land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Placement of ballast

To: benettw@earthlink.net (Bill & Dee Bennett), land-speed@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Placement of ballast
From: ardunbill@webtv.net
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 09:39:42 -0400 (EDT)
Bill, previous review of the ballast issue apparently came up with the
result that the old-timers at Bonneville went to lead ballast between
the axles, such as in the frame rails of a '32 Ford, if they wanted
ballast in a 200+ roadster for instance.  Ballast behind the back axle
was bad because it aggravated the pendulum effect if there was
fish-tailing.  Ballast ahead of the front axle was bad because it
interfered with recovery if the car was getting out of shape.  I gather
that people sometimes put some ballast over the front axle, exactly why,
I don't know.  It's clear that ballasting is a deep subject, and the
physics of it on a loose surface like Bonneville must be murky. Wrong
ballasting could bite you!  Everyone seems to agree that on a standing
mile airport course like Maxton, traction is so good you don't want any
ballast at all, just the lightest possible structurally-sound car
assuming reasonable normal weight distribution and rear wheel drive.
Cheers Bill

///
///  land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
///  To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
///  with nothing in it but
///
///     unsubscribe land-speed
///
///


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