The I would say you're hanging around the wrong people from automotive industries, because it's sure as hell not what any people I know in the motorsport industry take it as - that's not what Chapman intended to convey at all, which is pretty damned evident if you take it in context of what he was talking about, which was running suspension sprung so stiff that the kinematics barely mattered.Vanja #66 wrote: That's not my interpretation of his quote, that's what people from automotive industry and motorsport who have been around for 20+ years say it means. Don't underestimate Chapman, he was a lot more than a designer wanting only to make things as light as possible. But let's finish with this OT here...
Something modern F1 cars have come away from, although aero still trumps geometery - which is part of what is going on with the front hubs, as they run little in the way of anti-dive and compression stiffness in pitch, in order to get the front wing low under braking and then hold it there with damping/inerters.
Running with low anti-dive leads to your wishbone/upright flex rotating the brake ducts down under heavy braking - something that wouldn't be as noticable otherwise as the upright rotation under compression would counter more of the flex.
