FatBoy wrote: TwinTurbo wrote:
There's a big difference in the effects of the total weight, the weight of the unsprung components and the weight of the rotating components. Personally I'd be reducing the weight of the rotating items first, that's effectively free horsepower for faster acceleration. Then the unsprung weight, for better handling, especially with control dampers and springs. I would also be looking to reduce weight at the extremities to lessen the POI. Similarly reducing weight above the COG to lower it and weight at front (they are front heavy). I'd then use any ballast, required to meet the minimum weight, to offset the drivers weight in balancing. Plus I sure as hell wouldn't be racing with an excess of ~15 litres of fuel sloshing around.
There's quite a bit of work required in achieving the optimum weight distribution and this involves increased servicing costs in time, money and effort. Such is the price for winning, or maybe just going faster.
Yeah, you could do all that i guess. And still get spanked by a young gun like Dan Smith / Dimitri Agathos / Jaie Robson because they have far more talent than i ever will. If i was battling it out with the Top 3 or 4 i might consider pushing the envelope but right now myself (and the rest of the field it seems) are quite content to build sub 10k cars and just get out there and have fun - which was the intent of the series from day dot. Hopefully it stays like that.
Unfortunately raising the profile goes against that hope.
In my case, because I was never the best driver, not the worst, but definitely not the best, I always had to "engineer" my car to be a second or so faster than the competition. As a result I could in general keep up with the faster drivers as long as I worked hard enough to maintain the engineering advantage. It would have been embarrassing if the car was a second or so off the pace engineering wise and then handicapped further by my driving level. When I had a "faster" driver in a car that I worked on I couldn't have slept at night knowing that the car wasn't as fast or faster than the opposition. I really hate letting my teammates down. The driver and the other people who put their heart and sole (and often money) into it, it grates on me if the car isn't the best that it can be. I guess it's a DNA thing, I just don't go motor racing to lose, I don't have to win, but I do have to feel like we have a chance. That doesn't mean rolling the "perfect" car off the trailer the first time and every time, I'm OK with a work in progress, ongoing development. What I am not OK with is a "she'll be right" approach although I do understand that there are plenty of people who just love to compete.
Frankly Paul there simply isn't enough "fun" there for me in just competing, in order for me to put in a full effort I need more "fun" than that.
Just looking back at something from a page or two back - i had been meaning to check it as your estimated seemed absurdly low...
TwinTurbo wrote:So better brakes would help then, or more accurately shorter stopping distances. It's not the maximum speed itself that matters, it's the difference between the maximum speed and the corner speed. Simple example, RX7 has maximum speed of 190 kph (at Wakefield let's say) with a turn 2 speed of 90 kph (let's say), that's 100 kph to be washed off. If the Puslar (that weighs the same) has a maximum speed of (let's say) 160 kph and a corner speed of 60 kph then that's 100 kph to be washed off. Not a lot of difference in braking performance. Yes, I know the tyres are different.
Except the Pulsars are very close - (some just over, some just under) your estimated max speed, but a corner speed of 90km/h through 1 as verified by data i just looked at. So significantly different...
Whilst i have no doubt the brake package could easily be upgraded to make them even better under brakes my assertion that the package currently run is fine for what they are...
It was just an example Paul, it wasn't as you call it an "estimate", hence why I used the terminology "let's say".
For completeness it was Turn 2, not Turn 1.