Quote:
In that drawing Cody posted the shock is laid over at too much angle.
People keep hammering on this subject of coilover angle and I think it's made out to be more of a concern than it should be. Yes it has the effects mentioned, but that just isn't the whole picture. I think the engineer's expression "Perfect is the enemy of good enough!" applies here. I think the angle on my antique 1978 Formula Ford is at least 45 and probably 50 degrees. My car qualified on the front row for the national championships the year it was made and the other cars at front were the same model. People moved to setups with bell cranks and pushrods and lots o'bearings because of aero reasons. The other benefits were nice to have, but aero is why people spent the money and effort.
The great majority of builders on this site would be better served by accepting a compromise on shock angle as opposed to the effort to go to an inboard setup. Let's look at some drawbacks... They can take a lot of effort to design well, most that I see introduce plenty of their own compromises. If your setup accumulates maybe 1/16" of deflection in the mounts - that could be half the stiffness of a well designed frame. That 1/16" of deflection would be spread around all 4 corners and is not an easy standard to meet. It will cost more by adding several more bearings per corner and a radius rod. Often the shocks are located higher up raising your CG and also are not not in a good airflow, so they will run much hotter.
I don't think anyone should feel bad or that they did not do a good job because they have coilovers externally mounted in the traditional manner. If you publish plans for our car, like Kurt, there is an added incentive because the effort he put into it is spread over the copies make of his design. I looked at this for awhile on Car9 and just opted not to do it. If you want shocks that are not out in the breeze, I strongly recommend buying bodywork from Jack McCornack!
edit: Just to be clear, I did not qualify for the National Championships!