Front Wheel Drive Roadster?

[Buickguy3]

  Here's another view. I think that's his goal. First 400 MPH door car.

[NathanStewart]

On Copeland's car the majority of the front wedge shape is a water tank. lots of weight there.

I believe the tanks were built to fit the nose and the nose was specifically shaped to make lots of downforce.  At least that's what Keith told me. 

If I recall correctly there were three 4 wheel drive roadsters. One crashed the other two set records, one still holds 3 records AA/BFR, AA/BGR, A/BGR set as far back as 1992 with the latest set in 2004. Didn't seem to handle too bad getting those records. But I DO remember some of the comments regarding getting rid of them, like "Henry Ford never built 4 wheel drive roadsters". But of course we all know Henry built tons of blown fuel hemi roadsters......
By the way Nathan, wana know who the quote is from?

I think most of the four wheel drive roadster had earned a reputation of spinning - a lot.  Case in point, one of those four wheel drive cars was run one last time back in '06 or '07 I believe and it promptly went out and spun like it always had.  I knew the driver and had warned them that the car had a tendency of spinning to which I was told "ah nah, it's fine".  I can wager a guess on who didn't like 4wd roadsters.  It does seem rather out of place.  Kind of like running a motorcycle engine in a roadster.

BTW here's a pic of the fwd roadster I referred to earlier:

[Rex Schimmer]

Doug's pic of Copeland's car is with the "old" tranny, which I think is a 4 speed. I have attached a pic of the new tranny, a Weismann 8 speed which he was testing at the "Test and Tune" in July. He has done a ton of development work for Weismann on this tranny but thinks it is the way to go. Also doesn't look like it is just a bolt in to go back to the original.

Rex

[Dynoroom]

On Copeland's car the majority of the front wedge shape is a water tank. lots of weight there.

I believe the tanks were built to fit the nose and the nose was specifically shaped to make lots of downforce.  At least that's what Keith told me. 

If I recall correctly there were three 4 wheel drive roadsters. One crashed the other two set records, one still holds 3 records AA/BFR, AA/BGR, A/BGR set as far back as 1992 with the latest set in 2004. Didn't seem to handle too bad getting those records. But I DO remember some of the comments regarding getting rid of them, like "Henry Ford never built 4 wheel drive roadsters". But of course we all know Henry built tons of blown fuel hemi roadsters......
By the way Nathan, wana know who the quote is from?

I think most of the four wheel drive roadster had earned a reputation of spinning - a lot.  Case in point, one of those four wheel drive cars was run one last time back in '06 or '07 I believe and it promptly went out and spun like it always had.  I knew the driver and had warned them that the car had a tendency of spinning to which I was told "ah nah, it's fine".  I can wager a guess on who didn't like 4wd roadsters.  It does seem rather out of place.  Kind of like running a motorcycle engine in a roadster.

That well may be, I've never seen any roadster spin before...   Then again, aren't you driving a roadster now?
And if we go back a few years it seems to me rear engine modified roadsters were banned for the same reason, I don't have any idea whats different now other than the points structure at El Mirage.  

[DallasV]

If I could have half the pumpkin sticking out the front of the grill I would be interested in a fwd roadster

[RidgeRunner]

 

BTW here's a pic of the fwd roadster I referred to earlier:


[/quote]

madelAsteve, Nathan,

    That's Carter Lloyd's roadster from Eastern MA, pre-entered as a D/GR this year.  I have seen it at Maxton and Loring.

     It's slated to be at the TY-RODS reunion, Bolton Fairgrounds Lancaster MA Sun Sept 8th along with several other LSR cars if anyone is in the area and wants a closer look.

                                        Ed

[jl222]

  Here's another view. I think that's his goal. First 400 MPH door car.

 Does anyone know exactly what number those Goodyear Eagle tires are?

             JL222

[Richard 2]

  Here's another view. I think that's his goal. First 400 MPH door car.

So I guess on this car set-up (front wheel drive and lots of weight in front of the axle) you just throw the CP and CG rules of thumb out the Window?
Richard 2

[hotrod]

Same rules only applied in a new context.

CP moves forward with speed so it wants to be well forward near the front of a blunt car body any way.
The trick is to get the weight in front of that location which is determined by the aerodynamic shape of the car body and streamlining rules in the class.

CG placement is driven mostly by a compromise between traction and stability.
In a rear wheel drive car you have to have the weight far enough back to get necessary traction without creating uncontrollable aerodynamic instability.
That is the source of the rules of thumb you mention.

In this case the driving wheels are at the front so you can move the weight well forward without stability issues.
You only need enough weight on the rear wheels to keep the car on the ground and retain steering control so the rear wheels follow the front wheels and resist upsetting side motions from wind gusts etc.
(edit -- of course that light rear end means if it ever spins and gets backwards you can expect a wild ride)

Front wheel drive configuration is not ignoring the rules, but adapting the car to make best use of the rules.

Like a shuttle cock is inherently stable because the weight is well forward of the center of pressure, the front wheel drive allows them to get the weight well forward of the CP

[tortoise]

Could a fwd roadster get a useful amount of front downforce with a leaned-back '34 grille shell?

[John Burk]

Rear drive cars sometimes spin when thrust consumes all available traction leaving none for lateral stability and aerodynamics has it's way . Front wheel drive puts thrust way ahead of the AC and CG and steerable thrust cancels cross wind forces .

[jimmy six]

Tortoise . . A 34 grille would need to be on a 34 roadster and true to form needs to be in the stock mounted position. Funny as it seems the only one that looks stock is is the Davidson roadster which is the fastest....none of the others built could ever match a stock angle template.......I know I've checked a few....

[tortoise]

A 34 grille would need to be on a 34 roadster . . .

Haven't I seen a  model A or two with a deuce shell?

[Stan Back]

Rule 5.B.2, page 61.  Wannabe 32s are allowed for earlier years.  I've always been proud to have a Model A (but maybe we're paying a penalty?).

[jimmy six]

Tortoise....32 shell can run on 32 and earlier bodies even those of a different manufacturer. 33 and newer need to stay with the year of manufacture. Keeps from having a 37  Ford roadster grille on a 28. I think Stan would love that..........