If you are interested in evasive manuevers and collision avoidance, a driving school will probably do you better.

I'd be willing to bet a properly trained driver in a pickup he is familiar with will be better than a normal driver in a high performance vehicle he isn't used to.

However; larger brakes, lower center of gravity, stickier tires and quicker steering ratios will all help with evasive maneuvers.

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
I think ya'll are overthinking this

I know that there are a lot of factors and this can get technically very deep. On the other hand, I think most of you can generally take a look at a car/truck and think -- hmmm, that looks narrower than it probably should be for that height. Or, wow, that's car has a relatively wide track, must be handle curves pretty well.

Let's say I'm thinking about buying a Suzami model that kinda of looks like a Jeep. Aspect ratio looks about normal for cars. But then the COM is considerably higher. So, they want it to handle and be agile like cars but have the breakover similar to a Jeep. Ok, how did they compensate? Wider tires with rim offset outside the axle? Stiffer suspension? Anti-sway? KDSS like suspension? Nothing, hmmmm, maybe it's prone to being less stable?

Or if I'm looking at a 4Runner and trying to figure out is KDSS useful for highway driving or just a gimmick there -- it's really just for rock climbing despite the demo's. Is the 4Runner already compensating for height with a wider track and lower aspect ratio? Or might it actually provide good value and augment stability?

I'm not making purchase decisions. This is just scientific, conceptual curiosity on what is optimal and then what tradeoffs are made for different purposes and what other compensations are created?

Per Toyota:

This system will not engage during normal driving conditions, when hydraulic pressure is equal. In off-road conditions, KDSS activates when it senses that a wheel has dropped.

So it sounds like it's more for off roading.

Your questions are too scattershot which is why everyone is over thinking.

It seems like you want a high riding, tough off road vehicle that you can still maneuver well evasively.

If that's the case, then you need something like a land/range rover where it has adjustable ride height suspension and lots of expensive computers to try and help it do both.

If not, then just ask us what you want the car to do without bogging it down with details.

You talk about wanting to change the wheelbase and the track of a Subaru but you don't tell us what you are trying to accomplish.

You are talking about the "black art" of vehicle handling. There are numerous approaches to optimizing a car's handling characteristics. I belong to another forum that constantly pursues this question. As a rule you will want 50/50 weight distribution. But there are a number of VW's with very, very front biased weight distribution that handle extremely well. Driver driving style, power to weight ratio's, track/road conditions, objectives all contribute to the final results. As a rule you have little control over things like wheelbase, vehicle format and fundamental vehicle dynamics. These things are usually controlled by the vehicle you have and in competition, the rules you have to comply with.

If you provide us some amount of specific information someone may be able to give you some degree of useable answers. What is the vehicle you are working with? Power and modifications applicable? Are you planning to use this vehicle in competition? If "yes", then what type of competition, sanctioning body and what class will you be running. If no, then how are you going to use this vehicle and what are your objectives. i.e. Autocross and drifting look very similar to a casual observer but the two setups are drastically different. Lastly, what is your budget? Again, your approach will be drastically different with varying levels of budgetary constraints.