Draco-REX

I could have picked it apart, but that was the "gem" of the piece and I felt it was enough to make my point. I did address your other point (It's new and dfferent, let's try it out) in my explanation that I wasn't rejecting it just because it was different, and even pointed out two idea that I think do have merit. Hell, the Acura LMP1 cars with the rear tries on the front is another great example of doing something odd and making it work that I love. I guess this particular design rubbed me the wrong way because it is so obviously from a straight-line mindset that seems to sterotype American auto racing. That design is like admitting to the world: "Corners confuse us. We just want cars that go fast in a straight line and look like rocket ships!" God, I hope Top Gear doesn't get a hold of this picture.

What's with the personal attacks? Fuckstick? Really? A little unneccesary. I never attacked you, so I don't see what your problem is. I'm all for new and interesting designs. The "Diamond" layout would be interesting to see run. The six-wheeled Tyrell P34 was an interesting idea. This isn't an issue of rejecting a departure from the norm because it is different. This is a rejection due to it's ignorance of the physics involved in making a car turn. If this design was for drag racing, I'd be right there with you. But it's not. 1. The front tires are much too thin. Compare their width to the width of the cockpit. We have a general idea of how wide the cockpit needs to be to fit a human, so we can get an idea of the width of the front tires. A 4"-5" wide tire is not going to have the mechanical grip needed for either braking or turning. The contact patch just isn't there.. 2. Front track is way too narrow. Track width is important in steady-state corning as it effects the amount of weight transfer. A narrower track sees more weight transfer. More weight transfer means a larger discrepancy between the inside and outside tire, and lower total available grip. This is bad enough as-is, but it will compound the problem with #1. 3. Both mass and aerodynamic balance are shifted too far back. A tire's grip increases as more weight is put on it. (Although the coefficient relating downwards pressure and maximum grip lessens as pressure goes up, which is what makes #2 an issue). High speed cornering will tend to massive understeer as the rears will have far greater grip than the front. Low speed cornering will be unpredictable as they appear to be trying to hurt grip in the front to balance the heavy rear. As track conditions can and will vary, this will make the rear war with the front as grip varies and the car will understeer in some corners and snap oversteer in others. 4. This is obviously a low-downforce design as there is a lack of wings. But depending on the floor of the car to provide the adequate downforce is a problem in and off itself. First, unevenness in the tack surface can cause the available downforce to vary greatly or even "popping" the low pressure area by letting more air in. Secondly, diffusers require a turbulent low pressure area behind the car to accellerate the undercar air out the back. This means there's no clean air for the car behind. Possibly the use of only ground effect aero will minimize this. But more than likely, a following car will see lift in the front as the leading car's turbulence rides over the following car's nose. And with only 20% of the cars weight to counteract that, we'll likely see this happen: Granted, that was on the crest of a hill, but it was also a properly balanced car. This design could only really work on a Super-Oval, would be a PITA to drive on a smaller oval, and the team would have to just suffer through a road course. If this design were to be chosen, Indy would just become NASCAR with different cars. And as was mentioned above, with fully faired wheels it isn't exactly "open-wheeled" is it?

Epic Fail Post Fail Title due to Fail Spelling Fail link And to top it off, this is a repost. http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3170/2395177059_3b8c1afb97_o.jpg

If McCain got in, it'd be the same thing. The Milk and Honey ran out long ago. Just make due with the water and corn syrup we've got.

With all the weight and downforce on the rear, plus the narrow track and thin front tires, they have done EVERYTHING to ensure it will understeer as much as possible. Yes, it will be stable, but it will be TOO stable. Also, if you think about it, with all that downforce at the rear of the car, the turbulence behind it will be enormous. Since a following car will have no downforce at the front, we'll likely see cars flipping, ala the 90's Mercedes CLRs at Le Mans.. Hopefully someone who ACTUALLY has knowledge of how cars work will smack some of these desk jockeys around.

I love how the picture is of a simplified design, but they took the time to model the RIVETS holding the '70s era windscreen on.

Like the "Stock" in stock car racing nowadays.

"We here at Deltawing LLC have created the future of Indy racing. Americans can't understand the concept of turning corners in a race. So to that end we have created this new prototype. Capable of only 2 degrees of steering angle and with the machanical grip of a dog on a tile floor, this is JUST what the American race fans want! We envision these cars rocketing around Superovals and causing massive crashes as they understeer to the outside walls and then slide back down through the rest of the pack. With our new design, Indy will finally reach NASCAR's viewership levels." This design is an abortion. Look at how skinny those front tires are. It embarrasses me to think that an Ameriican company believes this is a good design. I can only dream the Impossible Dream that when F1 comes to Texas it makes people realize that oval racing is essentially just racing in a straight line and is utterly boring.

The 91 in California is so bad (along with Nevada and Arizona) that Cobb has to release specific tunes for the crap gas in those states.

I like how it's an homage to Mad Max.

EVERY prison inmate should work for their room and board. Oh as for Firing Squad vs. Lethal injection: Bullets are cheaper. No need to spend good money on a scumbag that's just leaving..

And California is the heart of American car culture HOW? I wonder how many on the CARB own huge SUVs....

Need to feed those girls up...

I've heard enough bad things about that guy and his tuning that I don't think I'd recommend him to anyone..

Bowdown. This guy is king. http://web.orange.co.uk/article/quirkies/Students_bizarre_attack_on_Hells_Angels

Wake me when it's actually on shelves...

That video was almost Win. But then....

The traditional rods are all rusty because that's often how they were. Guys without any $$ would scrounge whatever they could and slap it together to make a 'rod. A lot of these "rat" rods are put together these days for less than $5K. Some even as low as $1500. Scrounging and innovative use of oddball stuff is the name of the game (drawer pull knobs for grills, linkages made of old tools, etc.) You get big respect for using odd and rare engines. Old engines from generators and tractors go over well. The more obscure the better. FOr these guys, climbing through an old junkyard or mining a swap meet for parts is an art form.

We're too big of a market to take risks on. They don't sell flashy cars because to roll out to all the dealerships they have to commit to a large number of vehicles. In europe they cna roll out to smaller markets first and see if something works or not. If it gets a lukewarm reception they can keep their commitment low. China may be huge, but I doubt they have the same number of new car dealerships as we have here. We're victims of our own market size. Oh, as for the OP's article: It's easier to sell in a growing economy than a flagging one. Especially when we're pissed off at GM. The Volt may very well make or break GM in the US market.

You're going to need to replace the sliding door anyways.. If you don't fix the problem, you'll just rot out whatever new flooring you put in.

When I owned my '98 TA I had a Random Technology muffler on it. Loved the sound.

Yup, because white electronics are so new..... http://takinovertheworld.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/first-ipod1.jpg

The dynograph is messed up because the HP and Torque don't cross at 5252rpm. Either the torque is using a different scale on the right side of the graph which is cut off, or they messed with the numbers. Also the dropoff near redline is odd. It's as if he's letting off early. But that much torque and those smaller turbos probably mean it's set up for tight courses. If I were to guess, I'd say he can't change his gear ratios so he's sacrificing top speed for better exit accelleration.

Wow... That's some nice work. Not sure how I feel about the choice in chassis though... I think the C6-R has better aero..

You guys aren't cranking these things on real tight are you? You should be lubing the gasket with oil, then spinning it on until the gasket touches the block, then 1/2 turn or so by hand after that. A filter should never be tightened more than that. Oh, and cup-style socket ftw for that LS1 filter.