Removing the rear anti-roll bar decreases weight transfer to the front of the car.

Personally, I haven't found my 84 -SE to be particularly tail-happy, even with the rear bar. *shrug*

 

What removing the rear anti roll bar does is let the suspension travel. The reason that SA/FB's are so tail happy is because the rear geometry is **** poor and the links tend to bind instead of move. Because you have no travel, you have no control = spin. Softening up the rear suspension by removing the bar allows more travel. It doesn't really have anything do with weight transfer to the front or back, that's accomplished by braking/accelerating.

 

tail happy handling also comes from traction problems, hence my accident in the rain in a light car.

Last year the Canadian forum lost a member under similar conditions in an FD.

 

wider tires...lol. Um...if it's a matter of the suspension binding and locking down (which would cause all of the force of the turn on the tires alone)...then why hasn't someone tried addressing that issue? There would have to be some way to modify the links to prevent that from happening, it would seem.

 

There is and there are. A few tuners offer kits to relocate the links, and I'm looking at a Miata IRS swap

 

That's not quite right. Random's more accurate. Generally speaking, the more weight transfer, the less traction. You want both rear tires planted firmly on the ground. The anti-roll bar tends to "pick up" the inside rear tire when the car leans. Of course, the same thing happens at the front. It's the ratio of front-to-rear roll stiffness that determines (among other things) how well either end of the car sticks.

In steady-state cornering, a stock FB still understeers, though not as much as most cars. It doesn't take much to change the balance, though -- a tap of the brakes or small steering inputs.