Talk:Oversteer

message: The following statements from the text seem contradictory unless the second relates only to "high-speed" cars mass-produced for the general public, whereas the first clearly relates to professional racing cars.  This seems to be the resolution of the matter (unless the 2nd statement is just wrong), but I don't want to edit the article text unless that's what was intended.  Would a qualifed "equivalent original author" please step in here?
First statement -- The intention is to make fast cars oversteer (seems appropriate in a racing situation):
"Nevertheless, the required front/rear balance to make the cars fast through corners is obtained by setting up the aerodynamics and balancing the suspension. The car's tendency toward oversteer is generally increased by softening the front suspension or stiffening the rear suspension. Camber angles, ride height, and tire pressures can also be used to tune the balance of the car."
  
Second statement (2 sections down, "Critical Speed") -- Here the intention is to make fast cars understeer?: 
"Oversteering cars have an associated instability mode, called the critical speed. Above this speed control is reversed, that is, the steering wheel must be turned left in order to turn to the right.(Gillespie :Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics, or any basic vehicle dynamics text). Understeering cars do not suffer from this, which is one of the reasons why high speed cars tend to be set up to understeer.
  
--User Parsiferon 03:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The first statement is pretty much wrong, in general. Most racing cars are set up for linear range understeer (but not because of critical speed). However, even an oversteer car may not be able to reach its critical speed due to lack of power. Statement 2 is a reasonable summary of the phenomenon. I'll alter teh first staement Greglocock 22:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradictory OR Ambiguous

message: This article had rather poor grammar and was a bit inaccurate on some points.  I figure that a championship trophy qualifies me to help this article out a bit as an 'expert' (of sorts).  So I did a lot of reworking on it.  Overall, I mostly just improved the writing without changing what it was trying to say since it was more or less accurate.  But there were a number of points in the original article which were presented as absolutes when they are actually not.  I did expand on a couple of points as well.  Hope this helps.  209.128.67.234 05:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major Edit

message: Why does the article describe oversteer as a "Phenomenon" but understeer simply as a "term"? This seems a little overstated to me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.31.230.90 (talk) 22:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phenomenon?  

message: ...or is slight-to-moderate oversteer good, while understeer is positively lethal?! Of course, I may be projecting my own experiences of totaling an FWD jap due to understeer, while a slightly oversteer-prone RWD beamer has saved my butt quite a few times. Aadieu (talk) 07:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If you find understeer lethal then you are ignoring the vast weight of evidence by experts and engineers alike. Your BMW has understeer, at least if it is a 3 series or 5 series or an X5. I have the measurements to prove it. Any reasonably powerful RWD can be provoked into oversteer, more people get into trouble with it than not. Greglocock (talk) 22:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Either this is hardly readable and makes no sense OR... 

message: I agree with parts of an above discussion that the "critical speed" section is unclear and seems dubious.  The only readily available citation, http://www.me.umn.edu/education/courses/me5286/vehicle_dyn/Vehicle%20Dynamics%20Lecture05.pdf, does not link to an existing page, and should be replaced with something that can be read. 174.29.64.173 (talk) 00:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: = Bad Citation