land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: traction control

To: Higginbotham Land Speed Racing <saltrat@pro-blend.com>
Subject: Re: traction control
From: Joe Amo <jkamo@rapidnet.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 21:18:57 -0700
Skip  you feel that their should be no computers for aiding traction control ...
"sort of goes along with tuning" ???     Ok,  no data recorders, no computers to
tell the injectors what to spray, no computers to tell the timing what to do,
since its all part of tuning           not a flame,   just typing
thoughts            Joe :) :)

Higginbotham Land Speed Racing wrote:

> Hello Keith and Dave,
>
> MY OPINION ONLY HERE! NO FLAMES!
>
> It's not a new rule. See the '99 book. And the '98 book. The principle has
> been in effect for quite a while. The specific rule for 2 years, if I read
> correctly (some doubt there!). I looked at a controller when designing my
> deal but the rules said no so I feel that "that's the way it is". It also
> means that the driver has to know how to drive.....sort of goes along with
> tuning.
>
> Why would anyone want it?
>
> And next I suppose we'd have closed circuit TV and the driver in the pits!
> RPVs at the salt, how exciting.
>
> OK so it's more than a penny.
>
> LeRoy?
>
> Skip H
>
> At 10:19 AM 2/21/00 , you wrote:
> >Boy Your Fast Dave..... That was my question...
> >
> >What Prompted this whole discussion and how did this rule get here?  Just
> >curious.... I ain't smart enough to sort out a Holley let alone a Traction
> >control device... but I just went back and read the new rule.... What's up
> >with this and why do we need this rule?  Curiosity only....
> >
> >Keith... ahhhh No I don't expect to understand the answer...
> >
> >----------
> >> From: dahlgren <dahlgren@uconect.net>
> >> To: Jim Bickford <jbickford@volcano.net>; Land-speed@autox.team.net
> >> Subject: Re: traction control
> >> Date: Monday, February 21, 2000 12:11 PM
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>                                     WHY?
> >>
> >>
> >> Dahlgren
> >>
> >> Jim Bickford wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Dave,
> >> >
> >> > In Production Classes, if the car has OEM traction control it is legal.
> >> > All other classes active computer or non-driver controlled traction
> >> > devices are illegal (II-17 Computer). Most of these devices use
> >> > a computer to activate the rear brakes or random kill cylinders (like
> >rev
> >> > control)
> >> > when the is a RPM differential from the front wheel and rear wheel
> >> > speed sensors.
> >> >
> >> > The driver can of course manually apply the rear brakes when
> >> > he or she feel the rear tires spin. The most successful way
> >> > of dealing with wheel spin in the big lakesters or streamliners
> >> > is to use a slipper clutch either weighted or controlled by the
> >> > driver. The clutch generally is only fully engaged about the last
> >> > 1/4-3/8 mile at El Mirage.
> >> >
> >> > If everybody had as good a feel for what the car was doing as Freddie
> >> > Dannenfelzer all this complication would be unnecessary.
> >> >
> >> > Jim Bickford
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: dahlgren <dahlgren@uconect.net>
> >> > To: <Land-speed@autox.team.net>
> >> > Sent: Monday, February 21, 2000 8:08 AM
> >> > Subject: Re: traction control
> >> >
> >> > > What types of traction control are you talking about? There are a lot
> >of
> >> > > ways to do it.. Are you talking about manual systems that try to
> >apply
> >> > > the brakes or power limiting types that just reduce the output of the
> >> > > engine if there is a lot of slip. I know these are very unreliable
> >> > > because most major auto makers offer them to the public to drive on
> >the
> >> > > road by little old ladies.. If this type is illegal I think we should
> >> > > not allow automatic transmissions either , if you can't shift a stick
> >go
> >> > > home.. LOL
> >> > > I think it is called progress.. but for me I don't think I would ever
> >> > > want anything applying the brakes but me. limiting the power i would
> >be
> >> > > game for though if the car did not hook up.
> >> > > Dave Dahlgren
> >> > > Engine Management Systems
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Higginbotham Land Speed Racing wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Good that it was rejected!
> >> > > > My penny,
> >> > > > Skip H
> >> > > >
> >> > > > At 06:00 AM 2/21/00 , you wrote:
> >> > > > >Jim,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Not true - the suggestion was presented at the rules meetings and
> >> > rejected.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >Dan W
> >> > > > >----- Original Message -----
> >> > > > >From: Jim Bickford <jbickford@volcano.net>
> >> > > > >To: <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> >> > > > >Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2000 8:29 PM
> >> > > > >Subject: traction control
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >> Mike or Dan,
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> I have been hearing rumors that traction control
> >> > > > >> devices operated by other than the driver will
> >> > > > >> be allowed for Special Construction Cars,
> >> > > > >> streamliners and lakesters.
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> Any truth to this? I know in the past just the accusation
> >> > > > >> of having a traction control device on your car cost you
> >> > > > >> your first born and loss of competition license for 3 years.
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> Jim Bickford
> >> > > > >> in rainy Jackson, Northern CA
> >> > > > >>




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