Gotta Do Homework Before Posting?

[Mkelcy]

Just looked at the new(?) posting guidelines for the Suspension Forum.



The part about purchasing (and, I assume) reading one or more recommended books as a condition to posting caught my eye. I can see this if you're asking technical questions involving all those initials that were tossed around in the "New Subframe" thread recently; however, there are lots of folks who have a simple question and it seems to me we should (subject to use of the search function) be ready to answer without asking if they've read the books.

This is a lower key and less focussed board than Corner Carvers for example, but the reading suggestion struck me as a "don't bother us unless you've done the reading" kind of requirement. I suggest you remove it or at least qualify it to something like "If you have technical questions concerning why one suspension setup is better than another, be prepared to read one or more of the books recommended in the sticky below if you want to be able to understand the answer."

[zbugger]

Please understand that these guidlines are really recommendations. It's not required to get anything, just suggested. Really, it's for your own benefit. The more you know, the more you will understand. These books also contain many useful pictures and diagrams that will help you out a lot. They are not rules to live by, but please use these guidelines to direct you in a direction that can help you benefit from the information you are looking to receive.

[dennis68]

The reason for the sticky was primarily that anytime you start asking questions regarding modifying suspension components it will inevitably lead to a technical discussion. It would really get old to have go over the terminology and explanations of each in every thread, wouldn't it?

Another reason is that without a fairly decent grasp of suspension design theory no one really has any business turning a single bolt on the chassis. If you lose power because you don't know what you're doing under the hood the car dies, if the brakes or steering fails people die....big difference. Many will say it's my life....yours is not the one I worry about, it's the family truckster full of rug rats that don't know you just swapped parts from "x" to "z" and didn't fully understand the repercussions. Not a flame, just a rational explaining.

[Mkelcy]

Another reason is that without a fairly decent grasp of suspension design theory no one really has any business turning a single bolt on the chassis.

My initial point was that the reference books are needed if you are asking technical questions concerning suspension setups. Do you REALLY think I need to have a comprehensive understanding of suspension engineering in order to convert from drum to disk brakes? To swap shock absorbers? To install a DSE, Global West or other pre-engineered suspension kit?

As the posting guide said this is a hot rodders forum - your suggestion that "without a fairly decent grasp of suspension design theory no one really has any business turning a single bolt on the chassis" would eliminate about 90% of the folks here from doing anything other than engine and body work on their cars. Is that really the intent of this Board or this forum?

I'm all in favor of learning as needed to accomplish a task, but I don't think I need to read a suspension book to install the DSE coil over kit in my '68 Fbody. The engineering is what I expect to get from DSE when I lay down my hard earned money. If I were building a rear four link from scratch, I'd feel the need to educate myself; but really now, how many memebers here are building their own suspensions?

It just all seems a bit elitist and I'm not sure we need it here. So I repeat, why not say "If you have technical questions concerning why one suspension setup is better than another, be prepared to read one or more of the books recommended in the sticky below if you want to be able to understand the answer."

But read the book to turn a single bolt on my chassis? I don't feel the need.

[dennis68]

I just meant that I have personally seen many times where a simple bolt on procedure has gone terribly wrong...in a very unsafe way. I see calipers bolted on back wards, ball joints installed incorrectly, and suspension components literally falling off after someone attempted a "simple bolt-on". Working knowledge is much more important in this aspect than any other aspect of the automobile.

I actually think it's pretty naive to think you can just start playing with stuff in the suspension/brake group without educating yourself first, thats just my opinion. This is the one topic on this board most will agree on, the suspension threads are technical and do require some basic understanding before jumping into projects with both feet.

BTW, I know for a fact if you cause an accident due to a "bolt-on" gone bad you will be criminally negligent and probably get sued for everything you ever had or wanted to have. Something to think about.

Have to add the smiley so no one gets their feelers hurt.

[Mkelcy]

I just meant that I have personally seen many times where a simple bolt on procedure has gone terribly wrong...in a very unsafe way. I see calipers bolted on back wards, ball joints installed incorrectly, and suspension components literally falling off after someone attempted a "simple bolt-on". Working knowledge is much more important in this aspect than any other aspect of the automobile.

I don't think we disagree on basics, it's more of an emphasis thing.

I'm betting that most mechanics doing suspension and brake work don't understand FRCH or RC migration. Yet I also bet that they don't bolt calipers on backwards, install ball joints incorrectly or have suspension components falling off. Those things are not the result of a lack of undstanding of suspension design, they are the result of stupidity and/or mechanical ineptitutde.

My point remains simple. I don't need to read a book on suspension design to bolt on a set of shocks. If I say I want to use my car for spirited driving in the local mountains and describe what suspension components I've already got on the car, I can ask an intelligent question about people's recommendations/expereince with Shock Absorber Brand X, Model Y. And, frankly, reading a book on suspension design probably isn't going to help me ask my question or help those who are kind enough to reply. There are many other questions that don't require a detailed engineering understanding of suspension design. To imply that it's needed to participate in the forum, no matter how non-binding it is on the poster, starts making the board less accessible to those who are new and want to learn. (On the other hand, we should be able to execute people who ask a questions that has been answered a 1,000 times.)

Ultimately I don't care (much). But I've read the Corner Carvers FAQ's and frankly they present themselves as folks who are too busy/important to deal with most folks who enjoy the hobby they love. I just hate to see this board go in that direction, and the posting guideline I objected to seemed a step in that direction.

[dennis68]

My point remains simple. I don't need to read a book on suspension design to bolt on a set of shocks. If I say I want to use my car for spirited driving in the local mountains and describe what suspension components I've already got on the car, I can ask an intelligent question about people's recommendations/experience with Shock Absorber Brand X, Model Y. And, frankly, reading a book on suspension design probably isn't going to help me ask my question or help those who are kind enough to reply. There are many other questions that don't require a detailed engineering understanding of suspension design. To imply that it's needed to participate in the forum, no matter how non-binding it is on the poster, starts making the board less accessible to those who are new and want to learn. (On the other hand, we should be able to execute people who ask a questions that has been answered a 1,000 times.)

I completely agree, I guess we should hope that most have enough common sense to know they don't need a mechanical engineering degree to be able to ask which shocks might be add the most bang for the buck to their commuter.

[zbugger]

But I've read the Corner Carvers FAQ's and frankly they present themselves as folks who are too busy/important to deal with most folks who enjoy the hobby they love. I just hate to see this board go in that direction, and the posting guideline I objected to seemed a step in that direction.

We won't let that happen here. We will work on rewording the guideline. I will talk to Ralph and the others and make it right.

Oh, and as usual, this discussion will be watched. Opinions are expected, but some things will not be tolerated. Basic civil discussions are fine. Please play nice. That's mainly what we are after here.

[dennis68]

Oh, and as usual, this discussion will be watched. Opinions are expected, but some things will not be tolerated. Basic civil discussions are fine. Please play nice. That's mainly what we are after here.

Reading between the lines this says:
Oh, and as usual(because Dennis is posting here), this discussion will be watched. Opinions are expected, but some things will not be tolerated. :icon_razz

[Mkelcy]

Reading between the lines this says:
Oh, and as usual(because Dennis is posting here), this discussion will be watched. Opinions are expected, but some things will not be tolerated. :icon_razz

LOL and I thought it was directed at me!

[Steve Chryssos]

Just looked at the new(?) posting guidelines for the Suspension Forum.

The part about purchasing (and, I assume) reading one or more recommended books as a condition to posting caught my eye.

Nowhere does it state that you must purchase and read a suspension book as a condition to posting. It says read the guidelines before posting.

I suggest you remove it or at least qualify it to something like "If you have technical questions concerning why one suspension setup is better than another, be prepared to read one or more of the books recommended in the sticky below if you want to be able to understand the answer."

No need to qualify it in depth. Perhaps the moderators agree that the word "Recommended Reading" can be added. Soften the language. The books are for your benefit.
They may (probably will) help you communicate better with other members and parts manufacturers alike. Even with respect to bolt-on parts, the know-how will make you a more informed consumer--especially if those "bolt-on" parts are more involved like "bolt-on" subframes.
I purchased one of the first aftermarket subframes. Supposedly bolt-on, the kit was anything but. So off I went to fabricator #1 (a drag racer) to fix the geometry. He said he knew what he was doing and I blindly took him at his word. I got hosed. Bad. Same with fabricator #2. After some basic reading (the Herb Adams book), I was able to seek out a qualified fabricator and communicate my needs. Again, the books are for your benefit--not the board's. As a byproduct, I'm sure the board will benefit if our knowledge, as a group, is elevated.

So, I agree with Denny. No really, I agree with Denny. Stop that! I really hope that the book guideline stays and that the words "Recommended Reading" are added.

Funny thing about suspension geometry. After some basic reading you will be able to walk up to any pro-touring car and--with a quick glance--pretty much know if it's done right or not. It's a cool feeling.

[Ralph LoGrasso]

Mkelcy,

As Denny, Allen and Steevo have said, these guidelines are just that--guidelines. They're not meant to serve as rules, just a guideline to posting. With that said, I have changed #2 to read differently. I had to edit out a spelling mistake, and while I was there I decided to play around with the wording a bit.

"2). If you have the urge to further your knowledge on the suspension theory, design and kinematics behind several of the more popular pro-touring setups (3-link, 4-link, 4-bar, Satchell link, IRS, etc.), or if you just want some good late night reading-- Purchase one or more recommended books listed in one of the "Sticky Notes" below. You will benefit from these titles even if you are just looking to purchase bolt-on parts."

[Mkelcy]

Just saw the change to the posting gudeline. Perfectly addressed my concern. Thanks for listening.

[zbugger]

No, it's not because of you Dennis. Although I could say it is just to make you happy. I watch every thread. The whole reason I said what I did was because there are more "happy keyboards" around lately. Everyone is liable on this one. If I am going to direct any comment towards anyone, I will do it directly.

Oh, and Steevo..... How dare you agree with Dennis!!!!! You gotta keep that east coast vs. west coast thing going!!!

[nancejd]

Interesting discussion.

I think this is something that we ought to be talking about all the time. How do we include everyone, make this a fun place to hang out, and still learn from each other?

Personally, I like the idea of having guidelines. In fact, I hope that at some point we can edit some of this information into a faq for newbies, and a reference for veterans.

[baz67]

Those guidlines were a long time comming. They address many of the issues that I have seen. I like that the search issue is first and in bold. Mkelky had a very valid point pertaining to the reading. It is not nessasary for most of the bolt-ons. However, if someone want to did deeper into how thier fancy new bolt-on part affect the suspension then it is required that they have a basic understand of the terms.

I for one will hold any venders feet to the fire if they show up with fluff and no tech to back up claims. Denny did a great job IMHO on the closed thread. It did get a little out of hand, but chalk that up to growing pains. Sales pitches belong in the Gen. Discussion forum.

I also visit CC because I like thier no BS attitude. I have one whole post over there. That is because there has not been anything that I could not find in a search. No, PT will not become like CC, but I like the new guidelines.

[Steve Chryssos]

Oh, and Steevo..... How dare you agree with Dennis!!!!! You gotta keep that east coast vs. west coast thing going!!!

50 Cent says that Fat Joe isn't really a gangsta.

[chicane67]

To end all........ about 80% of any question can be answered by using the "search" function. Some times, the same questions get really old, really quick. I have even had to goto the "cut and paste" route to fill the majority and then add the rest in specifics.... which I dont mind answering tech stuff, but lazy is still lazy to me.

[dennis68]

A's rock...Yankees suck.

[CoryM]

I understand that most people are backyarders and do not deal with cars for a living and therefore don't have the same knowledge as others. Thats a fact of life. These people will be asking the same kind of questions that you asked when you were at their level so you have to expect basic questions as they learn. Answering the same question over and over again gets old, I realize that, but there is nothing saying you have to respond or even read it (unless you're a mod, then I suppose you have to read some of them ;) ). If they are too lazy to do a search, don't post a response. If you don't feel like posting a friendly, informative response why bother? It just seems a little odd that people who have the knowledge complain about simple questions when they aren't required to answer them. Its nice, and it is appreciated, but if you don't enjoy helping people don't help them. I am not hacking on anyone in specific but it seems like people forget they don't need to answer simple questions if they don't want to. I pick and choose what I help out on because I like to help people, but not enough to read every post.
On that note I understand its a fine line between being nice to the noobs, and keeping the board attractive to the more knowledgable people and I think you guys are doing a good job of that. The book list is also very good and I would recommend to anyone learning to get them. For their benefit though, not mine :lol .
Cheers.