Everyone has the same lawyers, and that's why they say to mount the new tires on the back. They want the car to always understeer because the average driver can deal with it. When the front starts to plow he will back off. This action will load the front of the car and give it more traction. He's saved himself but never really understands why. Most cars without anti-lock have heavy front brake bias for the same reason. Too much rear brake bias and a little rotation (yaw) and the car will oversteer easily. IOW, all these decisions are made for morons.
I'd rather the front have more traction. I'll take my chances that I can control the rear with the steering, throttle and brakes. When the front loses traction what's required to keep the car turning is completely different.
In fact, if you exceed the front traction limit substantially with high tire slip angles the only way to get regain traction is to reduce steering input. If that's not counter intuitive nothing is.
Jim - just another old autocrosser who'd rather not have the handling characteristics of his vehicles set by lawyers ...
I'd rather the front have more traction. I'll take my chances that I can control the rear with the steering, throttle and brakes. When the front loses traction what's required to keep the car turning is completely different.
In fact, if you exceed the front traction limit substantially with high tire slip angles the only way to get regain traction is to reduce steering input. If that's not counter intuitive nothing is.
Jim - just another old autocrosser who'd rather not have the handling characteristics of his vehicles set by lawyers ...