land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

[Fwd: To Duct or not to Duct, That is the Question...]

To: "Land-speed@autox.team.net" <Land-speed@autox.team.net>
Subject: [Fwd: To Duct or not to Duct, That is the Question...]
From: dahlgren <dahlgren@uconect.net>
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 16:20:55 -0400
Sent this to Beth and though it went to whole mail list here is a copy
for the list...Sorry for the duplicate Beth...
Dave

dahlgren wrote:
> 
> Maybe the first thing that has to happen is to put everyone on an even
> playing field. The illegal cars that are 'granfathered' ought to comply
> to the class rules.  Seems like a little wink and tip of the hat to
> someone that has a special car that has an unfair advantage.  This does
> not happen in any other racing venue that I am aware of.  I hear a lot
> about wanting to get NEW YOUNGER people involved in the sport. What is
> the point if the class they want to compete in has some cars that have
> an unfair advantage.  Does anyone think I could show up with a Winston
> cup car that is an original '67 Ford with a 427 and tell them it is a
> Holman and Moody car and should be 'grandfathered' in ? Or a car that
> was built in the early '90's that has a bigger wing ? Or an Indy car
> that has a Cosworth in it ?  Most of these grandfathered cars seem to
> have an advantage that is not easily overcome by some legal
> modification.  The whole concept is unfair and reeks of a good old boys
> club.  I realize there is a cost to bring the cars in compliance with
> the rules, but they are just that, rules.  If you do not follow them,
> and they are not fair for all, what is the point of having any.  Might
> as well just run what you brung.  Young racers of today are very smart
> and they know when they are being treated fairly.  If anyone expects
> they will show up for the glory of it all and then not have the same
> rules as everyone else is sadly mistaken. As for the person that has a
> body style that needs an illegal modification in order to be stable
> there are only too choices in my mind.  They either have to pick a new
> body to build a car around or they should be restricted, as a safety
> measure, to a speed that is below the point of instability and then be
> allowed to run as an exhibition car.  This is the only racing venue that
> I have ever competed in that the 'rules' were only for new cars....
> 
> My 2 cents worth, if I offended anyone, sorry that was not the point.
> 
> Dave Dahlgren
> Engine Management Systems
> Mystic,CT.
> 
> Beth Butters wrote:
> >
> >                         The alteration youguys see on studebakers hasn't 
>been legal for some time,  many of these cars have been on the salt for 30 or 
>40 years  and this was a popular  thing to do before it was made illegal .  
>These cars  have this modification grandfathered to them.  Just like there are 
>a few 4 wheel drive roadsters that are no longer legal.  Like I said  earlier, 
>walking around the pits to see what is legal in a class will get you into 
>trouble, and know  one preticularly  cars what you do as long  as its not a 
>safety item until you qualify for a record.  If  set a record in my class with 
>a car that  I see as not conforming to the rules  I ' d consider protesting 
>you.  You need to remember that  when you go thew inspection the inspectors  
>are not  looking at you car  as to class conformity, they are doing a safety 
>inspection.  So  follow  what the rules say in altered, no areodynamic 
>alterations to the body excepting the covering  of  openings with flat p!
lates ,
> no
> > airdams unless!
> >  they are fActory,  no flush mounting of window glass,  if you want to 
>build a comp. Coup build  one.  If you are  building  an altered from a modern 
>marshmellow car its more areo stock than I could ever get my Studebaker,  
>Whatr they have going for them is looks and overall length.  In my opinion you 
>will get into hot water venting  high pressure  areas thew body panels.   L. 
>Kvach Butters  BB/G Alt.  CC   #1392
> >
> > ----------
> > From:  dferguso@ebmail.gdeb.com[SMTP:dferguso@ebmail.gdeb.com]
> > Sent:  Monday, May 24, 1999 4:45 AM
> > To:  land-speed@autox.team.net
> > Subject:  Re: To Duct or not to Duct, That is the Question...
> >
> > hello mayfield,(racers),i pretty much agree with your interpretation , and
> > along with yours would come the logical deduction (no pun intended) that
> > ANY penetration consists of three elements, an intake, a ducting section,
> > and a vent, weather it is a home air conditioning unit like your example,
> > or the other extreme such as a hole in a piece of aluminum foil, in which
> > the "intake" would be one face of the foil, the "duct" would be about .008"
> > long (the thickness of the material), and the "vent" would be the other
> > face of the foil which the medium (air in our case) flowed towards.
> > therefore, a commercial naca duct placed in a body panel would also consist
> > of these three elements, which leads us to the original question - is a
> > naca duct in a hood or fender considered a duct or a vent (or both !) ?????
> >
> > regards,
> > doug ferguson
> > black radon engineering

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>