Talks about 350mph super car and interesting things on how there is nothing limiting the power, speed, and agility of our cars except ourselves. Talks about Nacar, Indy 500, SCCA and how they banned things that made it "uncompetitive" instead of letting everyone else adapt. Whats the "end" of the road, whats the road block that would make a car not able to go any faster or turn any harder? Us, humans, we all know after so many G-forces were done. Good read, I only got through a 1/4 of it so I decided to buy it.

 

Just finish reading another article. For those that have cylinders in your car *gasp* yes that exist, there an interesting read about some guy getting about 20 to 40% more fuel efficiency by cutting grooves into the cylinder head , the combustion chamber side. In a few mins I should be able to scan some pics.

 

Did you get them scanned?

 

I was trying to do it at work. But didnt work out tommorow I should be able to.

 

The main reason there are limitations/guidelines in motorsports is to keep budgets in check. The team with the largest budget typically wins. R&D eats up a lot of resources.

I'll have to read that article. Sounds interesting.

-Mark

 

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/futurec...9122-4,00.html

 

That's very true but in the last 10 years you have really seen the major sanctioning bodies begin to accept that the human body is being stretched to it's limits and thus speeds need to be drawn back every couple years for safety reasons. CART and the IRL probably lead the way in this regard. And the NHRA is at the forefront as well. When the CART drivers were blacking out from the G loading at Texas a few years ago they did the right thing and called the race. And though I love the big numbers and drivers/cars going faster every year I hate to see people get hurt. It's a bummer when the HP is cut and aero tweaks slow the cars but it's becoming neccesary to save the drivers from the inevitable crash.

 

I was at TMS that day to watch qualifying. Needless to say I have seen just about everything run at TMS and I used to attend at least one other CART race every year. The CART cars were stupid fast around TMS; I was astounded how fast they were going through the corners. Made the IRL cars look like dump trucks. CART did the right thing in canceling the race, the problem was they didn't decide to do so until the next day only a few hours before the race was to start. I was one of the people who drove to the track through all the traffic only to find out from a big sign outside the parking lot that it had been canceled...

Speed is over rated anyway; you don't need to go 230 mph in order to have a good race that pleases both the drivers and the fans.

 

Popular science is just a monthly Star or national Enquirer. It's a fringe magazine with articles based on hypothesis but yet the cover says it's the wave of the future likes its been tested. Sort of like seeing a movie star beat up on the cover of a magazine and the title says star beat to hell by jealous boyfriend. Article turns out it was for her upcoming movie....great.

Tim

 

Well the future stuff was fun read but they had some interesting points on racing and other things. Also they talk about some Indian dude that has "redigned" the piston engine by etching little scuffs on the heads to help mix the fuel/air. That was something else that was interesting.

 

If you want the real thing read "Invention & Technology".

 

That pub makes Popular Science look like Teen People crossed with the Jetsons.

But that article does have some valid points, humans are fragile creatures and cornering at 9Gs would not be fun. I was also interested that they talked to Saleen, someone who (although a newbie in the field compared to some manufacturers) has actually engineered and produced a real supercar.

On the magazine article subject: Damon, I picked up that issue of Racecar Engineering with the Parabolic trail-braking article. $8.95, but well worth it.

 

Did you read about the indian dude that "revolutionized" the piston motor as they say?

 

We've known for quite sometime that the limiting factor of fighter aircraft is survival and performance of the pilot. We can quite easily build any number of space vehicles, aircraft or cars that could make absolutely astounding numbers but when you must put us soft bodied humans onboard your vehicle is automatically handicapped

 

Maybe they should teach military anti-G straining/breathing techniques to these drivers.

Damon is right about the human being the limiting factor, but driving around radio controlled airplanes/cars is no fun.

How many Gs were the guys at TMS being subjected to? Usually the onset of the Gs rather than the actual amount of G loading is what would cause a "blackout". I never really heard the full story on that or if there was any experimentation/documentation going on. I suspect that a dehydrated, undernourished, and unsuspecting driver who made a quick turn-in could gray out with only loading to a few Gs. 9Gs sounds pretty excessive and would have caused the same guy to G-loc and wake up disoriented with his car probably driving toward something hard and static...(maybe that is what happened regardless?)
But hell, lateral Gs that I've experienced in a car are way different than the G loads I've experienced in a jet....so what do I know.

 

The problem isnt really how much Gs because there are cases of people surving Gs of up to 50g's!! (some guy on a rocket sled) problem is the amount of time its sustained cause the blood to rush away from the brain and finally in car racing the constant change of direction of the Gs.

I think a cool solution if possible would be to have check valves install in your veins and arterys not allowing the blood to go down. Even install a pump to increase flow if need be. Imagine, it would be fusing man and machine. Scary.

 

Agreed!

Most of the articles in PS are BS. It is a waste of money.

 

Hmm, well then maybe an anti-g straining maneuver would maybe work. Doing it correctly is what allows fighter pilots to not gray out under sustained high G-loading and still be able to function and put bombs on target.

 

Problem is no anti-g manuaver will work at these crazy loads and constant changes.

 

and thus we make multi million dollar rc cars in the future that corner around 10gs and absolutly fly in the straights......only if someone was sabatoged (sp) by turning the wing upside down....ha

 

The CART drivers @ TMS were having problems because of the downward Gs they were experiencing coming off of the banking in the corners. It was a rather unimpressive number, but they said the human body just cannot take it on the vector that was being produced that day. I don't think it was a matter of breathing techniques, etc., they were hitting 4Gs+ laterally mid corner, but they'd done that before.

 

That is the PR spin fed to public. Yet, if that is the excuse we're fed, we might deduce that some rules stifle innovation by limiting R&D, somewhat limiting pursuit of technology.

 

Its true, it use to be said, that technology starts on top (racing) and works its way down to the public. Yet now a days, you find more public cars WAY more advanced than some racing cars.

 

So if I may summarize all this, the only thing keeping a rotary powered car from reaching the speed of light, warp 1, is the amount of money we are willing to put into R&D?

I have noticed that the nacelle shape of the latter gens of the Enterprise are shaped similarly to a rotor housing. Could that be strictly coincidence?

 

1 word, G-suit. Of course the added weight of the G-suit system is probably a factor, but if it allows your driver to finish the race and not crash, then it seems well worth it. For those who dont know, a G-suit is kind of like a girdle that wraps around your abdomen and upper thighs. It contains inflatable bladders that constrict and prevent the blood from draining from the brain. Teaching drivers the "grunt" as previously mentioned would also help.