually having a nice back and forth jab-fest with a buddy who drives an 04 WRX STi and have to hear it from him how "his car outhandles" everything on the road...blahblahblah, and of coruse AWD. fine i KNOW the car is wicked in that regard, but i tell him to come on up vs. a done up fiero (motor AND suspension) and we'll do a "G" test

quote Originally posted by fierce_gt: anyone know the kinda lateral g's an F1 car pulls? i could have sworn i heard numbers close to 2g's on some tv show, but now i'm beginning to doubt i remembered that correctly, lol.

Short answer: +/- 3gs

Extended version:
Formula one cars run in the 3g range. some of them have to wear pillows on the side of their heads to keep their neck straight. They don't even use full race slicks to achieve this and for them is a big function of downforce. A typical formula one car can generate well over twice it's weight in downforce ( hence the reason they can theoretically drive upside down) and remember those little suckers weight in at just around 1100lbs and before the new engine regulations (1000hp v-10s to 750est hp v-8s) you can see they were almost 1hp per lb.

quote Originally posted by 3.8T: ^ Amen brutha. I was thinking the same thing.....and its quite true what u speak of in terms of handling limits and the forces u feel when doing road/auto-X....nothing like it. i find myself even 'tired' and breathign quite heavy after a serious run of either lol. espeically since our cars take just that much more skill/coordination to drive over a fwd car. im actually having a nice back and forth jab-fest with a buddy who drives an 04 WRX STi and have to hear it from him how "his car outhandles" everything on the road...blahblahblah, and of coruse AWD. fine i KNOW the car is wicked in that regard, but i tell him to come on up vs. a done up fiero (motor AND suspension) and we'll do a "G" test

My Cadero is an '85SE with a slightly warmed 4.9 and Isuzu 5 speed. That engine is definitely a torque motor, with peak torque at almost off-idle. It is RPM limited, but the power and torque curves make that engine/tranny combo almost perfect for ax'ing - 2nd gear could be a bit taller, but - -

The supsension? Front is a modified stock suspension with improved dynamics, Koni orange shocks, a 1 1/8" swaybar, and 325lb springs (that retain stock ride height). I DO run the shimmy damper, even while on course, BTW.

The rear suspension is a modified '88 cradle with a raised roll center, utilizing coil-over shocks with 8" 400lb springs. The swaybar is a stock '88 rear. The tires I currently use are 10" wide Yokohama slicks (actually, they are take-offs from Pro-Mazda formula cars) on 15x9 wheels.

Using timing equipment from the SCCA NeOkla region a few years ago, the Cadero registered 1.12 G's on a 200' skidpad set up at Davis Field in Muskogee (a very grippy concrete surface we used to utilize for local and Divisional events). That was with BFG R-1's and not the slicks - - I would think the slicks would do better.

Anyway, there are quite a few Fiero autocrossers that your buddy wouldn't want to run up on. But that isn't quite fair, his is a stock machine with stock suspension and stock motor - while all of ours are modified. His Subaru might have an advanced AWD, but his power doesn't come on until after a terrible amount of turbo lag. His horsepower and torque peak at awkwardly high RPMs. Not conducive to autocrossing, but hellish in a rally!!

G

[This message has been edited by cadero2dmax (edited 01-16-2006).]

One G is the theoretical limit for one smooth surface sliding on another smooth surface. Neither tires not pavement constitute smooth surfaces of the theoretical variety. Tire rubber extends down into irregularities in the pavement surface, which creates force vectors that add to those attributable solely to friction. Drag races accelerate at greater than one G all the time because of these additional force vectors.

I still smile when I think back to the 60s when some slide rule types "determined" that it was phisically impossible to accelerate to over ~200 MPH in a quarter mile due to the limits of traction.

quote Originally posted by fierce_gt: the really neat thing about physics when dealing with angular velocities and accelerations etc, mass does NOT matter. when you crunch the formulas mass cancels out. so cornering has nothing to do with mass, and that is why you can achieve higher g forces. basically, the car wants to go in a straight line because of inertia, which is directly related to mass. and the car will corner because of traction(friction) that is also directly related to mass. so basically, if you increase mass, you increase traction, AND inertia. so the car is no more likely to make that corner whether you add mass or remove it. it's all about the coefficient of friction(tires and road surface). that is what allows you to improve traction. that coefficient will also increase with suspension mods indirectly. by keeping more of the tire in contact with the road, friction will obviously increase. so basically, from my physics perspective. the biggest sole factor for handling is tires and road surface. but suspension work all indirectly affects it as well. i mean a tire will only be doing it's job as well as the suspension allows it to.

In addition to friction, there's also a mechanical "interlock" between the road and tire; the rubber "grabs" the irregularities in the road surface. This doesn't buy you a whole lot with any normal street tire, but it does explain how lateral G figures in excess of 1 are obtained.

quote Originally posted by fierce_gt: i'm nearly positive cali kid did not claim that high. i actually thought i read it as 1.09, but due to an above post think that's even a bit much. anything over 1g is serious braggin rights for a street car, and i'm positive he did break that mark, so congrats on that. anyone know the kinda lateral g's an F1 car pulls? i could have sworn i heard numbers close to 2g's on some tv show, but now i'm beginning to doubt i remembered that correctly, lol.

If I'm not mistaken, the 2005 F1 cars were pulling like 4 gs, if I recall correctly. I think it was on Allianz' little BMW Pre-race show that they show on SpeedTV.. I think it's called Inside F1. They said the drivers had to be very muscular and work out a lot in order to maintain control of the car at 4g's, which is pretty close to what Fighter pilots experience.

I would REALLY like to see some good numbers from my Fiero GT, I think that some G-Force or otherwise Z-rated tires (in the widest trim that can fit onto the stock 15's) would do wonders for me, as the BF Goodrich Traction T/A H-rated tires are a bit... subpar, so far as handling is concerned.

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure it was 4g's.

-Mulholland GT

------------------
1986 GT Getrag 5-speed

MULHOLLAND GT