OK ... :) ... The Gigantic Debate Thread ... :)

paulkish

paulkish

old fart
What is the difference between "Right front (in charge of turning)" and "Right rear (in charge of rotation)" ?

:confused:
 
On oval karts the RF tends to dominate the turning because it's pretty wide and heavy (compared to the LF). However, there are lots of contributors to turning power.

As to rotation, the RR rotates forward only. The kart rotates counterclockwise but to define a specific point about which it rotates would be tricky.

Todd
www.dynamicsofspeed.com
 
"The kart rotates counterclockwise but to define a specific point about which it rotates would be tricky."

Thanks Todd. It never dawned on me when I say the RR rotates or pivots around the LR, I was marking in many minds a specific point.

I've never considered the LR as a specific point, though I now see because of your reply, how I state it as a specific point. That is an error right now, I don't know how to correct.

I see the LR in my mind, as a constantly moving and constantly changing reference, not an actual point. I don't think I have the ability to define in specific exact terms, what I picture. The best I can do is try to describe the picture, concept and thought process. I don't have a picture in my mind of a staggered solid axle and connected kart or car, rotating around any fixed point. But I can clearly see a dynamic process and picture occurring. I figure everyone can put 3d images of things they've seen or comtemplated in their mind in color, add and subtract from them as needed and cause them to be rotated and operated. I can't put a fixed point of rotation to an axle or kart, because it's not fixed in my picture of it out on the track, it's dynamic. Again thank you because I never realized my words do say I'm referencing a fixed point.
 
Maybe instead of thinking "fixed" point, think "instantaneous" point. Since the kart is always moving and transferring weight, you're right that it's hard to think of one tire on an axle rotating around a point set by the other. "Instantaneous" freezes the action in a moment of time, but implies that things can change in the next instant.
 
Someone ... said:
Maybe instead of thinking "fixed" point, think "instantaneous" point. Since the kart is always moving and transferring weight, you're right that it's hard to think of one tire on an axle rotating around a point set by the other. "Instantaneous" freezes the action in a moment of time, but implies that things can change in the next instant.
Click to expand...

Thank you for bringing this back to life, I learned from you and I appreciate it.

I went and read Todds reply and putting it together with your thoughts and my observations listening to both pavement oriented racers and dirt oriented racers, the following came to mind. I see pavement oval racers thinking about setup from the front back and dirt oriented racers thinking about setup from the back foward. I've said that before and I also end up with what they need to accomplish is the same, it's just the perspective they arrive at the same thing, which differs.

I'm now thinking it doesn't matter if the fronts set the line of travel and the rear is setup to follow on the most efficient path or if the rear sets the line of travel and the front is setup to lead the rear on the most efficient line of travel.

My mindset of where forces originate takes me to a Winged Sprint with wing force helping the axle to operate. It's just as appropriate if you are lacking the forces to reference, to get your primary turning ability from the RF. It does not go against my ideal, it brings into the picture a way to approach LTO's which do not have the same ability to get to my ideal. I'm not backing off one bit on my concept and theory of the ideal. I'm bringing into my picture more of others understanding of what is practical for them and how it's best for them to approach the ideal.

There's always someone to thank for everything, thanks again to Someone. ... :)


paul
 
Not picking on you, but those Sprint cars have much more power than their tires can hook up to the track. Karts, especially in the "stock" classes, have the opposite problem - more grip than power. So we have to be careful when we compare how a Sprint car works to how a kart works.
 
Someone ... said:
Not picking on you, but those Sprint cars have much more power than their tires can hook up to the track. Karts, especially in the "stock" classes, have the opposite problem - more grip than power. So we have to be careful when we compare how a Sprint car works to how a kart works.
Click to expand...

Very true and I agree with you 100%. I bring them both together with thoughts of how each to be at it's fastest must operate at the limit of grip. And in my thoughts I always weight in available hp, as heavily as available grip. A winged sprint car would approach the limit of grip via hp and I see a over tyred kart approaching the limit of grip via doing all things possible to eliminate what we call tight. With each when they are able to operate at the limit of grip, it then becomes a game of who can maintain the most momentum. Though they come from opposite ends of the spectrum, to be fast they each will chase the same rules as best they can.

I hope I answered without argument of your view which I agree with and presented a view which can fit into your picture. ?

thank you


paul
 
"Not picking on you, "

No problem at all, pick away maybe I'll be able to take some of the chippings home and build with them. ... :)
 
Good morning to someone out there somewhere. ... :)

With the rain potential today, I'm sitting here with my first coffee trying to decide if I'm heading out to Port Royal or not, and reading through your writing. You wrote something which again was interesting and brought to me the comment which follows.

"So we have to be careful when we compare how a Sprint car works to how a kart works."

After reading it again I started to think about making the comparison. I knew somehow I had to be comparing the two, but I didn't feel I was usually if ever directly making the comparison. But I must do it.

I'm going to say I don't usually if ever directly compare the two too each other. What I compare each of them to is a picture I have in my mind of each working on a track.

I see them each alone on the same track in my mind. I can see an image of a kart on the track and see its interaction with the track. I can also do the same for a sprint car. But I never have been able to view how one compares to the other. I think it's like this. I can think of a worn gear and I can think of a brand new gear, but I can't think of them next to each other. Well yes I guess I can, I just did it while writing this, but it doesn't matter.

I'm trying to say I don't make comparisons between each type of LTO which races. I look at each in terms of their own ability to operate, close to what I consider ideal. If I had two levers one longer and one shorter and I wanted to know about each and how each could be used. I'd study each and learn how it could be used to do what needs done. It's much more important to know what needs done and if what your using will get the job done, then to spend time comparing a long lever to a short lever.

If I'm interested in the speed of how something is operated by the lever, I'm going to bring in factors of lever length and power. If the short lever is used, length and power will be different then if the long lever is used. But each can cause the same resulting speed. I think I can now compare the two objectives of getting to an ideal operation with a LTO and getting to a speed by a lever. I look at what's needed for a LTO to get to the ideal, the same as I would look at what's needed to get a lever to a speed. I see speed as a physical happening with a lever, similar to seeing the ideal of LTO operation, as a physical happening on the track. One is just a little more complex.

... This thunkin and writing what's on my mind is fun. ... :) only thing it's not necessairly correct.

paul
 
I hope my replies were only offering discussion and not being argumentative or assertive. I'm never 100% sure on things, even if I sometimes write as if I am.


paul
 
PK, how does the sprint car engine rotation affect the chassis lift? compared to a kart? remember that they also used normal and counter revolutions in sprints, Marine crank assys. are designed to work in reverse rotation. I can remember watching Drag cars lift the L/F tires off the ground as the R/R settled down.
 
jack burroughs said:
PK, how does the sprint car engine rotation affect the chassis lift? compared to a kart? remember that they also used normal and counter revolutions in sprints, Marine crank assys. are designed to work in reverse rotation. I can remember watching Drag cars lift the L/F tires off the ground as the R/R settled down.
Click to expand...

I think Jack, again meaning i'm not sure, with setup now mostly all per my 'ideal' BS on it, reverse rotation would not be an advantage. It use to be when everyone setup old school, only being concerned with dumping weight on the RR and go. Your into engines, I think they used 327 marine cranks to do it. I think with a 327 crank you can get to darn near 410, maybe a little more?

My son keeps telling me he has or has access to all the stuff to do a 327 crank, that spins spins spins. But... I know he's understands what is needed and how to do it, ... but i'm also sure I don't listen to him well enough and remember well enough to say for sure, it's a 327 crank he's planning on doing it with.(it might be a 360 he wants to make with it?) It would be normal rotation. He's been and being taught by an old time engine builder, who has just about everything laying around somewhere out in the barn. Problem is he's also a hoarder and it hard to pretty near impossible to get him to let loose with parts. It's not a matter of selling for a fair price, it's a matter of how do you get someone to let loose with some of their good stuff, even though they will never use it. ... :(

... lol Jack, I think the name of the engine game now a days is, zing zing zing, instead of roar roar roar. ... :)

same as with karts

... His dream engine is a 2cycle, if ya could put together a lighter 2cycle to go against 410 4cycles, ... :)


I'll bet your going to tell me who already did it and with what... I hope ya are ?
 
I seem to remember 454 SBC's using a 4" stroke billet Moldex crank that was several thousand dollars. Tell me how the sprints could lift the R/F on the straights without a reverse rotation engine? Plus many yrs. back I thought of building a 2-stroke 301 c.i. SBC, but the valving turned out to be too big a problem in that getting enough volume was perceived as a huge set back.
 
Last edited:
"Tell me how the sprints could lift the R/F on the straights without a reverse rotation engine?"

via wing down force, making it easy for the RF to go up and easy for the LR to go down and held down, pivoting across the other cross... LF/RR

ain't no way any driver in their right mind, would want weight on the big old RR making it want to go straight, at 150+ going into a turn. pre load and dump all the weight you don't need for the RR going in. ... maybe ? and then if after going in you can use your RF to help turn comming off, that's a big plus and again ... maybe ?
 
paulkish said:
Good morning to someone out there somewhere. ... :)

With the rain potential today, I'm sitting here with my first coffee trying to decide if I'm heading out to Port Royal or not, and reading through your writing. You wrote something which again was interesting and brought to me the comment which follows.

"So we have to be careful when we compare how a Sprint car works to how a kart works."

After reading it again I started to think about making the comparison. I knew somehow I had to be comparing the two, but I didn't feel I was usually if ever directly making the comparison. But I must do it.

I'm going to say I don't usually if ever directly compare the two too each other. What I compare each of them to is a picture I have in my mind of each working on a track.

I see them each alone on the same track in my mind. I can see an image of a kart on the track and see its interaction with the track. I can also do the same for a sprint car. But I never have been able to view how one compares to the other. I think it's like this. I can think of a worn gear and I can think of a brand new gear, but I can't think of them next to each other. Well yes I guess I can, I just did it while writing this, but it doesn't matter.

I'm trying to say I don't make comparisons between each type of LTO which races. I look at each in terms of their own ability to operate, close to what I consider ideal. If I had two levers one longer and one shorter and I wanted to know about each and how each could be used. I'd study each and learn how it could be used to do what needs done. It's much more important to know what needs done and if what your using will get the job done, then to spend time comparing a long lever to a short lever.

If I'm interested in the speed of how something is operated by the lever, I'm going to bring in factors of lever length and power. If the short lever is used, length and power will be different then if the long lever is used. But each can cause the same resulting speed. I think I can now compare the two objectives of getting to an ideal operation with a LTO and getting to a speed by a lever. I look at what's needed for a LTO to get to the ideal, the same as I would look at what's needed to get a lever to a speed. I see speed as a physical happening with a lever, similar to seeing the ideal of LTO operation, as a physical happening on the track. One is just a little more complex.

... This thunkin and writing what's on my mind is fun. ... :) only thing it's not necessairly correct.

paul
Click to expand...

"So we have to be careful when we compare how a Sprint car works to how a kart works."
What I meant is that a Sprint Car, especially 410s, have a lot higher power-to-weight ratio than a kart (especially "stock" engine karts).
That, and the Sprint Car could have a non-locked differential rather than the straight rear axle of the kart.
 
Someone ... said:
"So we have to be careful when we compare how a Sprint car works to how a kart works."
What I meant is that a Sprint Car, especially 410s, have a lot higher power-to-weight ratio than a kart (especially "stock" engine karts).
That, and the Sprint Car could have a non-locked differential rather than the straight rear axle of the kart.
Click to expand...

I see your meaning.

thanks


edit: Just had a thought on it and passing the passing thought along. I don't think I see anything coming from different power to weight ratio's, except different potentials. The rules for how lower potential and higher potential need to be applied, I think are still the same. I see only differences, in the ability to apply the same variables.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top