>
>[Phil Martin] How did it feel at that speed?
=========
Like a race car. It's amazing that folks with no background in
aerodynamics should 'get it mostly right' without trying.
=========
Had it been modded at all?
=========
At that time only very dense foam behind the lower air dam to keep
from flexing backward and the removal of the rubber molding on top
of the firewall to let the underhood air out. Also the torsion bars
had been removed and it had been retuned with no consideration for
pollution control.
=========
> My goal for at least one of my project cars is to drive it to
Bonneville
>and run at least 150 with no gear changes or other "track-only"
setups.
> I've heard that the Brick has a negative coefficient of lift - is
that
>true?
=========
By blind dumb luck I think, but yes. I doubt you'll get to 150
without major mods due to the rising 'ground effects'. This effect
begins ~80 and gets pretty serious over ~115 when the car begins
really squat. If you use the early small lower dam you could reduce
the effect with some loss of stability. For Bonneville, you want
only enough negative lift to keep from getting airborne. I don't
think you can reduce it enough to 'loosen' the motor up. Also, even
if you can make the motor pull past redline, the stock gearing won't
allow anywhere near this much speed.
=========
I've also heard that the front suspension geometry was designed
for
>on-centre stability - sounds like the right combo for a top-end
machine...
=========
Well, most cars are designed with lots of negative castor for
straight line stability including the Bricklin.
>
>--
>Phil Martin pmartin@isgtec.com
>"Art disappoints me when it is too little like life,
> Life disappoints me when it is too much like art."
>
>
|