Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Im curious to see what these air jacks look like that SSE and Cyber were using, does anyone have pics please?

Yeah I do. Will post at some point. Only SSE's were gas powered. Cyber put little scissor jacks into the base of theirs. Very clever and cheaper but not as fast/easy to use.

for those of you who like to avoid the banter on the R35 section, here is Tarzan doing his best to battle the understeer on his hotlap. understeer was the winner on this occasion but we will be working on that for next year ;)

Found this article, worth reading regarding pro class controversies....

http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_articles/articletype/articleview/articleid/2073/world-time-attack-challenge-2011-pro-class-controversies.aspx

Handbrake - congrats on the result mate you should be proud, some more testing and the car will be a serious contender next year....

interesting info about the tyres. Looks like Berry should get his tyres out of Japan.

Bit harsh calling Glenny Alonso though.... although might be worth trying to get it to stick at the next rally event :P

lol, I guess they don't get Wilfred in Seppo land.

Interesting article, I'd like to see the equivalent from each of the other top teams. For those that haven't read it, it says "We weren't trying to hide anything, we have some trick cylinder head and run 40psi boost, and we imply but don't say that everyone else is cheating but we are clean"

How do you cheat when there are basically no rules. Other than a nitrous setup Which should be detectable to a scrutineer there are no limitations to engine mods to my knowledge.

As for tyres, if a tyre maker offerred me some secret squirrel donuts not available to the competition that would give me an edge in that department you can bet your heiny I would take them.

I'll lay london to a brick that a lot of the top compeitors have their dirty little secrets they are unwilling to share with anybody.

of course...everyone is spending big and won't want to share the results of that spend....nothing different about the top level of time attack to any other category.

their specific implications (not accusations I said) were around tyres not being purchased commercially from local supliers, and tube frame cars.

The tube frame issue is going to be an ongoing bone of contention until the promotor lays down some hard and fasts. I dont have an opinion on it either way as I know bugger all about it but it needs to be nipped in the bud before it becomes a major issue.

How long will it be before there is a major rule shakeup, what we are seeing now is a repeat of what has happenned in other forms of motor sport right from the top down. Cars became so powerful and fast it became a health hazard to drive them.

Its only a matter of time before we start seeing 1000 plus hp setups if time attack conitnues at its current rate of development.

agreed...unfortunately. Especially if they stay at Eastern Creek where power + aero will really pay off.

I don't understand the tube frame restriction at all. If you can have tube frame front and rear ends (where it really matters), allowing total freedom of suspension mounting locations and geometery, why not have a tube frame body as well? The only difference in a tube frame body would be some weight saving.

The other benefit for tube frame would be closer match to sports sedan rules (as long as they are 2wd), so these cars could be used more than once a year.

CAMS have defined a space frame chassis in the 3D regulations.

Basically A 2wd floor pan vehicle must retain, roof, pillars, door sills and the majority of the factory floor pan.

Mods to tunnels etc are permitted.

As Duncan and I have argued awd rules suck the arse ad are not worth mentioning.

A space frame Is a tube chassis which non load bearing coach work is attached.

So tube extensions are fine providing the floor pan etc remains. Can't see how the TG s14 is going to retain the oem floor pan etc.......

It's a space frame just as my R34 is too.

I dont think many of the current running cars break the "space frame" rule. But there is a few cars being built that 100% do.

The majority of the running cars are " heavy metal" sports sedans.

Which seems like a great category to now go and race a skyline!!

ok, simple. just have a seperate class for all the "tube work" modified cars. at least those of us that cant afford to hack the front and rear of our cars will have a more leval playing field.

hell im all for seeing 1000+hp cars, would be a good spectical and im half temped to do a e3 wide body now.... needs the rubber under there..

may aswell take a leaf from the 80's super silluette formula. the cars wont look much differant. all thats needed is factory roof,and doors and floor. the rest is free.

2306757754_e1bf66efb4.jpg2306744004_9510964aa7.jpg

go nuts i say. these were made in the early 80's. i rekon with todays materials and tech a s15 or gtr with a similar design using 13" wheels front a rear will put down a good time :) id pay the entry fee to go watch it :)

food was actually reported as being many times better than previous years. i didn't eat any though as cyber/voltex had catered lunches and kindly donated some my way. dunno where they got their food from but it was bloody good.

well yeah dagwood dog/pluto pup/corn dog is a sure fire licence to drive the porcelain bus (and yes I get sucked in and buy one now and then) but I saw people eating some burgers etc that looked pretty decent. I'd not seen that stuff before.

off the track a bit but probably the best race-track for food i've been to is fuji speedway. nice choice of options there and they serve beers too (with a cool auto beer vending machine/robot).

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
    • @GTSBoy out of the cubic mile of crude oil we burn each year, I wonder how much of that is actually used for providing petrol and diesel.   From memory the figure for cars in Australia, is that they only add up to about 2 to 3% of our CO2 production. Which means something else here is burning a shit tonne of stuff to make CO2, and we're not really straight up burning oil everywhere, so our CO2 production is coming from elsewhere too.   Also we should totally just run thermal energy from deep in the ground. That way we can start to cool the inside of the planet and reverse global warming (PS, this last paragraph is a total piss take)
    • As somebody who works in the energy sector and lives in a subzero climate, i'm convinced EV's will never be the bulk of our transport.  EV battery and vehicle companies over here have been going bankrupt on a weekly basis the last year. 
    • With all the rust on those R32s, how can it even support all the extra weight requirements. Probably end up handling as well as a 1990s Ford Falcon Taxi.
    • Yes...but look at the numbers. There is a tiny tiny fraction of the number of Joules available, compared to what is used/needed. Just because things are "possible" doesn't make them meaningful.
×
×
  • Create New...