To: | James Tone <gmc6power@earthlink.net> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: TC thought |
From: | Dave Dahlgren <ddahlgren@snet.net> |
Date: | Mon, 03 Dec 2001 06:19:56 -0500 |
With all respect Jim I would love to see the dyno sheet for that one. How big is it in cubic inches and at what RPM? I must be out of touch with what can be done with a pushrod inline 6. Great job! The whole myth is what I propose will cost more than a new set of legal tires and wheels to go 300 mph. The first one might but the 50'th one won't. It is the same with every new technology first article is pricey and then they get cheaper.As an inspector have you ever had to ask or were even curious if the car had a rev limiter? If you did ask did you ask are there any special reasons you might want this to limit the engine speed. Are there any rules telling me that I can't limit the engine speed or change the boost or ignition timing by a method other than the driver. I never read them and I have read the rule book cover to cover, maybe I missed that part. I don't want to mess with the brakes and I don't want to mess with the throttle linkage. There are 3 controls that ought to be sacred to keep this a drivers race. 1. steering 2. throttle 3. brakes As long as the driver is in control of these 3 things they are driving the car and not along for the ride. everything other than that has already been legal to have operated by something other than the driver. 1. automatic transmission 2. ignition advance 3. fuel delivery 4. boost control 5. rev limiter 6. data acquisition 7. nitrous application Big guys and little guys have used all seven of these( and i am sure there are a few i missed) for there own reasons in the past. All I am proposing is to add another reason to use them and i honestly did not think that the reasons i could use them was even listed in the rules. I want to have safe cars! I even more want to have safe faster cars or at least the ability to explore things that might make the cars faster and still not make them dangerous by using devices that are not tested such as applying the brakes on one wheel. Dave Dahlgren James Tone wrote: > I have only one comment......700hp is definately attainable with a Jimmy. I > have it unblown and I'm sure BMR has at least that much blown. Mine is > attained without that much modern tech. Sure the cam grind is different and > the mag is more powerful but the oil is still in the pan and the injection > is all mechanical..... Ron Main may have it without ardun heads and lots of > technology...Technology is a wonderful concept if used properly. Some of us > as inspectors are at the mercy of the builder/owners to tell the truth when > asked questions on their race vehicles. TC for "safety" is the easy way > out. When the "little guy" spins and crashes his car or bike the "big guy" > will say he should have had TC. What to do....... who knows <snip> /// /// 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 /// /// |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: TC5, Dave Dahlgren |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Rev Limiters and Such, Bill Smith |
Previous by Thread: | Re: TC thought, Louise Ann Noeth |
Next by Thread: | Re: TC thought, Thomas E. Bryant |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |