Steering decision matrix
- Shangheethan Prabaharan
Criteria | Anti Ackerman | Ackerman | Parallel | Notes |
Manufacturability | 0 | 0 | .5 | Same parts but parallel steering has easier set up because both setups are symmetrical but the difference in difficulty is relatively low. |
Availability of off the shelf parts | 0 | 0 | 0 | Uses same parts |
Cost | 0 | 0 | 0 | Would have next to no difference, if any |
Even Tire Wear | 0 | 0 | 1 | Parallel steering keeps both tires are similar wears |
Maneuverability | 0 | 0 | -1 | Each can be the best depending on speed but parallel steering seems to be overall worse at cornering |
Ease of driving | 0 | 0 | -1 | If done correctly will improve handling due to less loss of traction |
Low speed corners | -1 | 0 | -1 | Ackerman is the superior version because the inner tire turns in more. |
High speed corners | 1 | 0 | -1 | Anti Ackerman works best in high speed corners as the geometry allows for most speed to be kept. |
Easy of lane switching | -1 | 0 | 1 | Anti Ackerman tends to understeer more into lane switches as the rear end lags behind because of the rapid angle change. Parallel allows for smoother transition. |
Total | -1 | 0 | -1.5 | Ackerman it is |