Special Stage Forums banner
41 - 60 of 209 Posts

·
Rapidly filling your mirrors
Joined
·
315 Posts
Dave, Dave, Dave....as they say in a homicide: follow the money.

Don't you see the headlines? "Audi returns to Pikes Peak!" Albeit not quite the same....

With Audi's cut backs in ALMS and the push to promote more clean diesel tech this is a natural link and one that I'd bet has some corp money behind it also. (if it's all really true) I can see a fleet of Audi support cars, "official vehicles" and such to accompany the hoopla of the run. Win on Sunday, sell on Monday? Maybe not but the race has been struggling for the past ten years for a mfg sponsor and this remains on more way to try and secure it. The VW connection a few years ago was a good way to open the door but there was no logical connection to race history. This promo has that.

Right, wrong or whatever it's business as usual and despite the fact that I agree with your point of view as a competitor...it's not about the racing it's about the business.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
331 Posts
I would agree that they should be run at the end of the day just because there is no telling how long of a delay they would cause. I'm not a competitor but I could only imagine the disappointment that they would go through if they had to run during the rain or worse yet miss their run all together.

From a spectators view it would make more since to group the runs based on the average delays from previous years. Why run a group that contains the vast majority in the beginning of the day while the other groups have had very few get stuck at the end when there's a better chance of rain/missed runs.

But then again at the same time you could say that you would want those groups to be run during the "safer" time of the day as to not cause injuries due to wet roads.
 

·
stay less flat...
Joined
·
777 Posts
If Audi was truely interested in re-kindling the racing history, they'd bring a TDI LMP car out and run a 9 flat. :rolleyes:

BTW, the headlines are already on the PPIHC website ticker.

Dave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LYmr7opxuw

like this but lower revs...

please.


so does the unmanned car get navigated by the computer or is there a "driver" controlling it remotely? I didn't bother to read the article - I know you guys did...
 

·
Left 4 into beachball
Joined
·
1,920 Posts
Discussion Starter · #45 ·
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LYmr7opxuw

like this but lower revs...

please.


so does the unmanned car get navigated by the computer or is there a "driver" controlling it remotely? I didn't bother to read the article - I know you guys did...
Awesome video, but that's not an Audi despite all the people on the interwebz proclaiming it is...its a BMW powered Norma.

The unmanned car will run based on computers, but I haven't see exact details on how exactly they do it. The car's got some sensors (like backup sensors?) and also has GPS. Some seriously cool technology for sure.

Dave
 

·
stay less flat...
Joined
·
777 Posts

·
stay less flat...
Joined
·
777 Posts
Good find!

Alain has moved onto a newer version of the car and the one in these videos was for sale....and was a bit of the inspiration for me to start looking into sportsracers for PPIHC.

Dave
I was disappointed the finish on Mt. Ventoux is so low for the cars. the upper section where the mountain is bald (from deforestation in medieval times - not alpine treeline) would have looked cool to see a car running on.

I guess there's not enough room at the top to shut it down...
 

·
Left 4 into beachball
Joined
·
1,920 Posts
Discussion Starter · #49 · (Edited)
I was disappointed the finish on Mt. Ventoux is so low for the cars. the upper section where the mountain is bald (from deforestation in medieval times - not alpine treeline) would have looked cool to see a car running on.

I guess there's not enough room at the top to shut it down...
Yeah, I was expecting them to break out of the trees too. Not sure on the date of that race in relation to the other vid, but to me, the car looked a tad less insane. Altitude maybe?

Found this last night on the interwebz...wonder what the reserve was/is:

http://tinyurl.com/ykgnhda

Dave
 

·
Rapidly filling your mirrors
Joined
·
315 Posts
I agree Dave. The future of PP lies in totally different machinery. Which has been one of my frustrations the past two years- that we've not been given any direction to what those classes could or might be. It's important that the PPIHC begin to define what these classes 'might' be.

There are a host of possible classes to build from; starting with SCCA based sedans to Koni Challenge, to spec based cars such as FM or SRF. (low budgets) For the more experienced and open classes cars such as the one in the ebay link and former Indy car or ALMS hardware however there remains some issue.....like what limitations on build or motors should be expected? I've toyed with some open wheel options the past couple years but be damned if I'll invest hard money in it only to be told it's not eligible! Figuring it takes a couple of years to build a good new machine now's the time to put these things to paper.
 

·
R3 into mudpit
Joined
·
166 Posts
Im still thinking a champ car is going to be the best bet for a while. V8 turbo Cosworth motors putting 800hp with 850 available under "power to pass." Its already a full aero car, all you would probably want to do is max out the downforce. I momentarily thought about the old turbo F1 cars. But those chassis and the areo would surely be showing their age by now. But champ cars went bye bye in 08. So they are still very "new" as far as that goes.
 

·
Rapidly filling your mirrors
Joined
·
315 Posts
Im still thinking a champ car is going to be the best bet for a while. V8 turbo Cosworth motors putting 800hp with 850 available under "power to pass." Its already a full aero car, all you would probably want to do is max out the downforce. I momentarily thought about the old turbo F1 cars. But those chassis and the areo would surely be showing their age by now. But champ cars went bye bye in 08. So they are still very "new" as far as that goes.

Most went to Australia I heard. The Panoz cars at least. Not sure on that much hp for the road but the ptp on a straight would be nice....maybe less lower boost for normal time and more boost on the ptp??

One hiccup that is part of my concern...how are you going to meet the roll cage requirements? Are they going to be repealed?? See the build problems here that I speak of? No way would I build an old Champ car with a n/a or turbo motor specific to PP and not have a clear understanding of the roll bar requirements- for a number of years also.

You can't put a roll cage (of any value) inside a carbon tub. Drilling holes and bolting to composite is not wise and building it to fit the bulkheads means you won't fit unless you're a midget. A "free floating" cage might be doable but again making for very tight quarters- tighter. No roll cage? Might meet with some negative response form the ins companies given history. Is it worth spending 75k to hope it passes tech?
 

·
R3 into mudpit
Joined
·
166 Posts
I see all the problems here and i understand them. One issue you will have though is this:

...No way would I build an old Champ car with a n/a or turbo motor...
You actually wont be doing much motor work anyways. The motor is actually a part of the chassis. The only things you might be able to mess with realistically is the boost levels and some slight tuning. But keep in mind that may be out of the realm of possibility for most "tuners." You will really have to search to find people to work on a car like that anyways. I do have a lot of "cutaway" shots of a 2005 chassis if anyone wants to see them. They are almost identical to how the last "gen" of the cars were built. It should give you an idea of what youre getting into with a higher end open wheel car.

But as far as the safety requirements go the reason for having A pillar bars is so the driver doesnt get crushed in case of a roll over correct? The reason open wheel cars like Champ Cars, Indy, F1 etc dont need these is because they are designed not to need them. The driver sits low enough in the car so in the event of a roll over the drivers head is well under the line that is formed by the top of the "roll bar" and the front of the drivers tub. As seen in these 2 photos, the first is in fact a champ car and the second is F1:





There is more engineering in safety in these chassis then some racing series put in the engineering for the entire cars. They are designed to dissipate the energy away from the driver and are in fact very good at it. They do this by actually allowing everything attached to the drivers tub to break free. The downside to this being you only get one chance with a chassis. Usually it is done after one good accident. We all know there are ways that one could potentially get injured racing a vehicle like this in an event such as Pikes Peak (when its paved obviously) but we arent here to play the what if game. If you want to deconstruct everything down to every possible what if we would never race. There are inherent risks to motor racing that we all take every time you harness in. I just hope that whoever is in charge of giving cars the thumbs up or down for Pikes Peak realizes that these cars as they are would still be miles safer than the open wheel hill climb specific cars that are held together with V-band clamps. I understand the reasoning for this, i stated it earlier with regard to the higher end cars so please dont get mad at me for that comment. All they are doing is using a cheaper and easier version of what takes engineers a lot of time and money to do on the higher end cars. So long story short i guess, they shouldnt need any added roll bars anywhere. No to mention the difficulty that this would require as stated by Todd.
 

·
Left 4 into beachball
Joined
·
1,920 Posts
Discussion Starter · #55 ·
Look at Paul Dallenbach's car. In a previous life, it was an Indy car I beleive, and they made him add bars so it looks more like an Open Wheel car. I say this in a nice way Aaron, but until you've had the pleasure of dealing with the PPIHC folks, you just wouldn't understand. :confused: Don't get me wrong, I'm in agreement with you on the amount of engineering that goes into chassis safety, and I'd gladly hop into one of these cars. Now, who's going to cover the car rental fee for me?

Dave
 

·
R3 into mudpit
Joined
·
166 Posts
I fully understand they any safety person in any race series or event shouldnt let a car run that is potentially unsafe. But sadly i think if they do wind up requiring more safety gear than needed this wouldnt be anything that could be done by a grassroots effort. Has there been a number of you requesting that rules be put in place in the event that it is paved soon? If enough people ask about it that are seious it may force them to hurry up and make some decisions about new classing and safety rules. Which would benefit both the drivers and the event as a whole. The more people that know far enough in advance can actually prepare and have a car ready, which means more entrants.

On a side note though. As far as i can tell in the rule book the only thing it says about aero is that it needs to be approved in advance. And unless i am reading that improperly then i have some good ideas that were used back in the CanAm series that you might want to look into incorporating. Think Jim Hall :cool:
 

·
Rapidly filling your mirrors
Joined
·
315 Posts
Time out please.

1. Don't take my comments out of context. My "no way would I build...." comment was edited removing the core. "specific to PP rules etc etc", to mean that building such a car with a ONE RACE A YEAR value is about ZERO on the value scale of owning such a vehicle- given you would have no other place to run it. Plus the cost to produce it combined with no guarantee that in 2012 the rules would not ban such a car make such a build totally stupid.

Sorry...no rant here but if you don't understand the cost to value of such a project that's fine but I think I do. I've reviewed options and proven what can be done in a class. Don't ask me to build a new car...with no ground rules...and then tell me my work would be fruitless.

2. Paul's car and David's car are neither "former Indy cars" in any way! Paul's is a home built copy of a former Wells car (Wally's car) and has some Indy influence to it and help with aero work. David's car is another purpose built car with no history other than hill climbs. Although the main body cowl is taken from a Lola T-600 Forumula Ford. Hardly what one would consider terribly high tech.

There are no open wheel cars with true road racing backgrounds running today. All are hybrid Wells or other home built cars that have been massaged over the years to what you see today. Once paved the first true road racing single seater to show will clean their clock as would be the case in Stock car vs Trans Am cars.

The problem is that all this money and time is being wasted in hybrid cars. Fully paved the complexity of the race will change nearly overnight. Regardless...the problem is not about "what to race" but rather "what is allowed to race".
 

·
Left 4 into beachball
Joined
·
1,920 Posts
Discussion Starter · #58 ·
Interesting info on the current crop of cars hybrid OWs. I haven't been around since they first ran, so I was only going off the info that had been shared with me. Guess I got some mis-information.

Agreed with building a car for one race a year, whether it be PPIHC or any other one-off. Their non-committal response it what put me off from trying the Radical...but part of that was b/c I didn't want to run a typical radical with a bike engine, I wanted a powerplant that would be more altitude friendly.

Dave
 

·
Rapidly filling your mirrors
Joined
·
315 Posts
I'm with you Dave. I'd consider such a car also (although at my age not sure how much commitment I'd really put into it any longer) if they'd put publish rules for the class being in perhaps 2012 or such. And I'd want those core rules in writing and firm. The problem would be running the car for testing. I'd probably petition to allow the car to be run in testing (for the fee of course) but not entered in 10 and 11 maybe. Open to anyone producing such a new car or perhaps others in similar situations with new cars etc etc. With no testing allowed without an entry (I tried that) there's not much of a way to really shake down the design. Traditional HC events won't work given road conditions, road racing events won't be ideal due to altitude and grade.
 

·
R3 into mudpit
Joined
·
166 Posts
Todd im sorry apparently i did misunderstand your post. If there isnt going to be a very odd set of rules made for open wheel or any other car that will be potientially running pikes peak there shouldnt be any reason you could only use it for Pikes Peak. The idea Dave has been throwing around would be a truely killer open track car. You would still be able to take it somewhere to drive it to hone your skills, test and tune, time trial, time attack, etc. But you are right you would almost certainly not find another race series with similar cars in which to run it. But this brings me back to what i asked earlier. Have enough of you requested that they start working on potential classes and rules for a paved Pikes Peak? The only way they are going to do anything about it now is if the competitors are proactive about it. Let them know that there is more than one or 2 of you that would like to start building cars for when it is paved. Otherwise the first year its paved you may be "stuck" driving what is already being used. Otherwise whos to say they wont wait until after it is paved to get rules in place.
 
41 - 60 of 209 Posts
Top