![Image](http://bi.gazeta.pl/im/2/9036/z9036562Z,Fernando-Alonso-w-nowym-F150-Ferrari.jpg)
See that rod which is not aligned with other wishbones? It's a push rod. 'Push', because it's pushing nose up from the wheels.
Here's drawing grabbed from (great!) Scrabs blog:
![Image](http://scarbsf1.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/reaction.jpg)
On the left there's push rod and on the right pull rod.
i think thats probably the case. unless it was murray walker then its perfectly understandable...Onch wrote: The post actually seems to have been written by a Ferrari fan that does not really understand what he is talking about, but manages very well to do 'as if'...
Thanks mith.mith wrote:I'm not the expert, but I guess I understand it enough to explain it.
You are puzzling your self! The pull rod can give you better airflow over the gearbox. You can choose what you want to do with it.Onch wrote:Thanks mith.mith wrote:I'm not the expert, but I guess I understand it enough to explain it.
I know the difference between push- and pull-rods, it is the bit saying that pullrods work better whith higher downforce that is puzzling me...
I am puzzled by that and the counter claim about push rods as well.Onch wrote:Thanks mith.mith wrote:I'm not the expert, but I guess I understand it enough to explain it.
I know the difference between push- and pull-rods, it is the bit saying that pullrods work better whith higher downforce that is puzzling me...
Perhaps the author was referring to pullrod flexibility while going over bumps/ kerbs when the wheel is in jounce (instantaneous upward acceleration putting the usually-thinner pullrod in compression, vs. pushrod in tension under the same condition), leading to split-second load cycling on the tires. Apparently the front pullrod suspensions of the ~2000 era suffered this problem (think: split-second unpredictable steering after hitting a kerb). One could expect an instantaneous loss of traction due to the same phenomenon on the rear tyres - but one would have to be jumping the kerbs with the rear tires, and the cyclic bouncing may not have that much of an effect on tire traction.delacf wrote:Hi, have read that the pull rod system is more fragile. Is this true?
Metals work better traction. This allows us minor safety factors (no risk of buckling) and allows us to go to the limit but that does not mean that the pull rod system is more fragile, that meant that we have gone too the limit.
Regards,
delacf
Are you claiming that the current Pushrods are exactly the same as the first and haven't also benefitted from development?n smikle wrote:The first pull rods were nothing compared to the ones today. Just google some photos. Similar to the first EBD's to todays. Very crude.
The truth is that the push rod has hardly changed since its inception.Sayshina wrote:Are you claiming that the current Pushrods are exactly the same as the first and haven't also benefitted from development?n smikle wrote:The first pull rods were nothing compared to the ones today. Just google some photos. Similar to the first EBD's to todays. Very crude.
That highlighted part of your statement is where I draw issue. Aerodynamically the push rod and pull rod are just different trade offs.shelly wrote:It must also be noted that this year's ferrari has a very unconventional rear push rod assembly, with the "push" element moved forward in order to gain part of the aerodynamic freedom of a pull rod.