[xtn]

There are many methods for changing the balance of a car. Tire pressures, compounds, sizes - many alignment settings, front and rear roll rates, spring rates, and damper settings - etc.

But when you boil it all down, there are only two basic scenarios.

1. You reduce the grip on the end that sticks too much, or...
2. You increase the grip on the end that doesn't stick enough.

Let's look at a scenario wherein the rear of the car won't rotate as much as you would like. You can reduce the negative rear camber, toe the rear tires out a bit, firm up the springs or anti-roll bar in the rear, or any other number of things that will reduce rear grip. Such methods represent #1 above.

OR you can do things that will increase front end grip to match or exceed the rear end grip. This represents #2 above, that I humbly submit is the superior choice.

Why is it the superior choice? Well, if you can get the behavior you want by ADDING grip overall, you will be able to go faster than if you achieve the same behavior by lowering grip overall.

Disclaimer: I don't autox. But the autox guru who says that changing the rear camber will ruin the car is full of beans, unless there is no legal way within your class to increase front grip an equal or greater amount. I do know this much: On the couple of slow, tight turns I experience on track, I have no problem getting the car rotated with all shims removed on every corner. I don't do it with power of course; I have to do it with trail braking. It has taken a lot of practice, but it works well.

xtn