djr81

Looks like it. Although the rear body work is not the same. http://www.my105.com/classified.asp?id=7764 Not sure what an SR1800 is supposed to be either. Maybe there is a typo on the entry. Saurus looks more likely than Saurag.

Hey Frankies back. The fifth photo is Frankie in his Supra. See www.speedeventseries.com (on the front page under video clips - Franks spin at Barbagallo) for the last time he was there. This is some random stooge from Busso......

Anyone know anything about these things?

I agree & um, disagree. No car is difficult to drive in the wet. If you can't take off from a set of lights without wheelspin you shouldn't be driving. Or won't be for long after plod sees you. But the only tyres that suffer unduly in the wet are R compounds & cheap "performance" tyres. The reason you pay good money for good tyres is that they grip well in all circumstances.

Seriously if you think that getting sideways in fourth on a wet road is testament to you driving ability you need to think again. Things to avoid are: 1. Driving like a dickhead. 2. Bragging about it on an internet forum.

Yeah the Brawn thing was sort of my point. It was good out of the box. Compared to the McLaren which is a dog which no amount of testing will fix. RBR are the odd one out as they are the only team running a pullrod rear. I would have thought that most of the big tems would have been working on the revised diffuser since before Melbourne.

I will be gobsmacked if they get banned. It won't take any of the major teams very long to get the new arrangement implemented. The lack of testing will not hurt them as everything will be sorted using their wind tunnels, cfd systems & shaker rigs.

Well that begs the question: What curve does the HKS unit give? The Ruzic one will do a straight line adjustment to the lateral accelerometer output as one of the settings.

Looking at the first photo (ie motor with head off) it would appear that all of the cylinders were affected. Which pretty muchs rules out a single dud injector or poor air distribution through the manifold.

Velo list their Perth distributors as: www.searleraceequipment.com.au Tony Flood Motorsport (Nice bloke, recommended) 08 9472 1800 Kew Street Welshpool. Race Tune Services (Roley - again, nice bloke) 08 9371 3333 Chalkley Place Bayswater.

Sooooo what spring rates did you settle on? Also I am interested to see how they dealt with the mods for the spring rubbers.

The point of the Velos is they are available in different widths so you can get anything from a slip hipped nancy boy fitment to something suited to the fat bastards of this world. Most Japanese seats are very narrow. Also try OMP - they do good stuff.

Because the 32's & 33's have too tall gearing which means you too often get caught off boost or between gears in hillclimbs/kharnas etc etc.

Velo do nice work, are local & best of all can be specced up so you know they fit before you buy them.

The best work Ilmor did was designing a push rod V8 for the Indy 500. The motor had a life of exactly one race - the 1994 Indy 500. Needless to say it won. Ilmor was bought by MB ages ago. The Ilmor that exists today came about via a Honda Indycar engine programme & Roger Penske's involvement. Same thing just different.

Judd motors (the 3.5 litre V8's anyway) were used by Williams, March (Leyton House) & Ligier. Later by Lotus. Judd had a long history in F1 & other categories - he worked on the championship winning Repco V8's & had extensive dealings with Honda. Judd engine developments company still exists today. Interestingly (or not) the motor the Leyton House team went on to use was an Ilmor V10. Which morphed into a Mercedes Benz badged unit. Which went into the back of the Sauber. Well before Sauber was taken over by BMW. See how incestuous F1 is?

I guess that was sarcastic. Hard to tell. Clearly weight distribution will profoundly affect traction & have an influence on cornering speed. My point was that the relatively influence it has on braking performance in no way explains the complete hash many drivers are making of defending their places into corners. Alonso was all over the place in Malaysia & clearly he is no Muppet. RBR's scope for running an "illegal" rear diffuser will be seriously hampered by their pullrod rear suspension. You can bet someone somewhere is beavering away designing a pushrod rear setup for the RBR. Adrian Neweys abilities (in an F1 sense) have not been in doubt since he designed the Leyton House Marches that offered the only real competition to the McLarens in 1988. The amusing bit about Leyton House was who their motors were designed for & by - not necessarilly who had their names on the cam covers...

This years cars are predominantly grip limited at the rear. Which means the teams try & get as much weight forward as possible. (By the way this is why the diffuser ruling is so critical) With the KERS you obviously need a motor tied in with the drive train to get the power out. Beyond that the batteries need to go as far forward as possible. On the upside I don't think any of the teams are running over weight because of KERS. On the downside obviously there will be limits to how much ballast you can redistribute when running it. But weight distribution shouldn't have a marked affect on braking performance.

How did you get 4 degrees out of offset bushes? I couldn't get even three. The Nismo arms tend to get sold as a kit - with stuff you don't need. http://www.nismo.co.jp/en/products/competi...linebcnr33.html Mostly the arms are stock Nissan parts, but drilled differently & painted silver. For my 10 cents worth the minimal list will be: Sway bars front & rear. Shocks/springs (If you are unhappy with what you have). Adjustable bushes for front & rear. Falling under the good idea category is: Shorter front upper control arms. Adjustable castor rods or offset bushes for the stock items. Under the nice to have category are: Longer front lower control arms. Front upper link mounting brackets (ex Nismo)

Well the KERS runs in conjunction with the motor (obviously). So if it igets to be fully charged half way into the braking zone then clearly you lose whatever percentage of retardation the KERS was providing. The KERS only runs off the rear brakes so by my dodgy figuring it must affect the braking performance. Even then it assumes the torque of the KERS is constant as the car decelerates - although presumably the engineers have worked out a way of keeping it relatively linear.

Yeah the commentry appeared to be running about 5 seconds behind the vision. So Brundle would be speculating as to whether or not someone would be in for a pit stop - but after they had screamed by the pit entrance. Still having the sound out of sync with the vision is pretty common....

The problem with the KERS cars appears to be that they are horrible under brakes. The bias must be all over the shop.

Just thought I would offer this up to those bitching about One HD TV. Where I live we don't get One HD. Or infact any commercial high definition broadcasts. Or for that matter any commercial digital broadcast at all. So the Win signal goes out in beautiful analog. Wide screen? WTF is that? You will notice how the timing on the left hand side of the screen can't be read. Brilliant. Qualifying doesn't get shown at all. Steven Conroy = Fail. You fkn muppet.

To be honest I can't think of a reason why you couldn't get ABS to function on a dual master cylinder set up - one with bias adjustment at that. Ofcourse it tends to depend on how you go about the bias adjustment. If you think about it a reservoir is just a reservoir so that doesn't affect anything. The twin cylinders are just a different way of proportioning the fluid (ie instead of having springs in the bore of the conventional system) The bias adjustment just alters the amount of travel each cylinder has relative to your pedal. The only thing I can think would be a problem is running a pressure limiter for the rears. But if you have a look at the stock set up & the knee points etc even that doesn't appear to be a problem. So in short it should work. Just don't quote me on that....

The three channel/four channel thing doesn't make a huge difference. A three channel ABS system still detects a locked rear in the same way as a 4 channel. The difference between the two is that a three channel will release (reduce, really) line pressure on BOTH rear brakes. A four channel only does the locked side. Basically you are trading rear end stability (3 channel) for slightly more retardation (4 channel).