Autocrossing & Roadracing Suspension Setup for Track Corvettes, Camber/Caster Adjustments, R-Compound Tires, Race Slicks, Tips on Driving Technique, Events, Results
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Load Transfer Distribution

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 2, 2025 | 10:52 PM
  #1  
AZSP33D's Avatar
AZSP33D
Thread Starter
Drifting
 
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 744
From: Stay dangerous my friends
Default Load Transfer Distribution

Another suspension data/theory question, even though they don't seem to get too much traction in here (pun intended).

Do you guys run the data on this?

The idea is to load the tires so that you get the maximum total grip under varying cornering loads and especially at max cornering load, and flatten the LTD vs G's curves... The LTD % can be moved around from front to back and such with track width offsets, different tire size offsets, springs and wheel rate splits, shocks, ARB's, packers (rate and timing), roll center trim, camber, etc. Optimum-G focuses more on this than RC location/migration numbers, although that's part of it.

https://optimumg.com/our-seminars/ap...icle-dynamics/

Last edited by AZSP33D; Sep 4, 2025 at 01:46 AM. Reason: Added OptimumG reference.
Reply
Old Sep 3, 2025 | 07:30 PM
  #2  
jtmck's Avatar
jtmck
Instructor
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 211
Likes: 7
From: Portage IN
Default

You did not mention weight.
I believe you need to have a car heavier in the rear.
After you have done all you can to do move weight to the rear, you may have to add weight to get there.
A car should be 50/50% side to side, loaded with driver, and approximately 52% on the rear.
When you have these numbers, this is your minimum weight.
Sometimes weight is needed in the right rear to get to your numbers.
In braking you will have a little more than 50% on the front. In acceleration you will have 54% on the rear.

I have people disagree with me.

And you are correct, these threads do not last long.
Reply
Old Sep 3, 2025 | 10:51 PM
  #3  
AZSP33D's Avatar
AZSP33D
Thread Starter
Drifting
 
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 744
From: Stay dangerous my friends
Default

Originally Posted by jtmck
You did not mention weight.
I believe you need to have a car heavier in the rear...
you’re right, I missed an obvious factor. The point is maximizing dynamic load transfer distribution effect, in addition to the plan view of the CG, the CG height is also a big factor. As is CG height gradient font to rear. There’s probably more too. The weight factor mentioned also determines where the load starts out before its dynamically distributed, so the starting point.

I’m not writing a textbook or teaching anyone here, just winging it with ideas I come up with as I type on my phone..

I wanted to study the subject more, but I didn’t want to go as far as attending the OptimumG seminars (I’m sure that’s very expensive too) Was looking to come up with something beyond the Milliken & Milliken RCVD text book standard that’s now over 30 years old (and probably outdated tire models). The emphasis on load transfer distribution may be the next level, as it integrates a lot of geometry and dynamic aspects into one focused idea.

An example may be when people looking at more caster for better performance with improving camber gain in roll without so much upsetting braking with excessive camber. By itself, it sounds like a great idea. But then how does that work with the rest of the geometry and so the direction may be if we’re looking at it from a load transfer distribution perspective… we would also consider overloading the front outside tire with a quick steering input before the chassis takes a set, or we can be introducing excessive twisting force into the chassis (big issue on earlier generations of Corvette prior to the with a more flexible chassis) which certainly influences load transfer issues… or adding to front roll center jacking issues, or heavy ARB jacking issues. Anyway, the point is we can get lost in theories, so the primary perspective is load transfer distribution that ties it all together in a very practical way.

While looking for additional reference on the subject, and came up with a book “The Science of Vehicle Dynamics: Handling Braking and Ride of Road and Race Cars.” By Massimo Giggiani… this guy is a professor on the subject and closely interacts with leading engineers, so I should certainly learn something. Ordered it but yet to receive it or read it.

Amazon Amazon

Last edited by AZSP33D; Sep 4, 2025 at 01:46 AM. Reason: Added AMAZON link to the book and preview of index and introduction
Reply
Old Sep 6, 2025 | 05:47 PM
  #4  
AZSP33D's Avatar
AZSP33D
Thread Starter
Drifting
 
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 744
From: Stay dangerous my friends
Default

I have recently found that ChatGPT does a decent job with LTD calculations along with practical analyses of the results... if correct wheel rates and corner weights and roll centers and CG are input, tire sizes, also, and even shock data if you choose to go that far. Note that for the Corvette leaf springs there's a different rate for roll than for pitch/heave, this can be handled as a multiplier to the wheel rate (such as 1.3 in front and 1.2 in rear, or actually as measured on the car) or there's an ARB effect that can be added compared to standard coilovers. Sometimes they get the math wrong, but that's happening less and less it seems.

Code:
Targets (front share of lateral load transfer)

For fast CAM-S on 200TW, RWD, big power:

Turn-in (0–0.4 g transient): 46–48% front – enough bite to point the car.

Mid-corner (0.9–1.2 g steady): 40–44% front – keeps rear planted so you can pick throttle early.

Power-on exit (≥0.8 g with throttle): 38–42% front – traction biased.

You won’t “hold” one number through the whole corner; use springs/leaf twist and bump engagement to bias the curve this way, then use shocks to shape the transients.

How much “geo %” to assume?

Use 12–15% as your baseline when you’re doing paper calcs. If you raise RCs or run very small roll angles, the geometric fraction creeps up; if you soften the platform, it goes down.

Where you are now (based on our runs)

Springs: Kf=1004 (MR=0.55), Kr=620 (MR=0.95)

Roll multipliers for C4 transverse leafs: try front 1.25–1.30, rear 1.20 

Bumps: front bump stop active with no space

With mF=1.25, mR=1.20 and geo 10–15%, you’ll sit roughly 41–43% front once the front bump is in—good mid/exit bias. You’ll want a little more front share right at turn-in.

How to hit the targets (order of operations)

Lock geometry (geo % baseline): keep RC ≈ 4"/3" (front/rear). That’s ~12–15% geometric on total LTD for this platform—don’t chase geo to tune balance unless you need a big swing.

Set elastic (steady-state) split:

Front leaf roll-mult: 1.25–1.30

Rear leaf roll-mult: 1.15–1.20 (you already moved to 1.20; good)

This should put mid-corner front share in the low-40s% with 10–15% geo—right in the window.

Use bumpstops to curve the balance vs travel:

Front bump: keep it, 0–0.25" gap. Early engagement gives a small rise in front share = better turn-in without murdering traction.

Rear bump: keep removed or, if you reinstall, run a 0.5–0.75" gap so it’s a late ramp only on big compressions. Early rear ramp drives the balance too rear-biased mid-corner.

Shape transients with shocks (most important for autocross):

Entry rotation: add rear rebound 1–2 clicks (holds rear down on weight transfer) or reduce front rebound a touch. That nudges turn-in toward 46–48% front momentarily.

Mid/exit traction: back rear rebound off a click and/or add a touch of rear compression so the inside-rear comes down cleanly—keeps effective front share in the high-30s/low-40s under power.

If it pushes on initial turn: +rear rebound or −front rebound.

If it’s too loose mid-corner: −rear rebound or +front rebound.

Fine *****:

Tiny front bar (or +front roll-mult) if you still lack entry bite after shock tweaks.

Tire pressures/temps: a quick way to move 1–2 points of balance without touching hardware.

Front camber (you’re at −3.0°): don’t give this up; it buys front grip without jacking LTD.

Last edited by AZSP33D; Sep 6, 2025 at 05:54 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2025 | 09:33 AM
  #5  
CraigStu's Avatar
CraigStu
Drifting
Conversation Starter
All Eyes On Me
Photogenic
Top Answer: 1
 
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 616
From: Blacksburg Va
Default

In your example of increasing caster to get camber gain there can also be an unintended side effect. With a previous car I once experimented w/ +10deg caster. Just turning the steering wheel sitting still you can see that the inside tire raises the car and the outside tire lowers the car. That to some extent makes the car roll further. But it also puts more weight on the inside tire while taking weight off the outside tire. These could be good things as the outside front tire is always being pushed the hardest while inside front tire is always losing weight. What is the overall net effect? Also consider how much the steering is actually being turned mid corner. Probably not as much as one would think.
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2025 | 01:01 PM
  #6  
mfain's Avatar
mfain
Drifting
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,782
Likes: 1,555
From: Las Vegas NV
Default

I'll chime in here. I am an advocate of big caster to take advantage of the camber gain when the wheels are turned. I used to try nominal caster (7 to 8 degrees) and count on a lot of travel (soft springs/big bar) to generate more dynamic caster with suspension travel. With a lot of travel, either good aero or shocks with a lot of rebound resistance are required to pin the nose down at corner entry through the apex. You lose caster and ultimately camber if the nose lifts too early. I have evolved to a lower ride height with less travel, and even the use of bump stops. Now I set up with a little more static caster since I don't get the caster gain with less travel. With a low center of gravity and a roll center about 1.5-2" above the ground, the big advantage I see to big caster is the rapid increase in positive camber on the inside tire at turn in. With a stiff bar you are really loading the inside tire and the positive camber helps a lot. My approach is for higher speed road race conditions, and may not be as applicable for autocross. I am working on significantly increasing downforce and I just started a thread on Aerodynamics for Bricks, but a lot like suspension threads, it doesn't generate much interest.
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2025 | 03:15 PM
  #7  
AZSP33D's Avatar
AZSP33D
Thread Starter
Drifting
 
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 744
From: Stay dangerous my friends
Default

Originally Posted by CraigStu
In your example of increasing caster to get camber gain there can also be an unintended side effect. With a previous car I once experimented w/ +10deg caster. Just turning the steering wheel sitting still you can see that the inside tire raises the car and the outside tire lowers the car. That to some extent makes the car roll further. But it also puts more weight on the inside tire while taking weight off the outside tire. These could be good things as the outside front tire is always being pushed the hardest while inside front tire is always losing weight. What is the overall net effect? Also consider how much the steering is actually being turned mid corner.
yes, you’re right that was my point. I’m in the 4-6 degrees caster camp for the most part. Mickey likes 7-8 degrees but that’s too much for my flexible chassis and normal SIA numbers. BTW you can cancel out caster gain/loss caused by anti-dive geometry, by angling the UCA pickup from centerline (in plan view)

another interesting thing about looking at dynamic load transfer distribution is that the ideal distribution changes from entry to mid to exit. Once we see/observe the data, changes can be made for the desired effect… for example by the use of linear rate foam bump stops and spacing at ride height (I use the 2.25” Integra Urethane for example. Nice feature of the urethane foam style bumpstops or packers is that they have a lot more force in compression than extension/rebound so the shocks are not so confused or conflicted on what spring rates they need to manage rebound.
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2025 | 02:29 PM
  #8  
69427's Avatar
69427
Tech Contributor
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 20,944
Likes: 962
From: I tend to be leery of any guy who doesn't own a chainsaw or a handgun.
Default

Originally Posted by jtmck
You did not mention weight.
I believe you need to have a car heavier in the rear.
After you have done all you can to do move weight to the rear, you may have to add weight to get there.
A car should be 50/50% side to side, loaded with driver, and approximately 52% on the rear.
When you have these numbers, this is your minimum weight.
Sometimes weight is needed in the right rear to get to your numbers.
In braking you will have a little more than 50% on the front. In acceleration you will have 54% on the rear.

I have people disagree with me.

And you are correct, these threads do not last long.
I am one of those people who would disagree with you. Outside of tractor pulls (and perhaps the occasional low-speed, minimal corner count autocross) I see little need/advantage in carrying around any more weight than needed. Weight slows acceleration, increases braking distance, degrades cornering ability, and just increases wear and tear on brakes and tires, while also increasing fuel consumption (requiring even more weight in fuel to complete each track session).

My '69 (without driver weight) is f/r 52%/48 % (1400#/1300#). Would I like the percentage to be just the opposite? Absolutely, but not at the penalty of carrying around 200# of ballast in the back of the car to get that ratio. Similarly, I'd love to have a 50/50 left/right weight distribution (I've moved the alternator and battery to the right side.), but I'm not willing to add weight to the right side and degrade cornering even further just for some numbers.

Weight is the enemy. I reduce it wherever I can, relocate what I can, and tune the suspension to work with the resulting balance/bias/ratio.
Reply
Corvette Stories

The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts

story-0

2027 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 First Look: Everything You NEED to Know!

 Michael S. Palmer
story-1

5 Best & 5 Worst Corvette Daily Drivers

 Joe Kucinski
story-2

The Headlights of Every Corvette Generation Explained

 Joe Kucinski
story-3

5 Best & 5 Most Overrated Corvette Track Packages of All Time!

 Joe Kucinski
story-4

Every 2027 Corvette Engine Explained

 Joe Kucinski
story-5

Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette

 Verdad Gallardo
story-6

10 Ugly Corvettes That We Still Kinda Love

 Joe Kucinski
story-7

Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer

 Brett Foote
story-8

10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)

 Michael S. Palmer
story-9

8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems

 Pouria Savadkouei
Old Sep 12, 2025 | 02:35 PM
  #9  
69427's Avatar
69427
Tech Contributor
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 20,944
Likes: 962
From: I tend to be leery of any guy who doesn't own a chainsaw or a handgun.
Default

Originally Posted by AZSP33D
yes, you’re right that was my point. I’m in the 4-6 degrees caster camp for the most part. Mickey likes 7-8 degrees but that’s too much for my flexible chassis and normal SIA numbers. BTW you can cancel out caster gain/loss caused by anti-dive geometry, by angling the UCA pickup from centerline (in plan view)

another interesting thing about looking at dynamic load transfer distribution is that the ideal distribution changes from entry to mid to exit. Once we see/observe the data, changes can be made for the desired effect… for example by the use of linear rate foam bump stops and spacing at ride height (I use the 2.25” Integra Urethane for example. Nice feature of the urethane foam style bumpstops or packers is that they have a lot more force in compression than extension/rebound so the shocks are not so confused or conflicted on what spring rates they need to manage rebound.
I wasn't aware of those particular bump stops. I'm going to look into them. Thanks.
Reply
Old Sep 12, 2025 | 10:22 PM
  #10  
AZSP33D's Avatar
AZSP33D
Thread Starter
Drifting
 
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 744
From: Stay dangerous my friends
Default

Originally Posted by 69427
I am one of those people who would disagree with you. Outside of tractor pulls (and perhaps the occasional low-speed, minimal corner count autocross) I see little need/advantage in carrying around any more weight than needed. Weight slows acceleration, increases braking distance, degrades cornering ability, and just increases wear and tear on brakes and tires, while also increasing fuel consumption (requiring even more weight in fuel to complete each track session).

My '69 (without driver weight) is f/r 52%/48 % (1400#/1300#). Would I like the percentage to be just the opposite? Absolutely, but not at the penalty of carrying around 200# of ballast in the back of the car to get that ratio. Similarly, I'd love to have a 50/50 left/right weight distribution (I've moved the alternator and battery to the right side.), but I'm not willing to add weight to the right side and degrade cornering even further just for some numbers.

Weight is the enemy. I reduce it wherever I can, relocate what I can, and tune the suspension to work with the resulting balance/bias/ratio.
There are many other factors here. My perspective is that you are mostly correct, but extra weight added can improve performance, if placed in the right location.

to continue related discussions… Obviously in racing where there are (almost always) minimum weight rules, and if the car is underweight. But also see the performance of the very heavy Tesla 3 performance, with so much of the weight very low.

My car was always faster around the autocross course with a passenger, and the passenger seat is very near the rear axle.

I’ve had a front wheel autocrosser with a cross bar structure in front that ties the four LCA attach points together. Filled it with lead shot and the performance improvement was significant.

But I’m not referring to how the vehicle is loaded static, but more about load transfer distribution, the emphasis is on how the tire loads are transferred to maximize total grip. Not just a single number to say how much the tire is loaded, but also how the tire is loaded, shape of the pressure pattern, transient loading, things like that. The static load is just in two dimensions when it’s sitting on the scales, there’s so much more to it, like a third dimension of height and the transient effects, the moments of the components that make up the whole, there’s geometric loading, aero load, load per square inch of tire. one way to look at it is that performance only exists when the tires are loaded, and performance increases if the total load can be increased without overload. Look at the top fuel dragsters, the key to performance was that they had to figure out how to be able to load the tires significantly more to accelerate to 340mph in 3.7 seconds. Performance is really all about being able to load the tires.
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2025 | 10:34 AM
  #11  
CraigStu's Avatar
CraigStu
Drifting
Conversation Starter
All Eyes On Me
Photogenic
Top Answer: 1
 
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 616
From: Blacksburg Va
Default

By "load transfer distribution" are you talking about shocks, CG height vs roll center height, or ?
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2025 | 08:46 PM
  #12  
jtmck's Avatar
jtmck
Instructor
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 211
Likes: 7
From: Portage IN
Default

Thanks for the reply
I sent a note to the original poster on his questions and we had a good phone conversation on his examples.
I find it difficult to get the point across in a post.
I am Jim Mckamey in Portage IN
jt.mck@comcast.net
219-742-7456
If you want to give me a call, I think I can better explain my point.

Thanks Jim M.
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2025 | 09:30 PM
  #13  
AZSP33D's Avatar
AZSP33D
Thread Starter
Drifting
 
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 1,716
Likes: 744
From: Stay dangerous my friends
Default

Originally Posted by CraigStu
By "load transfer distribution" are you talking about shocks, CG height vs roll center height, or ?
The official definition is something like LTD includes all roll stiffness contributors: springs, anti-roll bars, bump stops, tire vertical stiffness, shock valving, AND geometric effects (roll centers, lateral link angles, jacking). It is the percentage of the car’s total lateral load transfer that happens at the front axle as measured against the rear. It’s the simple and clear metric for linking your suspension roll stiffness to your balance.

LTD (for example ~48–49% front with RC geometry included at say 12%) is evaluated for tire size distribution (295/315) so you can see if you’re under- or over-supporting a corner. Or if you're under or over loading a tire. Or if you want to improve corner entry, or mid corner, or corner exit grip.
Reply

Get notified of new replies

To Load Transfer Distribution





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:13 AM.

story-0
2027 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 First Look: Everything You NEED to Know!

Slideshow: Is the 2027 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 the best Silverado yet?

By Michael S. Palmer | 2026-06-16 08:01:12


VIEW MORE
story-1
5 Best & 5 Worst Corvette Daily Drivers

Slideshow: 5 best and 5 worst Corvette daily drivers

By Joe Kucinski | 2026-06-15 10:32:13


VIEW MORE
story-2
The Headlights of Every Corvette Generation Explained

Slideshow: The headlights of every Corvette generation explained

By Joe Kucinski | 2026-06-15 10:17:14


VIEW MORE
story-3
5 Best & 5 Most Overrated Corvette Track Packages of All Time!

Slideshow: The 5 best and 5 most overrated Corvette track packages ever.

By Joe Kucinski | 2026-06-09 12:46:45


VIEW MORE
story-4
Every 2027 Corvette Engine Explained

Slideshow: Every 2027 Corvette engine explained

By Joe Kucinski | 2026-06-09 12:16:31


VIEW MORE
story-5
Designer Imagines A Corvette That Looks More Like a Corvette Than the Corvette

Slideshow: A Jaguar designer's personal project imagines what a modern front-engined Corvette might look like if Chevrolet revisited the golden age of the Stingray.

By Verdad Gallardo | 2026-06-08 19:53:43


VIEW MORE
story-6
10 Ugly Corvettes That We Still Kinda Love

Slideshow: 10 ugly Corvettes that we still kinda love.

By Joe Kucinski | 2026-06-03 10:34:17


VIEW MORE
story-7
Top 10 Most Expensive Corvettes Ever Sold on Bring A Trailer

A lot of money has changed hands at the online auction house over the years.

By Brett Foote | 2026-06-03 10:21:50


VIEW MORE
story-8
10 Things Every Corvette Owner Needs (2026 Edition)

Slideshow: 10 great gifts Corvette enthusiasts actually want for Father's Day!

By Michael S. Palmer | 2026-06-03 15:43:40


VIEW MORE
story-9
8 Most "Only Corvette Owners Understand" Quirks and Problems

Slideshow: These are the quirks, annoyances, and oddly lovable problems that every Corvette owner eventually learns to live with.

By Pouria Savadkouei | 2026-05-28 09:31:39


VIEW MORE