Roadster pick up in STR?

[Geo]

Oh, this is going to be wonderful.  Great idea and implementation on the model.  A new thought in roadsters  I can think this way because I do not have a dog (roadster) in this fight.  Love the concept!

What engine are you going to run?  Most will not allow your feet to go forward to keep your head down. I think the firewall rule limits foot placement forward anyway.  Perhaps rear engine dragster positioning with your heels by your butt and your hands by your calves looking just above your knees. Unless you have a motor like the 300 mph roadster then all the lowering does not mater because of the outside dimensions of the motor.

I like it because of the different thinking in the confined roadster world. Will it work?  Perhaps no better and no worse.  Still it's cool.

Geo

[Stan Back]

"And yes I know I need headlights."

And a driver.

[Stan Back]

"Most will not allow your feet to go forward to keep your head down. I think the firewall rule limits foot placement forward anyway."

You certainly can extend the firewall forward in StR.  It would be best to run a V-4 to meet the hood length and wheelbase restrictions.

And increasing the frontal area with, say, two 28" tires might be a concern.

[RichFox]

Thinking along these lines, I wonder if it would be advantages to narrow the rear track enough to put the tires in the bed. Maybe put some of dan's 17 inch dia tires in the fenders just to fill them in somewhat.

[zenndog]

There is a minimum rear axle width.

I don't fully understand the wheelbase restrictions yet.

I still don't get how set back enables someone to run a suicide front end on a T. My first interpretation was that the wheel base had to be stock + 3"

I don't get the comment about 28" tires and frontal area. This was a pre made model kit and the tires i would pick for the front would be the goodyear 21" tires, or the 17" x 2.5 drag frontrunners if they could handle the weight.

[Stan Back]

Clue me in -- I've never seen a minimum axle width in StR.  You must retain the stock rear quarters, so it would be difficult to inset the wheels inside the frame rails.  And the old "spirit of the rules" thing -- some of us (not many) believe that a Street Roadster should look like a street roadster.  Some of us still have ours licensed.

"My first interpretation was that the wheel base had to be stock + 3""
Nor are there any wheelbase restrictions in StR.  But it works as if there is one when the only body panel you can lengthen is the hood and you must not have more than 15% set-back.

"I don't get the comment about 28" tires and frontal area."
Well, I'm no aerodynamicist(?), but putting a 28-inch drive wheel on the outside of each rear fender would seem to add to the area exposed from the front.

And, again, the main problem of the T in Street Roadster is packaging the driver.

[zenndog]

Oh, I get it. In regards to the tires. I never said this was a great idea, just an idea. I am not sure it makes any sense at all. Again, the tires are what was in the kit, I would use whatever the the drive train called for, with an eye towards smaller tires.

I know this idea is on the fringe but I think it might work out.

How do I run it by the roadster guys at the scta? Can someone PM me an e-mail?

I will play with the wheelbase and setback.

In my dreams I would be able to put different engines into it, but I know size and space are major constraints.

Here is an engine I was thinking about running



Here is another



I don't want to rule out a V8 either though

[zenndog]

Stan- Page 54, top of page, 2012 rule book

"The minimum tread dimensions for all Vintage Category vehicles are 44 in. front and 50 in. rear. Modified Roadsters are exempt from the front requirement."

[jdincau]

The problem with channeling the body so deeply is that the driver must sit on top of the floor and the floor must be on top of the top frame rail. The driver already hangs out in the breeze on a T and this dosent help. Getting it low by having the tires outside the fenders is a novel approach but it increases the frontal area significantly. The rules have pretty much evened out the resulting frontal area so that the various years of roadster body all show up in the records.

[Stan Back]

Amen!

[zenndog]

Amen to what?

Well, that is why I built the model, to see how it would look and be able to show people so we could have a discussion.

I see it being tight but not impossible.

[jdincau]

I see it being tight but not impossible.

I agree and it certanly looks neat but I think the drag penalty of the rear tires will be a big handicap.

[Skip Pipes]

I don’t have a dog in this fight (as I’m in another roadster camp).
However, I think this concept is innovative and clever. Nonetheless, I suspect it will run afoul of the “Spirit” rules.

That aside, I really like the concept. I’d like to see it run, even if it’s TO.

Nonetheless, I’m with jdincau as I suspect the drag penalty (even with 17" & 21" tires) will cancel out the advantages. The only way to know is build it.

Skip Pipes

[zenndog]

No fight, just questions.

I barely have time/energy to build a land speed racer, much less fight over it.

Just an idea so I ask the people who know or have an opinion.

I had a conversation with Rich and he had a couple ideas about the space issues that really fleshed out/completed some ideas I had been playing with in my mind.

Loving the feedback

I sent an e-mail to Russ

[Tman]

If you could make it lean 20 degrees you could run two wheels and call it a motorcylroadster!