71 replies to this topic

[Steve Scheifler]

But if you want to look at the safety angle (am I required to put that in upper case?) then I suppose that keeping the tires inside the bodywork reduces the risk of the kind of accidents we see too often on straights.

[Tom Sager]

Wouldn't it be easier to spec a toe plate measurement at a specified plate thickness and height above the ground with driver in car using the average left to right side measurement from in front of and behind the tire as maximum track width?  All that's needed is a set of plates and 2 tape measures. 

[Ron Alan]

Wouldn't it be easier to spec a toe plate measurement at a specified plate thickness and height above the ground with driver in car using the average left to right side measurement from in front of and behind the tire as maximum track width?  All that's needed is a set of plates and 2 tape measures. 

Great minds Tom (post 21)

[Bench Racer]

Ron, when some want to belittle a rule, that's so wrong. If two rules interplay as does track width and tire tread width on ground shall not protrude beyond top portion of fender, we shall play within both rules. If someone doesn't like to play within a rule, write the CRB to eliminate the rule. The only reason for posting metal bulkhead which shall close any opening between the cockpit and any part of the fuel tank was to make the point to those who belittle rules. Danny in particular was not belittling a rule, he was making the point he never viewed tech checking tread width on ground. 

[Steve Scheifler]

Bench, you may as well bring up the rule about running with scissors.

[Jim Drago]

Bench, you may as well bring up the rule about running with scissors.

[Tom Hampton]

Bench, you may as well bring up the rule about running with scissors.

What kind of scissors? Can you define "running"?

[Steve Scheifler]

What kind of scissors? Can you define "running"?

For bipeds running generally requires rapid forward motion on two legs during which only one foot at a time is in contact with the ground. Of course you need the correct viewing angle to be certain.

[Todd Green]

Even if the ebjs wear faster than normal, so what? Replace them. I haven't heard anyone say that they have broken one in two.

 

We broke one at the last 6-hour enduro for WERC @ Utah Motorsports Campus.  Of course with ~15 minutes to go in the race.  Luckily we had a 15 minute and 2 second lead and still won.  Car never had contact, but has had offs and pounded who knows how many curbs over the 3 years they were on the car.  We run the enduro every year, plus a full season (~14 races/year).

[Tom Sager]

Great minds Tom (post 21)

 

Shucks hadn't read the entire thread but yes!

[Ron Alan]

Bench...Not sure I was trying to belittle anything? Just stating why maybe Know one has ever seen a car rolled through a white powder substance...

 

Curious what would happen if a car measured fine on track width but then failed a white powder drive by(If in fact we live by 2 rules)? Maybe this needs to happen at VIR to get someone to write a letter to CRB?

[Tom Hampton]

Curious what would happen if a car measured fine on track width but then failed a white powder drive by(If in fact we live by 2 rules)? Maybe this needs to happen at VIR to get someone to write a letter to CRB?

Yes, that's what this class needs... Another DQ of a front runner over a stupid rule. /sarcasm-kinda

[Tom Sager]

For bipeds running generally requires rapid forward motion on two legs during which only one foot at a time is in contact with the ground. Of course you need the correct viewing angle to be certain.

 

Actually running requires that neither foot be in contact with the ground during a portion of the stride. 

[Steve Scheifler]

Actually running requires that neither foot be in contact with the ground during a portion of the stride.

Technically correct but not relevant as a rule, and try doing one without the other.
I THINK that if you read the official description for Olympic race walking (I don’t know if it is even still an Olympic sport) the rule is written more as I describe. Your way doesn’t work as a rule and adds nothing to mine. Right?

Edit: But admittedly I’m guilty of focusing on what draws the distinction between walking and running, not an unreferenced definition of the latter.

[Tom Hampton]

Being a runner...for more than a small part of my life...

Its funny, race walking has rules about what qualifies as walking (and what doesn't). It mostly comes down to always being in contact with the ground with at least one foot. Most of the technique revolves around minimizing the time with both feet ON the ground---as close to running as is legal, or maybe a little gray.

Running doesn't actually have a rule. You just have to go fast enough... Which requires both feet to be off the ground for a significant portion of the gait cycle (roughly 1/3rd) in order to be competitive.

Biomechamically, physiologists use this distinction "all feet off the ground" as the definining characteristic between a walking and a running gait for bipeds (other limb counts have different distinctions and more gait types).

[Tom Hampton]

Fwiw, from a gait analysis and Biomechamical perspective the airborne component is critical...as this is what sets up the conversion cycle between potential gravitational energy, potential spring energy, and kinetic energy.

What that has to do with ball joints...? Well, I guess I started it. :=)

[Steve Scheifler]

Being a runner...for more than a small part of my life...

Its funny, race walking has rules about what qualifies as walking (and what doesn't). It mostly comes down to always being in contact with the ground with at least one foot...

Which was precisely my angle. Maybe not ideal, but I’m pretty sure I can sell it in the tech shed; I hear they are easily intimidated and I can always recruit you as a recognized expert.

[Bench Racer]

Which was precisely my angle. Maybe not ideal, but I’m pretty sure I can sell it in the tech shed; I hear they are easily intimidated and I can always recruit you as a recognized expert.

Not really, ask the guy who appeal the head STR. Of course that's a step or so over the tech shed. 

[Jim Drago]

Not really, ask the guy who appeal the head STR. Of course that's a step or so over the tech shed. 

You hit a new record... Not one of those last three or four posts had anything to do with the topic or and relevance to each other

[Bench Racer]

You hit a new record... Not one of those last three or four posts had anything to do with the topic or and relevance to each other

Jim, I can string all my comments within this post  together referencing other post comments and they have much to do with the topic, maybe in a roundabout way.