Interesting comparison. Maybe I need a little help here in understanding what
LSR
is all about. My understanding is that it is about devising a way to to break a
record for a certain size engine and body type using the smarts I was given and
whatever technology was available. In special construction the rules are
designed
for unlimited innovation... Am I on the same page as the rule book here or not?
I
am quoting the rule book so I thought I was.
Louise's version seems to be I can try to break a record as long as i don't do
anything any smarter than the last guy tried.. What happened to the innovation
part. Do I have to run a stove pipe air scoop too?? I am bewildered now.. For me
this sport is about 90% figuring out what the real problem is and then setting
objective to overcome them. The execution of the final design is the smaller
part
of it all.
As far as traction control goes what I want is an accurate definition of what it
is.;
I want to be able to have my rev limiter go off when I want it to for whatever
reason I think is important.
I want most boost to be controlled for whatever reason I think is important.
I want to change the ignition timing whenever I want for whatever reason I think
important.
I don't want anything to run the brakes other than the driver.
I don't want anything to run the throttle other than the driver..
The consensus of opinion says that these ideas will slow the car down. If so
then
I will just be riding around and burning gas making a little noise, like a lot
of
cars are doing already.. So the real harm or threat is??
The real issue with traction control is i think not understanding the many ways
to implement it in the first place. Applying one brake to slow down the one
wheel
going too fast is in my mind very dangerous.
Having something other than the driver control the throttle even though it is
becoming common on such exotic cars like chevrolets is probably a challenge for
some to get right.
These happen at every meet.. and have been deemed normal a log time ago.
Having the rev limiter go off and slow the engine down is a non-event.
Having the waste gate open and drop the boost in a turbo engine is a non-event.
Having the ignition timing change and drop or increase engine power is a
non-event.
I just want to do these things for a different reason.
I assume correctly I hope that the majority of the rules are made for safety.
If that is the case would someone please tell me what what unsafe condition I am
creating by reducing engine power.
If rules are made to keep all the cars going similar speeds in a given class
then
this has just become NASCAR.
The other point that does need to be brought up is the only reason this is such
a
hot topic is all other ways to aid in traction have either been exhausted and
there are no more meaningful gains to be had. Or in the case of many of the cars
not in special construction the rules on aero design prohibit any technology
that
will make a meaningful change in traction. So all that is left is ballast.
What class does a locomotive fit into anyway?? And is it gas or electric... I
hate the smell of burning coal so I'll stay away from the steam driven ones for
now.
Dave Dahlgren
Louise Ann Noeth wrote:
> My dad used to think that any fisherman who used a radar device was a big
> sissy who didn't understand the whole point of dropping a hook in the first
> place. Me? I thought it was silly to go out in the boat to relax and then
> bring along something that made you work. In a competition, however, the
> device would provide and unfair advantage to those with the resources to buy
> one and I can see why it should not be allowed.
>
> Be Vigilant,
>
> "LandSpeed" Louise Ann Noeth
///
/// land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe land-speed
///
/// or go to http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///
///
|