Yeah, maybe....but the principles are all the same. Until you know what the suspension geometry is, and what effect that is having on the way the car performs, it is probably not a good idea to start throwing changes at it (like a bump steer kit) until you know if it needs it or not. I think that is the point Shaka was originally trying to make. There are modern, high performance vehicles that, for example, delibertly use bump steer to compliment Ackermann (or lack thereof) to produce the desired effect (generally slight toe out) in a turn. Some of the engineers are pretty savvy, and if you make changes to their design without knowing the possible "unintended consequences", you may be f---g up. To your point, underthinking the problem may be more of a problem.

 

As an FYI - my C8 has both the Z51 package and the Magnetic Control shocks but no front lift kit...
DSC Sport might just have the necessary hands on experience and track seat time in the new C8.
Though there's been a lot of very knowledgeable posts!! Finding a qualified Corvette C8 suspension mechanic will be a challenge.

 

This car was designed by fools. Caster angle gain is the result of anti dive geometry. I don't ever use anti dive or squat geometry. It introduces too many binding forces. God knows what it does to bump steer with all that Monkey motion going on.. There are other ways to control pitch. Despite severe anti dive geometry on this car, the pitch changes are unacceptable. Magnaride is not active, it reacts dynamically only. Heavy and expensive also. Squat geometry actually actually makes thing worse for nose dive. A smaller flywheel lowered the engine yet the Cg was raised because they placed the heavy coil springs (and Magnaride shocks) in that dumb *** casting structure way too high. What a clumsy structure, my God. That Cg heads skywould under braking and the transfer is increased to the front. Mid turn, the platform is horizontal longitudinally and on exit, the dive/squat geometry adversely changes the pitch in reverse to the braking. What front and rear geometry transitions are taking place. Golly.
Turn in uncovers other serious design problems. The short rear axles and provision for front drive requires A arms that are too short. 3' neg camber for track settings is because there is insufficient camber gain in roll. Can't imagine what lat.and long. roll couples are. No wonder Michelin had to provide a 'special' structured tire for this car. Who wants to screw around so much preparing your car for track days.











A simplified lighter stronger and more efficient structure.




Stock structure engine far back

 

Call GM - Shaka’s got this figured out. I’m sure crash testing has nothing to do with the design right?

 

There's obviously a lot of serious suspension guys here, so I have a question.

Surely these undesirable effects would have been apparent to the GM engineers. They probably have pretty crazy modeling software, and I really don't think they're simply incompetent. So, why would they design it this way?

I'm guessing there's some sort of tradeoff that they had to make? Is it a cost thing? I would think changes in suspension geometry wouldn't impact cost that much.

 

Designing & selling an aftermarket suspension kit that will lower CG and improve handling would be a great goal. Wondering how the C8R is dealing with these issues... Any information available on the C8R?

 

For most of the people who will purchase this car, it will be more than satisfactory. There are too few of us who want a dedicated uncompromised sports car. The numbers don't favor us. The times, they are a changing. There are so many rules and regulations plus the myriad of duties that this car has to perform. Retractable top, golf clubs, 200 speakers, DCT, ABS, e Diff, comfort, styling, powerful, economical, dependable, fit and finish and space for golf clubs. The stock holder needs are paramount, therefore a huge profit must be the focus of the CEO, so it's got to be cheap to manufacture.
It is also the highest selling sports car in the world. With these factors, it is far more challenging to design and manufacture such a sports car than cars that cost $millions. The only thing that can prevent it's success is the adverse outcome of the election. Like governments, the C8 is what the electorate deserves, to paraphrase G.B. Shaw. I'm out.

 

For comparison, here is a link to a view of the Audi R8 rear suspension:

https://images.app.goo.gl/XFzX3w14HmoRcfN88 . .

Here is another R8 view:

https://images.app.goo.gl/X4WLU6aEXjCrJ2nf6
.

 

We've been around since the late 80's. We're not currently racing but most years have been compromised of a shop, a parts company and a race team. Monoball control arm bushings are eliminating rubber bushings at connection points that deflect under cornering loads. I've driven about 30 miles on the street with prototype monoballs/sway bars on the car it was perfectly compliant but the steering felt unbelievably more sharp, connected and precise. We've made this product for C5/C6/C7 so we are familiar with the product but on the C8 we put a huge focus on fitment to make sure it's a smooth process for the end user. We still plan to install the into the arms for the customer at no additional cost because while it seems straightforward and easy there's a number of ways a pretty capable customer can mess these up trying to press them into the arms. Here's a picture of the car running at COTA and an old pic of the ALMS car and you can see a Corvette Racing car in the background.

 

And let's not forget hauling a bicycle too preferably by adding / using a small tow receiver.