Banked Trac k Stagger

alvin l nunley

Premium User
From this picture, can you see the need for less stagger on a banked track? I use 25° only for illustration purposes, I doubt there's many tracks with that much banking. Anyway, at 25°, the path's each wheel is following are closer together, so less stagger on a banked track. If I keep on increasing the degrees of banking, the difference gets smaller and smaller. If the banking was 90°, can you see that there would be no need for stagger. Stagger is greatest on a flat track and gets less and less as the track incorporates more banking.
25 deg banking.jpg
 

paulkish

old fart
Anyway, at 25°, the path's each wheel is following are closer together
Yes if you relate 25*s to the original 0* 'flat' of the track.

LOL Al and not laughing at you it's just funny, the wheels are still 34 apart if you relate to the 24* 'flat' of the new banked track.

Is that what's had you hung up for all these years?

At all times the tires are 34 apart and at any given point on the track, the two tires relate to a flat track.
The only time stagger makes a difference is if you relate the differences to the same track.
Your comparing apples and oranges. Compare stagger and what it does when change on the same point or same place on the track.
If the track is banked then a stagger change will still changes things according while it's at the same place on the same banked track.

I now see what's been hanging you up and I hope you see it.
 
Last edited:
As posted in the other thread perfect rear stagger on paper for a flat track, corner radius of LR at 50 ft is 1.722 same deal at 10 deg banking is 1.697 so little less yes on paper, however so small you would not make a change, when we raced a banked track that got screaming fast for the race on a day race at 8 sec laps we had to go with little more rear stagger to maintain best speed. where on a normal Friday night 10 sec track we did not have to change, Don't ask me why 100 % to explain it, I always chalked it up to the added G forces squatting the outside tires more.
 
I'm with Paul on this , the actual contact is still 34 inches apart .
Not 30.8 inches .
Which in the other thread where he showed less distance center to center required less rear stagger, we all know that's not how it works on track if you narrow RTW moving wheels in tight, it will tighten the kart and require more rear stagger and a lot more to compensate.
 

alvin l nunley

Premium User
Take a look at this picture, now I know you're never going to drive on a track that is 90°, but think about this, how much stagger do you think I would need if I was on that track. The point is, as I rotate this axle assembly closer to 0°, the stagger needed would be more and more.
90 deg banking.jpg
 
Take a look at this picture, now I know you're never going to drive on a track that is 90°, but think about this, how much stagger do you think I would need if I was on that track. The point is, as I rotate this axle assembly closer to 0°, the stagger needed would be more and more.
View attachment 8580
I think we all would agree with this statement, however as you went closer to zero ( flat ) the tread patch distance would stay the same as well.
 

alvin l nunley

Premium User
I think we all would agree with this statement, however as you went closer to zero ( flat ) the tread patch distance would stay the same as well.
That's my whole point, the axle stays the same length, but the amount of stagger needed changes. A banked track needs less stagger. The more banking, the less stagger.
 

flattop1

Dawg 89
The two tires are in different planes also . Thus the outside tire radius is longer .
Here we are with a gear is a gear . The hands on pepole disagree with the mathmatics and resuling out come .
 

paulkish

old fart
At least from my current perspective we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Is your thinking the only thing stagger does is help you turn?
Then your correct if you don't turn you don't need stagger.

If the only thing stagger does is help you turn then the amount needed is totally dependent on the amount of turning you do.

If it's totally dependent on the amount of turning you do then banking has nothing nothing to do with the amount of stagger needed.
I think the last sentence is a true statement.
I'll back it up by saying the only thing banking does is allow you to go faster and in the turn you create more g force.

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


Stagger would then need to be adjusted to changing g forces which have nothing at all to do with banking except that different bankings can allows you to go faster and make more g forces.

So, when banking increases while maintaining the same amount of turn or radius you will need to adjust stagger to compensate for the additional g forces. I think that's correct Al and thank you for your input allowing me to put the correct 2 and 2 together and get 4.


And it takes me back to my own original theory about tire surface speed and how increasing stagger increases the difference in surface speed between the two rear tires. When banking increases we've already applied more load to the rear tires. The increased difference in surface speed allows us to put the amount of slip needed to be fast back into the LR tire. If perfect then the increased potential to slip puts you back to what would be needed in the ability to slip or free up the LR tire, before g forces increased.

It means the amount of banking not only allows you to go faster it redirects how forces are applied to your tires.
Right now thanks to your incorrect thinking Al i'm pretty much convinced banking only should be looked at in terms of how it changes your ability to go fast in a turn, how it effects the amount of g forces you create and how weight is directed.

The above blended with radius will give you what's needed for stagger. That is except grip, tire hardness and air pressure along with sidewall flex need to be mixed in to.

... do you see it now Al? ... :)
 
That's my whole point, the axle stays the same length, but the amount of stagger needed changes. A banked track needs less stagger. The more banking, the less stagger.
Yes .025 less on paper for ever 10* of banking increase ( per Todd Godwin ), however If we do the math from flat to 90* we don't end up a zero stagger So I'm still not sure your correct, BUT now your back pedaling your now statement is not the picture you just painted, plus yesterday when you decreased center to center measurement From 34" to 31.25 your stagger decreased even more, SO all were pointing out is for a normal oval racing kart with normal avg Maxxis or Burris tires for the center to center measurement to be 34" the wheel spacing's would have to be 3" from the frame, so lets say your LR is out 2" and RR 1" now real close 34" center to center, Now you move that LR in tight and RR in tight closer to the 31" as figured yesterday, that kart would plow like a dump truck with rear chains pushing snow on ice just from that 3" change, yet your math showed less stagger needed, So what I'm pointing out is something wrong with your math and theory, take the less stagger for banked track out of the equation.
 

paulkish

old fart
The more banking, the less stagger.
That is not a calculated truth.

Stagger calculation for radius as in a styrofoam cup and center to center on the tires has nothing to do with banking. It only relates to radius. Your bringing in things which have nothing to do with radi needed for exact stagger.
Your then trying to fudge them to something which seems to fit what others tell you is needed racing.

Banking has nothing at all to do with any radius of stagger.

That Al is because no matter where the two tires are in space, on a flat track or on a banked track, the calculation is about a moment in time and at any moment in time the measurement is taken via a straight line between the centers of each rear tire.

Your kidding and tricking yourself to believe it's another way and then your so convinced you can't see why it's not accepted.
Garbage in Al and garbage out even though your calculations are 100% correct.

The only reason you can't make your spread sheet work on this one is you had no place to go and copy someone else's correct spread sheet, then converting it to look like it was your own.
 
The two tires are in different planes also . Thus the outside tire radius is longer .
Here we are with a gear is a gear . The hands on pepole disagree with the mathmatics and resuling out come .
Except this time the math's not adding up, a ratio is a ratio math the ratio is always the same.
 

paulkish

old fart
The thread you started Al has been good for me.

I can now completely separate thinking between banking and stagger.
Banking is just that and only what it is and how it effects speed and g forces.
Stagger as a calculation is only what it is a calculation based on two different radii.
How banking and stagger effect slip and grip at each rear tire is a third thing which is the result of the first two.
And then there's a fourth thing which is how banking effects weight projection.

I'm thinking i'm close on the four items above so long as i/we don't loose track of the whole process is about how we effect grip.
The why of how we effect grip is about 1 thru 4.

LOL, it becomes all about knowing what you need to do to be fast given circumstances, without having to worry about all the variables and calculations.

this has been a fun write. thanks Al
 

paulkish

old fart
Wheres the picture that shows the forces on the kart and driver at 25 deg.?
The picture which is in your mind will take an artist to produce it, not a mathematician. ... :)

XXX#40, I think your picture is clearer then any calculation you might find. ... :)

Your art presentation is on the track to be seen and as they say with art, if it's good it will also be experienced.
 
This has been fun and reassuring while learning, can't wait to see Al's response now, and the smart guy's that usually chime in, to potentially understand and learn more. Why is smoke rolling out of my computer lol !!
 

95 shaw

Premium User
Here's my question.

Does your track transition from straight to corner banking? Or is it a hamster wheel, lying on its side?

Transition, in any case, is where stagger need shows itself.
 
Have you ever let go of your steering wheel (just for a sec on a caution lap) on a flat turn vs. a banked turn? Isn't the banked turn helping you turn so you can go faster? Doesn't a banked track warrant a change in your front end geometry vs. a flat track? And, isn't it dependent on how tight the turn is? I think it is a lot more than just thinking about stagger. We got to apply some physics to these theories.

Brian #89
 
Top