What is Reddit's opinion of Engineer to Win (Motorbooks Workshop)?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

I have a few books on the subject as well. And it all started here:

https://www.amazon.com/Engineer-Motorbooks-Workshop-Carroll-Smith/dp/0879381868

Back in the day, I had a wonderful, 1,000 page machining textbook that I would give anything to get back. So much lost knowledge! Damn.

Today I made pretty awesome cupcakes So I have that going on, anyway. :)

Is English not your first language? That might explain the confusion.

>Shocks have a huge influence on suspension geometry, this is evident solely by the the change in a wheels camber dependent on shock movement

You're mistaken, again, here. Shock movement doesn't dictate wheel camber. Shock movement is not-nor-ever-is the cause of suspension movement. It is the result of suspension movement.

>Shocks have a huge influence on suspension geometry, this is evident solely by the the change in a wheels camber dependent on shock movement, and to use an example you mentioned, jack a car up and the place another jack under a wheel, raise the level of that wheel on both a vehicle with a coilover setup and a seperate spring and shock setup, in both cases the wheels camber will change. This is a fundamental fact of how suspension work

Again, you're erroneously conflating suspension geometry with shock damping. The geometry doesn't change because the shock compresses. The shock compresses because the geometry changes.

Toe and camber change during bump (on a macphearson) are controlled exclusively by LCA inner joint location, balljoint, outer tie-rod location, strut bearing location, and steering rack location. The strut is irrelevant.

> in the vehicle mentioned gas shocks were not in existence when it was built

This is both wrong and pedantic. Monroe started producing gas shocks in 1980. This truck, being an 89, came from the factory equipped with gas charged shocks.

Perhaps is my fault for saying de-gassed. That's probably a local colloquialism. I should have specifically said "remove the damping medium". The point still stands.

I say do the experiment. Swap a good shock for a non-functional shock and tell me the camber, toe, and caster curves of the suspension design have changed. You can't, because it's not true.

This part will probably blow your mind. You can design a macphearson suspension with without a coil-over-shock that uses a telescopic compensating (non damping) upper shaft and use an externally mounted shock and the camber, caster, and toe curves of the system will be identical to that of the same design with an integrated coil-over-shock. The mounting of the shock does not define the movement of the spindle. Ever.

I think this is where the misunderstanding is coming from. I believe you are saying this:

>the shock determines how far the suspension moves during input

which is true. I'm not arguing that. But what you aren't understanding is that the shock doesn't define the arc the suspension moves through. And the shock doesn't cause the suspension to move. The suspension moving causes the shock to move.

>for my last point ill refer your mention of steering rack location and steering knuckle location, that by design is to allow vehicles to self correct steering (like when you let go of the wheel after turning a corner and it turns itself back) and also in tandem with the entire steering design, thats why different vehicles of different sizes or weights have differing angles of steering knuckles and differing steering rack placements.

This is also completely wrong. Steering rack location and knuckle location defines ackerman geometry and bump-steer. Return-to-center is controlled entirely by caster. The difference in ackerman design is a function of wheelbase, not weight. Weight is a factor in anti-dive. And steering rack placement is controlled by engine and oil-pan clearances. Inner-balljoint locations are controlled by rack height and inner LCA width.

>, considering this is a rear shock mounting location, with no need for a turning movement such as the front wheels have, then why do the shocks have top mounts, top mounts that if worn need to be replaced though they create less than 1mm of a difference in mounting position?

shock mounts get replaced because the free movement of the damaged mount doesn't allow linear loading of the shock. It changes the effective shock damping rate.

>And saying that, take the front shocks out of any vehicle and try drive it and let me know how well the steering works. If shocks are as insignificant as you claim the steering should work just fine

The steering does work fine. But again, you're not isolating variables here. The steering geometry remains unchanged. What changes is the amount of travel the suspension actually goes through.

** this discussion is not about how much the suspension compresses or extends. **

I need you to understand the bolded part. If you can't understand that then we can't even agree on definition of terms here. I've literally designed suspensions for race cars.

Please. Read a book on suspension design. I recommend Engineer to Win as a primer.

https://www.amazon.com/Engineer-Motorbooks-Workshop-Carroll-Smith/dp/0879381868

If you want to learn what affects what in real time you can get a demo version of Performance Trends Suspension Analyzer https://www.performancetrends.com/SuspAnzr.htm

One thing you'll note, on their LCA demo picture, there's no pivot point for the shock and coil spring on the SLA suspension because the don't define movement.

https://www.performancetrends.com/graphics/Suspension-Analyzer/Suspension-Analysis-software-Main-Screen.gif

Might I suggest https://www.amazon.com/Engineer-Motorbooks-Workshop-Carroll-Smith/dp/0879381868. Its an excellent book on the fundemental engineering in most vehicles.

http://www.amazon.com/Engineer-Motorbooks-Workshop-Carroll-Smith/dp/0879381868

This is a good place to start. You should have enough info after reading this to formulate more specific querries. It's a deep deep hole, so be careful.