You might be a self - proclaimed 'Newbie', BrudderWanner, but I think you
have whacked the proverbial Nail on Its big flat Head, Bob ........ I concur
completely with what you write .
It would seem the shorter car would have a lower 'polar moment of
inertia' but once it is spinning it might not 'pencil roll' as easily as a
longer
wheelbase car as you mention .....
and of course the C/G is a big factor in the probability of rolling over.
Many years ago ( yeaaaa, back in the Fifties ) we talked to some of our top
running oval track heroes
about their shortened wheelbase coupes, mostly '34 three & five window
coupes, which
were frequent winners, on the advantage of shortening them up: they said
they handled
better in the turns, and were a bit easier to whip in and out in tight
traffic while passing, but they would spin out much more quickly, with little
or
no warning, before they went for a loop ..... and sometimes a ride on their
roof ! Wow -- these thoughts sure could take me down memory lane .... I like
your concept of the enclosed driver capsule closely protecting him as the
front and rear sections might crunch up, and/or break away ....... dissipating
energy all the while . Just try NOT to prove your theories with your
superneat little Insight at Maxton this Spring, or later out on the Salt !
Thanks
for your reply to the email that I just forwarded because it looked sorta
interesting ~ looked as if several guys were enjoying Franklin's comments,
as
usual ....... hmmmm ? old guy Bruce
|