[ZWA SS]

I am curious as to why the 1LE, in either configuration, didn't follow the square setup?
I haven't seen any mention through any of the other threads.

[mjk3888]

I imagine that a combination of better chassis and the E-LSD helps the car avoid pushing that can sometimes be caused by rear tires being a lot wider than the fronts.

So a square setup isn't needed. However I would be interested in seeing if 305's can be fit up front to see if it creates better turn in or if it creates an oversteer situation.

[gajagfan]

Originally Posted by ZWA SS

I am curious as to why the 1LE, in either configuration, didn't follow the square setup?
I haven't seen any mention through any of the other threads.

I had the same questions. There were many with a lot of track experience who explained the benefits of square set-up to us novices, and now this. I assume the gen 6 chassis handles different than the gen 5, so I can see a change, but it makes me think that square is not as important as many proposed.

PS: To me having a car that acted neutral (as little as possible oversteer and understeer) would be the desired goal, no matter how you went about getting it.

[mjk3888]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

I had the same questions. There were many with a lot of track experience who explained the benefits of square set-up to us novices, and now this. I assume the gen 6 chassis handles different than the gen 5, so I can see a change, but it makes me think that square is not as important as many proposed.

PS: To me having a car that acted neutral (as little as possible oversteer and understeer) would be the desired goal, no matter how you went about getting it.

Think of other super cars. Most have staggered width wheels. A square setup doesn't always make for a better handling car, but it can help tremendously to sort out some issues. Think of Porsche 911's in general they have much larger rear tires than front. For example the 2015 911 GT3 has 245 fronts and 305 rears, this is to aid in the prevention of the natural tendency of oversteer that a rear engine car will have. Even still the GT3 has to implement rear wheel steering and a host of other technologies to keep it planted see here. On the other hand the 5th gen Camaro had some severe understeer issues. A combination of large front tires and not having over sized rear tires helped to sort this out.

Quite simply the 6th gen platform may not have this issue. It probably has a better balance. So square tires aren't needed. So the people who preached to you about the square setup are right in reference to the 5th gen, but it seems it may not be on the 6th gen. The E-LSD could be the tech allowing the car to still rotate with larger rear tires similar to the 911 just not as drastic as using rear steer.

[toehead93]

The sway bars are the easiest tool used to offset under-steer created by the staggered tires. Look at the sway bar specs between the gen 5 1LE and ZL1, although the ZL1 has staggered tires it doesn't have under-steer issues because the sway bars were setup to deal with it. The 1LE sway bars were designed for square tires. If you have a gen5 SS and want under-steer gone with stock staggered wheels you want to use the ZL1 sway bars. If you change your SS to square tires, use the 1LE swaybars.

I have not seen the specs for the sway bars on the 1LE but I imagine they are different then the SS or they have the same bars which means the SS doesn't have much under-steer to begin with. Can anyone confirm the sway bar specs between the two?

[detltu]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

I had the same questions. There were many with a lot of track experience who explained the benefits of square set-up to us novices, and now this. I assume the gen 6 chassis handles different than the gen 5, so I can see a change, but it makes me think that square is not as important as many proposed.

PS: To me having a car that acted neutral (as little as possible oversteer and understeer) would be the desired goal, no matter how you went about getting it.

It has been discussed somewhere. I believe the answer was along the lines of what gajagfan said.

The 5th gen had a square setup to help reduce the understeer present in the regular SS. The 6th gen was more neutral to begin with and this wasn't a concern.

[booyaa56]

Would anybody know what the offset of the rims would be? Just curious to see if they would be similar to the 5th gen 1LE???

[mjk3888]

Originally Posted by toehead93

The sway bars are the easiest tool used to offset under-steer created by the staggered tires. Look at the sway bar specs between the gen 5 1LE and ZL1, although the ZL1 has staggered tires it doesn't have under-steer issues because the sway bars were setup to deal with it. The 1LE sway bars were designed for square tires. If you have a gen5 SS and want under-steer gone with stock staggered wheels you want to use the ZL1 sway bars. If you change your SS to square tires, use the 1LE swaybars.

I have not seen the specs for the sway bars on the 1LE but I imagine they are different then the SS or they have the same bars which means the SS doesn't have much under-steer to begin with. Can anyone confirm the sway bar specs between the two?

Al mentioned that the Stab bars where upgraded for the 6th gen SS 1LE as well.

That is also a way to help reduce understeer in a car, but I think we are comparing apples and oranges when we talk about how they went about tuning a 4,100lb 580HP car and a 3,800lb 426HP car.

Also lets not forget that the ZL1 had MRC and the 1LE did not. A lot of differences between the two cars.

[gajagfan]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

Think of other super cars. Most have staggered width wheels. A square setup doesn't always make for a better handling car, but it can help tremendously to sort out some issues. Think of Porsche 911's in general they have much larger rear tires than front. For example the 2015 911 GT3 has 245 fronts and 305 rears, this is to aid in the prevention of the natural tendency of oversteer that a rear engine car will have. Even still the GT3 has to implement rear wheel steering and a host of other technologies to keep it planted see here. On the other hand the 5th gen Camaro had some severe understeer issues. A combination of large front tires and not having over sized rear tires helped to sort this out.

Quite simply the 6th gen platform may not have this issue. It probably has a better balance. So square tires aren't needed. So the people who preached to you about the square setup are right in reference to the 5th gen, but it seems it may not be on the 6th gen. The E-LSD could be the tech allowing the car to still rotate with larger rear tires similar to the 911 just not as drastic as using rear steer.

I am aware of what you are saying and agree. I thought it was clear that the gen 5 1LE setup was designed (along with a splitter and reduced rear spoiler over a standard SS) to reduce understeer. The stretched rear in sense reduced rear traction, and the bigger front increased front traction. Al says just about that in the video introducing the car, but someone jumped all lover me when I said this. Anyhow, I agree with what you said.

[90503]

I would agree with all that's been said above, and just add this...

The square set-up also provided the ability to use various tire and wheel set-ups. The staggered set-ups seemed to have limited choices for track (or street) tires that give you the same height and all around. You can even rotate tires for longer life, unlike staggered.

I'm sure the 6thGen's staggered set-up is an improvement over the 5th's, but I hope going square on the 6th is also doable, and won't upset MRC or Stabilitrak. Aftermarket tire and wheel choices will be more of an easier option as well.

[mjk3888]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

I am aware of what you are saying and agree. I thought it was clear that the gen 5 1LE setup was designed (along with a splitter and reduced rear spoiler over a standard SS) to reduce understeer. The stretched rear in sense reduced rear traction, and the bigger front increased front traction. Al says just about that in the video introducing the car, but someone jumped all lover me when I said this. Anyhow, I agree with what you said.

Not sure why they jumped all over you. Just because the 1LE and Z/28 ran square setups didn't mean that all performance cars on all chassis should. If it was that easy every manufacturer would do it.

Sometimes it's a shock when those kind of people learn that they may not know it all. Sometimes entertaining sometimes not so much. Always makes me smile though.

We are all here to learn and discuss things. That's why I join forums. To learn. Not to teach. I have done a lot of searching here and on other forums to learn about E-LSD, PDR, Performance Traction Management. I enjoy learning about the wild stuff that engineers are doing with affordable cars now.

[Gen_Nick3.8]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

I imagine that a combination of better chassis and the E-LSD helps the car avoid pushing that can sometimes be caused by rear tires being a lot wider than the fronts.

So a square setup isn't needed. However I would be interested in seeing if 305's can be fit up front to see if it creates better turn in or if it creates an oversteer situation.

Well remember the 5th Gen 1LE had a square setup and putting the ZL1 rear size created an under steer issue. Engineers said that the square setup was perfect. So I assume that the 6Th gen they found that this tire setup was perfect for the chassis

[chrisvr6]

Originally Posted by booyaa56

Would anybody know what the offset of the rims would be? Just curious to see if they would be similar to the 5th gen 1LE???

[mjk3888]

Originally Posted by Gen_Nick3.8

Well remember the 5th Gen 1LE had a square setup and putting the ZL1 rear size created an under steer issue. Engineers said that the square setup was perfect. So I assume that the 6Th gen they found that this tire setup was perfect for the chassis

I'm sure it is but it would be interesting to see if the how the car responded to the change.

I likely will just keep to original setup until the goodyears are worn then I may see if I can fit 295F/315R Michelin Sport Cups to replace the standard 285F/305R

we shall see in time.