(Note: LANDRACING.COM donations are not tax deductible)


This is a public forum. The opinions expressed here don't
necessarily reflect the feelings of The Folks That Run The Site (that's us)
unless we explicitly say so, ok?


Author Topic: Rear Tail Section Length Rule  (Read 12517 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bbb

  • Aerodynamically Challenged
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 296
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Charlottesville, Va
  • JorNic Motorsports
    • JorNic Motorsports, Charlottesville, Va.
Re: Rear Tail Section Length Rule
« Reply #15 on: October 28, 2004, 02:02:00 AM »
Quote
Maybe an Unlimited class for sit-on bikes?
:D    :D    :D

Offline Larry Forstall

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
  • Age: 77
  • Location: West Chester, Pa.
Re: Rear Tail Section Length Rule
« Reply #16 on: October 28, 2004, 09:34:00 AM »
I think modifing rules to meet current standards is fine, (i.e. front fairings being allowed past the front axle because street bikes come that way) but wholesale changes would affect the integrity of current records. Things that don't affect performance such as the tire behind the rear bodywork should be eliminated.
    For those so inclined, an unlimited open-wheel bike should be allowed to run for time only. Wild as you want, but at your own risk. After all it's just the number we are all looking for. Hey Bill, fire up the welder, it's  "Run what you Brung"

Offline joea

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1555
  • Location: Rapid City SD
Re: Rear Tail Section Length Rule
« Reply #17 on: October 28, 2004, 04:13:00 PM »
Larry, these proposals have NOTHING to
 do with SCTA rules.........
 
 FIM/AMA only........
 
 Joe  :)

Offline Larry Forstall

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
  • Age: 77
  • Location: West Chester, Pa.
Re: Rear Tail Section Length Rule
« Reply #18 on: October 28, 2004, 11:36:00 PM »
Joe: My bad: I don't have a copy of the AMA rules. I thought they were based on SCTA or SCTA  were based on AMA rules. Aren't the FIM records mostly just by displacement? But dustbins etc. are not allowed. Anyway I don't think the FIM is going to change.
     Saw your pic in BRN paper. First time I had a good view. I like the aero, the other half of your speed equation. L

Offline mike mendoza

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
Re: Rear Tail Section Length Rule
« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2007, 09:36:14 PM »
THAT'S THE REASONING BEHIND SIDE HACKS

Offline ack

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 306
  • Location: San Jose, CA
Re: Rear Tail Section Length Rule
« Reply #20 on: November 11, 2007, 06:29:27 AM »
Dave,
 
 You may be right, but to run on current FIM and AMA rules vehicle may not run for records in any winds on course higher then 3 mph.
 Some may not want that you are correct Dave, but we still want the ability to try it out and allow the innovation of the past let us if we wanted to.. Thats all.  If there is no advantage to it, then you dont run it, but if a guy wants to the rules will be there to let him.
 
 Jonathan

The FIM rule is 11 MPH.  The 3 MPH is somthing Denis came up with when we were about to make our first run this year.  It's not valid under FIM.

bak189

  • Guest
Re: Rear Tail Section Length Rule
« Reply #21 on: November 11, 2007, 11:17:45 AM »
Ack is correct....FIM 11mph crosswind....................
A long tail/seat was tryed on the 1973 Can-Am
125c.c. record bike.........it got non-rideable at 80mph......even though it look good in the windtunnel..........................as has been noted on this forum before (pay attention people)
DUSTBIN FAIRINGS ARE ALLOWED WITH AMA/FIM
(BUB) as long as the fairing is above axcle height.
(just like the "old" roadrace dustbin fairings of the 1950's)
However, I would like to point out that at this years BUB, our sidecar got blown sideways with a 12mph crosswind (with a Dustbin) We ran with a 3mph crosswind (with a Dustbin) with no problems........so Denis's 3mph rule makes some sense..................................................................................