Another interesting point you've raised Doug is your reference to roof
rails and their requirement as more a safety item in various hardtop
vehicle classes. When planning my Fuel Roadster we ran in 98 we decided
that their requirement on cars in order to improve directionary stability
and therefore safety, we would incorporate on the roadster by inserting a
raised strip of aluminum down either side of the rigid tonnau panel to body
side junction. I broke my neck and put myself in a wheelchair at my first
Bonneville in 88 with a foul handling car, so with this in mind our design
priority was safety through good handling. At tech we got a 100% pass and
compliments on some innovative, simple ideas. I was questioned about why I
had the rails and replied why not as per the doorslammer requirement. There
were no roadster rules for or against them but we were told that if we set
a record they could be grounds for a protest so we removed them. I notice
they now seem a no-no per 99 rules. I disagree and notice in a 95 photo of
Chuck Salmens great handling piece he has some.
Chris Harris C/GR #397 New Zealand.
----------
> From: dferguso@ebmail.gdeb.com
> To: landspeedracer@email.msn.com; land-speed@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Fw: spoilers
> Date: Friday, November 12, 1999 8:45 AM
>
> thats cool, they are on the frame on the outside of the main rails. ive
> got pictures of jun automotive at 97 w.o.s. running 4 of the exact same
> blades, equally spaced onder the trailing edge of their car, slightly
> smaller, but then again it is a smaller japanese car. at this very event,
> with these very same chines in the same shape and location of ours, they
> set the current scta F/BGCC record @ 233.217. really i think of them as
> providing a service somewhat in a way similar to a roof rail, or the a- -
> end of a weathervane, they do not provide a boost in speed by any means .
> thanks
>
> doug @ black radon engineering
>
>
|