How To Improve Your Performance

It is Speedweeks again here in Florida. There has already been testing going on for the dirt races at Volusia and Bubba Raceway park as well as asphalt racing at New Smyrna Speedway. This year I will be helping an old friend, Jerry Symons get his asphalt modified up to speed for the World Series of Stock Car racing championships.

The track testing we will do in a couple of days will be a test of the changes we have already made to the car. I evaluated what the team had been doing and made suggestions for changes. Now we’ll see how those changes worked out.

During the past year, I have seen trends that disrupt the order of a balanced setup. Teams will apply methods to their cars in incomplete ways, or ways not intended for their particular type of car. One popular trend is the use of “tie-down” shocks. There is no good use for those types of shocks for the purpose of “tying” down one corner of the car.

Since the tire is not attached to the racing surface, it cannot help hold down its corner. The only thing that happens is that the shock does not allow the tire to maintain contact and loading to the track.  The Tie-Down shock used on a normal spring rate will overcome that spring and lock up that corner of the car.

High rebound shocks, what some like to call tie-downs, are designed and intended for use with high spring rates to work with those rates. Bump stops and bump springs both have very high spring rates and the high rebound works with those high spring rates.

When you install those shocks on a corner with conventional spring rates, the high rebound will overcome the spring and there will be a lot of compression and little rebound. The corner jacks down and load is taken off the tires to where that tire won’t work well anymore. Be careful where you install high rebound shocks.

Goals – The overall goal of testing is to find a setup combination that will be both initially fast and also stay fast for a long time. It should be good on the tires, comfortable for the driver, and out run the competition all the way to the last lap.

On asphalt, the setup we end up with is probably the one we will qualify and race with given small changes between the two.  For dirt, we will make setup changes required for the different track conditions. That does not mean we cannot test on a track that is consistent.

A primary goal for dirt cars might be to just learn the process of making changes to meet the track conditions. There is an order and logic to adapting to changing track surface grip levels. Becoming comfortable with making those changes can be a huge performance gain.

Pre-testing Preparation / Planning – It is most important to know your car before you go to the race track for practice or testing. On Symons modified I had already evaluated the front and rear geometry, checked alignment of the car, and done a dynamic analysis of the spring combinations to balance the two suspension systems. We also looked over the dyno graphs of the shocks, checked the steering system for Ackermann, and made changes where necessary..

If you are going to a new track, take into consideration the banking and transitions. If it has a different banking angle than you are used to, a different spring setup might be in order. High banked tracks need higher spring rates overall and have little need for traction enhancing technology. If the track is flatter, include methods of creating bite off the corners into your planning.

Arrival – On arrival at the track, establish a pitting position for the car that is relatively level. We should have easy access to the tool cart as well as the trailer and other track facilities that may be needed. Mark the spots around the tires so you can always park the car in the same position after each run.

Weigh the car before testing and after all of the testing is done at the end of the day, re-weigh the car to see how the weight distribution might have changed from the various adjustments. If the track scales are different from yours as to cross weight, note the difference and adjust what you read each time to what the shop scales read.

How to Measure Track Performance –We need to measure our on-track performance.  There are two components to speed, the motor/gear, and the chassis setup combination.  Since we work on these separately, we need to measure them separately.

If we have lap times that include turn segment times, we can then compare our times with our competition. Turn segment times tell us all we need to know about how good the chassis setup is. Remember that if we can improve the mid-turn speeds, we will usually also improve the straightaway speeds.

The First Set of Runs – The driver should initially make several slower circuits and then a few faster laps to “shake down” the car the first time out. This establishes that the brakes work as expected, the wheels are on tight, the air will stay in the tires, there are no water or oil leaks and the transmission and rear end lubricants will be brought up to temperature.  We should do two more short runs following the initial outing before we can expect to get meaningful tire temperatures.

Have the driver initially run the turns at a speed lower than normal and note the position of the hands. Then once the car is up to speed, the driver should again note where the hands are and if the steering is significantly different, the car is either tight or loose.

After each run, record the tire pressures and temperatures, tire sizes, and engine water and oil temperatures. Keep hard copy records of the data in addition to digital records that may be stored in the tire temperature/pressure box or a computer.

Once the driver is confident that the car is sound, longer and faster runs can be done.  As you make your next series of runs, try to have the driver stay out at least 10 laps so that the tire temperatures will be sufficient to show how they are working.

Evaluation Time – Evaluate the tire cambers, pressures and overall handling balance. Make quick adjustments to the front tire cambers and all four tire pressures if the temperatures dictate. Do not make chassis adjustments until the tire issues have been corrected.

Record the driver comments as well as crew comments as to the handling and engine performance.  If the car is not neutral, now is the time to make changes to improve the handling while working to maintain a balanced setup.

There is a difference between Handling Balance and Dynamic Balance.  The car is neutral when it is neither tight nor loose.  We can easily adjust most cars so that they will be neutral. This may make the car faster, but it is not our primary goal.  We need the car to be both neutral in handling and balanced in how the front suspension and rear suspension are working.

Mid-Turn Performance First – We must always evaluate and correct the mid-turn performance first. To balance the car at this Steady State point on the track will also help to balance it on entry and exit.

We can interpret the balance of the car by evaluating the tire temperatures.  These tell us how much work each tire is doing in relation to other tires. We are looking for more equal temperatures on pairs of tires on each side of the car.

Changes to panhard bar height and/or spring rates can help bring temperature to a tire that is too cool. More uneven front tire temperatures indicate a tight car. High RR tire temps indicate a loose car. Once the tire temps come to be more equal on each side, the handling balance can be tuned with cross weight.

Remember that spring split in the rear and panhard bar height changes are the most effective way to re-balance a circle track car. As you make those changes, you might need to also tune the handling with changes in cross weight.

Tire wear can tell us a similar story when racing on dirt.  Dirt teams rarely take tire temperatures. They do feel the tires for temperature, so we know that they feel it’s important. But tire wear can also tell us how hard a tire is working.

Entry Tuning – Entry problems can be caused by rear alignment issues or incorrect shock rates, mostly in the LR corners of the car. Over-driving the entry can make a car push. Make absolutely sure that the rear end is aligned properly and square to the centerline of the car. Do not install a high rebound left rear shock. And don’t let your driver “dive bomb” the entry to the corners.

Excess LR shock rebound may cause the car to be loose on entry as load is transferring to the front while braking. The LR shock should allow the LR tire to move in rebound to help it maintain contact with the racing surface as the car pitches forward and to the right on entry.

Spring split has some affect on entry performance too.  At flatter tracks, a stiffer LF spring over the RF spring helps entry stability in most cases. Remember that spring changes also affect the Dynamic Balance of the car and you will need to re-evaluate the tire temperatures and make changes to the panhard bar to re-balance the setup after a spring change.

Exit Tuning – Problems associated with corner exit involve either a tight-off or loose-off condition.  If we use the wrong methods to improve either of those, we might then end up with a car that no longer handles in the middle. So, the changes we make to improve exit performance should never change the mid-turn balance. Changes to spring rates, spring split, panhard bar height and cross weight will all affect, and probably ruin our mid-turn balance. So, just how do we tune exit performance?

The tracks where we usually see exit issues are mostly the flatter tracks with associated lack of grip or at tracks where transition in the banking cause problems. The combination of lateral forces that come from turning the car and the torque associated with power application tend to overload the grip capability of the rear tires. So we need to develop ways to increase the amount of grip the rear tires have available on exit while being careful not to affect the mid-turn balance we have established.

We can experiment with various designs of Pull Bars, Push Rods, Lift Arms, and rear steer that happens only on acceleration. The goals are to reduce the “shock” to the rear tires upon initial application of power and increase the total rear grip by introducing rear steer (to the left) into the rear geometry.  The more the rear tires are steered, the more traction they will develop, just like the front tires when they are steered.

There is a limit to how much rear steer we can use before the car becomes too tight. Larger amounts are more tolerable on dirt than with asphalt. A few ten-thousandths of an inch of wheel movement can be felt by the driver on asphalt where-as an inch or more of wheel movement is not unheard of on dirt.

At The End of The Test – Always save your sticker tires for the last runs of the day after the car is all dialed in.  If the setup is good, make a qualifying run on fresh tires. After that run, do a 30 or 40 lap run on those newer tires and see if the lap times stay consistent.  A truly balanced setup will provide lap times that fall off less than your competition as more and more laps are run on a single set of tires.

Review your notes when you get back to the shop and learn from both the gains and losses. All of the results are valuable and the more we learn about the effects of changes, the better we can make quick adjustments during a racing event. The top teams make a point of knowing how each chassis adjustment affects all of the other parameters involved with their setups.

Incorrect tire stagger, bent shocks, suspension binding and poor alignment are some of the peculiarities that can ruin a test session. If radical setup changes do not seem to provide the expected result, look for a mechanical problem and fix it. Keep your test notes available for review. Test as often as you can afford and whenever the track is available. If you can develop a comprehensive plan for your testing, your performance will get better and you will enjoy your racing experience that much more.

The post Track Testing Tips appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Tucked away in a residential area in Deland, FL is Koury Race Engines where Byron Koury and his son Byron Jr. were busy fielding phone calls and putting together racing power plants. Even on a rainy day during Speedweeks, the work doesn’t stop.

After a tour and a look at some of the engines under construction (not just circle track applications either), we took some time to talk with Koury about the history of his operation and the current state of racing engines.

In the following video, Koury gave us a very candid view of the state of short track racing engines. Enjoy!

The post The State of Racing Engines with Byron Koury appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Race Spotter Tech: Tips From A Professional Spotter

The spotter articles always get a lot of attention. The first one I did some years ago was well received by the lead official in ARCA racing and he told me he was going to circulate it to all of the spotters in that series to read. I don’t know if he ever really did that, but it was a compliment.

I try to give information that I think makes sense and from what I have gained as a spotter. In this edition, I am going to be talking to a consummate professional who has driven in NASCAR in K&N Pro Series, Camping World Truck Series, Busch (Infinity) Series as well as the ARCA, the ALL Pro Super Series, Southern All Stars, and the USAR Hooter Late Model Series.

Race car driver Jimmy Kitchens, originally from Hueytown, AL, is a member of the storied Alabama Gang and also a member of the Alabama Auto Racing Pioneers Hall of Fame. He is now a professional spotter for Cup teams as well as other touring series of NASCAR, and in IMSA road racing.

As he contributes to this presentation, he draws on his abundant knowledge base from having driven the cars he is spotting for, his years of experience as a professional spotter and from working hard to become a better spotter. Much of what you will read here will be coming from a conversation I had with Jimmy just after this year’s 24 Hours of Daytona IMSA race.

Education – In order for a person to become a spotter and do a good job, they need to be educated about racing first. They need to watch a great deal of racing with the objective of seeing how drivers work the traffic and how they react to traffic working them. If possible, early on, listen in on spotter/driver communications and get a feel for what sounds right and what makes sense.

Once you have taken on the role of spotter, do a lot of practice before an actual race. Work with the driver in testing and practice sessions. Get to know how much information he wants and needs from HIS perspective. It matters not what you think, although you can offer suggestions. In the end, it is what the driver feels comfortable with that works best.

Learning The Track – Here is what Jimmy has to say about learning a new track. JK – “Get a feel for the new track and how it might change as the race progresses. The first step is determining the track characteristics.”

“Get with the driver and crew chief only and determine what are the expectations for this particular race. Are we here to win? Are we here to check out the car, the driver, or maybe prepare for a race coming up in about a month? What are our goals here?”

Editor – this is called being realistic. If you are a new team, or new to the track you are running today, there will be a learning curve. The more honest you are about your situation, the better progress you will make.

JK –“Three quarters through the race, see where you’re at with those goals. Be realistic throughout the race as to what you can do and how much you can help or push your driver. Be able to admit that you’re having a bad night or a mediocre night. Always be truthful with yourself about where your car is at and try to work towards that original goal.”

“Find out from the driver what he needs different from you as a spotter. Things like less input, more input, staying calmer. Determine what the driver needs to make you a better spotter for that particular driver.”

Being In The Seat – Spot like you are riding in the seat beside the driver. You might have to let him know that ahead is a very slow car. This is important because the closing rate may be too quick for the faster car to avoid a collision. If you are side-by-side with someone racing for position, you need to let him know about a slow car on the inside so he can, a) crowd the other car to make him lift if he is on the outside, or b) move the other car over enough to get by the slower car if your car is on the inside.

Know that you as the spotter must “feel” when the driver needs to be cleared, just like if you where driving. Never clear too early, but don’t hesitate either. Know when a driver needs the information and what information he needs. When your driver is passing a slower car on the outside down the straightaway, he needs to know exactly when he is clear so he can either take the normal line into the corner or stay up. It’s either one or the other and if the information is delayed, he may lose valuable time if he could have taken the low line.

In this case, by all means, key the mike early and as soon as clear happens, say “clear”. If it happens to be a sudden announcement, say two words like, “you’re clear” so that if you cut off the first word, “clear” comes through.

Tire Management – JK – “A real big thing in short track racing is that a lot of those tracks haven’t been paved in a long time. Know the tire data about when the falloff is and keep that in perspective throughout the race and enforce tire management as needed.

“Set your own pace for tire management.  If you know the tires are going to go away in 65 laps in a 100 lap race, there’s nothing wrong with telling your driver, ‘let’s run 80% for the next 20 laps.’

“If somebody wants to race you hard, let them go. They’ll come back to you later on. A good racer does that. If tire management is not an issue, then you run the best laps you can all night long. Know the symptoms of the race car. Do you know when the tires are falling off? Help the driver manage the symptoms, whether it’s loose, tight, etc.”

“It’s good to have somebody giving your driver lap times as you go. Pick a spot on the track where the crew chief, or other person, can give the driver lap times like, ‘the leader is running 21.20’s and you are running 21.50’s.’ Do this about every five or ten laps. The spotter cannot do this and do his job too.”

“This is huge in practice too. You need to be able to tell your driver your running 0.40’s and you need to be running 0.20’s right here. That tells the driver he needs to try different things to improve the lap times using that as a reference.”

“As a spotter, you need to keep up with the race track throughout the night. Note where the grooves are at, are the leaders arcing into the corners with a late apex? Help your driver keep up with the track and let him know where the leaders are running. If the driver cannot run a better line, find out why and communicate that to the crew chief so he can find a solution.”

Afterwards – JK – “After the race, that night or the next day or so, debrief with the driver and crew chief to give them what you think is valuable information. Find out from the driver what he needs different from you as a spotter. Things like less input, more input, stay calmer, etc. Determine what the driver needs to make you a better spotter for that particular driver because every driver is different.”

“Find out what he likes and doesn’t like about how you spot. Also, get the crew chiefs opinion. Have that conversation away from the driver so that you can plan out strategy for assisting the driver in any way you think you need to.”

What the Driver Needs – The driver needs the following basic information from the spotter:

– Help in lining up before a race.

– Knowledge of when to expect the green flag and to call when the race goes green.

– Notice for caution lights. Announce caution lights, or impending cautions and hazardous track conditions.

– The proximity of crashes and where to go.

– Communication with the officials..

– Clearance all around the car. Let the driver know when it is clear all around so he can run his line.

– Who is closing and how fast.

– If there are slow cars ahead, give notice about slow cars on the track so your driver can avoid trouble.

– Information about the car.  You might be able to spot trouble with the car before the driver or crew notices anything.

– Laps run and laps remaining. Let the driver know when the half way point has come, when there are ten to go or if it will be a green, white, checker at the end after a late caution.

– Lap times vs. leader. Some drivers need lap time information to judge how they are doing against the leader.

–  Moral support and encouragement. Offer support to the driver, especially during long runs and cautions.

Be A Professional – JK – “Anything you say needs to have merit. If the driver wants to joke on the radio, that’s his call. But as a spotter, I always keep it serious and I never ever comment on a joke, because the way I look at it, I’m there to be focused. I don’t want to let my guard down.”

“As for other spotters, don’t be afraid to go to another spotter to coordinate your race, if that is what it takes to avoid trouble on the track. Things like letting other spotters know when you are pitting so their driver can plan how to avoid your slowing car. One day that courtesy could come back to help you.

“Be respectful of the other spotters and try to work with everybody up there. Remember the spotter is not driving the car. In Cup racing, it’s a big brotherhood up there on Sunday. Find out who is spotting for which car.”

Advanced Techniques – There are a few advanced techniques you can develop and use when spotting. When you get comfortable, you can begin to look well ahead and watch other cars at times when your car is all clear. And let the drive know every time he is all clear. That gives him a chance to relax his guard a little until he reaches new traffic in order to reduce fatigue.

Watch for future conflicts developing and if need be, alert the driver to them. If two cars get to racing side by side up ahead, they may be slowing down and this may be an opportunity to be alert to an opportunity to pass both cars if they were to get together and move up the track.

Be on the alert for caution situations, not necessarily waiting for the caution to come out. If an obvious caution situation develops, tell the driver immediately so he does not get into it. The flagman may be looking in another direction, as often happens, and the actual caution may come out too late for your car to avoid a problem.

If a car blows a motor, tell the driver to “stay high in 3 and 4, oil on the track” so he doesn’t go flying in there and then slide to the wall. This kind of knowledge is a bit advanced and only veteran spotters are good at it, but it will help your racing program a bunch if you can develop a holistic approach to your spotting duties.

Safety – JK – “If your driver crashes, make sure he doesn’t unbuckle, unless the car is burning, until the safety crew has gotten there, regardless of how pissed off he is, or how bad he got dumped. Never tell him immediately that ‘the 10 car wrecked you’, etc. Keep the driver calm and later on, when you both have had a chance to review what happened you can give your opinion.” Editor – People do unwise things when they are full of rage.

“Under caution, let your driver know where the pace car picks up the leader, and first and foremost, where the safety crew workers are on the track. If your driver has pitted and is out catching up to the pack, let him know where the back of the field is located so he doesn’t run up on them. Do not stop spotting when the cars are rolling around the track under caution.”

“When there is an incident on the track ahead of your driver, call out where it is, if there is any debris, how big it is, etc. And don’t forget to tell the driver what’s behind him and where he is clear to go, or not.”

“On a self-cleaning track that is high banked, be aware that as soon as a car is in the wall, it’s going to come back down. On a flat track, they’re pretty much going to stay where they are.”

Conclusion – Good driver/spotter relationships often are a significant part of winning races and championships. The longer you work together, the better it gets. Talk to other veteran spotters and let them help you to get better. These guys are going to be beside you at every race and a sort of camaraderie can develop in many cases.  Good luck and speak clearly

Sources:

Rugged Radios
888-541-7223
www.ruggedradios.com

The post A Clear Guide to Spotting appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Advanced Methods for More Forward Bite

Racers are forever trying to find more forward bite. The problem is greater for higher horsepower motored cars than with the crate classes, but nonetheless, everyone experiences times when they could definitely use more bite to help them use more throttle off the corners.

Over the years, the methods have changed somewhat, but the overall goal remains the same. Just what is that goal? It is to cause a mechanical change in the load distribution on the rear tires so that there will be a more equal loading of the two rear tires. It’s as simple as that.

We have known forever that the more equally loaded a pair of tires is, the more traction they will have. That is why cars running more left side weight go faster through the turns than ones with less left side weight. Because of load transfer, the left side tires always end up with much less load on them than the right side tires. We would need over 80 percent of static left side weight in order to end up with equally loaded tires through the turns.

Past Methods – Just to give you a little history lesson here to show how racers previously manipulated the loading on the rear tires coming off the turns, we’ll take you back to the mid to late 1990’s. Then several methods were used that may or may not apply to today’s racing. Many of the tracks were flat and the goal was to get off the corners better, not necessarily get through the middle well.

So, almost all of the teams of that day ran a softer right rear spring rate than what was in the left rear. Upon acceleration, the stiffer LR spring loaded that corner and cause a spike in the cross weight percent and that tightened the car. This also made the cars tight through the middle, but the teams mostly lived with that because they believed the greater gain was acceleration off the corners.

Another “trick” used was to stagger the mounting of the rear coil-over springs. If you placed the LR spring in front of the rear axle tube and the RR spring in the rear of the tube, and used a spring pull bar third link, as the rear end rotated on acceleration, the LR spring added load to that tire and the RR spring took load from the RR tire. This put more loading on the LR tire to make it more equally loaded in relation to the RR tire and then provided more bite. Again we had more equally loaded rear tires this way and it didn’t necessarily hurt the mid-turn handling.

In today’s racing, the use of softer RR spring rates and staggered spring placement methods are not applicable or useful for several reasons. First, with the bump setups being used, these methods will not allow us to reduce the rear roll enough when running a softer RR spring. We must run a stiffer RR spring rate, or one with more force, in today’s setups and we’ll tell you more about that later on.

As for spring stagger, many sanctions do not allow the use of a pull bar, so the effect of utilizing rear end rotation to load the LR tire does not work. Even the method of staggering the heights of the trailing arms that I have described in previous articles is of no use if you cannot use a pull bar.

The Problem With Today’s Setups – The problem we run into in today’s racing is trying to deal with setups using stiffer RR spring rates over the LR spring rate. When bump setups started being used, the front suspensions became very stiff, initially with bumps and large sway bars, and now more recently with just the bump stops and/or bump springs and smaller sway bars.

Again in previous articles, we have explained the concept of a balanced setup whereby the two ends of the car are made to work together in roll stiffness, or what we call equal roll angles. They must match up in order for the car to perform well through the turns.

So in order to accomplish that, we had to install rear spring rates where the RR spring was stiffer than the LR spring by whatever amount worked to balance the setup. Here was where the problem stated. If a softer RR spring makes better bite, the opposite will make the car have less bite, right? Yes, that is exactly what happens.

The problem that arose when we started running bumps and stiffer front suspensions is that when we matched the rear stiffness with the front, we lost grip off the corners. The following is one way in which many racers are solving that problem.

Today’s Solution To Loss Of Bite – In the following explanation, I’ll try to make this simple although the calculations used to show the process are somewhat complicated. I did those for you and I do not expect you to have to do them yourself. Just try to understand the process and build your rear suspension system in a way that will maximize rear bite not only with bumps setups, but also with soft conventional setups.

First off we need to understand what is happening in the rear of the car when we go through the turns, which is the first step in getting to accelerating off the turns. We have load transfer going on. For a typical asphalt late model car weighing 2800 pounds, we typically see, just in the rear, 560 or so pounds of load going from the left side of the car to the right side in a 1.8 G-force turn. The total vehicle load transfer is around 925 pounds.

Most rules allow 58 percent left side weight. That means that the left side tires carry 224 pounds more than the right side tires. But our rear load transfer is 550 pounds, so our LR tire ends up weighing much less than the RR tire.

Since more equally loaded tires have more traction, we need to get more weight onto the LR tire so that the rear tires will be more equally loaded, and we can do that. We just need to fool the car into thinking it has the higher spring rates it needs through the turns, and the softer rates it needs to get off the turns. It’s tricky, but it can be done.

Understanding Force Verses Spring Rate – Here is the beginning of understanding how to get what we need. First off, we need to get through the turns well. It’s not like the 1990’s where we accept a sacrifice; we don’t in today’s racing.

The stiffer RR spring rate serves to provide more force than the LR spring rate to reduce roll and make the rear stiffer to match the front stiffness of the bump setups. Force is the work a spring does when it is compressed.

If we think about using a greater force number  in the RR corner to get the rear roll stiffness we need through the turns instead of a stiffer spring rate, we are then on the right track. By using this concept, we could ultimately be using 1990’s technology in the 2017’s.

Every spring will generate a certain force when compressed. A stiffer spring will generate a given force in less travel than a softer rate spring. If we compress a softer spring a greater amount, we can generate the same force as the stiffer spring.

How The Typical Stiff RR Spring Works – Let’s say we are running a pair of rear springs that are: LR = 150ppi and RR = 250ppi (ppi means Pounds Per Inch). If the RR spring was compressing 2.35 inches at normal ride height, then it is producing 588 pounds of force, sufficient to hold up the RR corner in a typical late model at 2800 pounds total with 58% left side weight and 50% rear weight.

Let’s assume this RR spring traveled 3.65 inches more through the turns. That is total of 6 inches of spring compression. If the spring rate is 250ppi and we travel 6.0 inches, the force needed to get the car through the turns in a balanced state is 1,500 pounds. Hold that thought.

Spring Pre-loading Technique – There is a technique called spring pre-load whereby we can pre-load a spring on a shock body to a certain force number. Then we can use a softer rate of spring and pre-load it a certain amount to achieve the desired force amount that will balance the car through the turns.

If we do this right, we can install a softer RR spring than before to gain loading on the LR tire off the turns. Then the two rear tires will be more equally loaded and provide more bite. Let’s see if that is possible.

For our example, let’s choose a 200ppi spring for the RR corner. In order for this spring to generate 1,500 pounds of force, it would have to travel 7.5 inches, something not possible. If we want it to travel more than the amount of the original 250ppi spring we could pre-load it by 600 pounds and then when it gained the additional 900 pounds of force needed at mid-turn, it would have then traveled an additional 4.5 inches. That is 0.85 inches more than the 250ppi spring would have traveled.

It is important to say here that you need special equipment to safely pre-load a spring with that much force. And I’m not saying that this is the amount of pre-load you will need. There are many possibilities. It’s just that with pre-load, we have the tools, using a force machine, to play with spring rates to better gain loading on the LR tire to become more equally loaded in the rear for more traction.

Pre-load Plus Bump – So, in the above example, we see where we can utilize a softer RR spring rate to achieve the same desired force at mid-turn. We are now balanced like before we pre-loaded the RR spring, but have a softer spring rate installed.

What we desired all along is more bite off the corners and we have only made it through the mid-turn section. We can now look at the acceleration phase of the turns to see where we can gain loading on the LR tire.

If the RR spring is something softer than when we did not pre-load, that corner as well as the whole rear of the car will travel more as the car transfers load from front to rear upon acceleration. In order to take the next step in gaining bite, we need for the rear to travel down, or squat, somewhat. We may want to reduce our Anti-squat by reducing the angle in the third link.

When we have made the car squat, we can use that motion to gain loading on the LR tire by installing a bump stop or spring in the LR shock. This is the rest of the story I am telling here but not necessarily exactly the way all racers are doing it.

If we have arranged the spring rates in the rear to less of a spring split, say going from a 150 LR spring and a 250ppi RR spring with a 150ppi spring split, to a 200ppi RR spring and a 50ppi spring split, we have made quite a difference in how the car will exit the turns under acceleration. But we still have a stiffer RR spring rate and what we need is a reverse spring split to gain loading on the LR tire.

If we install a bump at the LR corner, be it a stop or spring, we can gain spring rate at that corner while the car is accelerating off the turns. But we need to time the contact onto the bump just right or it will ruin our mid-turn handling.

If at mid-turn we are off the bump on the LR by ¼ inch and then the car squats ½ inch during initial acceleration off the turns, we gain spring rate and the force of whatever the bump spring rate is per inch divided by four. If our bump were rated at 400ppi, then we would gain 400ppi of spring rate and a total of 100 pounds of force.

Load Difference For Rear Tires – Let’s see what we need for load gain to really make equally loaded rear tires. For our example car with the numbers presented above, we have a 2800 pound car with 200 pounds of un-sprung front weight and 300 pounds of un-sprung rear weight. Typically we see 58% left side weight, 50-50% front to rear weight distribution, running a 10 degree banked track generating 1.8 G-force.

With a Center of Gravity height of 15.0 and a track width of 66 inches, this car will transfer a total of 564 pounds of rear weight from left to right through the turns. This represents a change in cross weight from whatever you run to a number closer to creating equally loaded rear tires. Gaining LR loading to achieve a number that will equal out the rear tire loadings may or may not be possible, but the closer you can get to that number, the more bite you will have.

Any force you can add to the LR tire will be added to the RF corner and that will increase the cross weight loading. Any force you can add to the LR corner will take force or loading off the RR tire as well as the LF tire. You move towards the higher cross weight needed to offset the weight transfer caused by the lateral G-forces and that makes the rear tires more equally loaded.

Which Route Will You Take – There are many ways to go about this and combinations of pre-load, spring split and LR bump rate and timing that will get the job done are many. We are not in any way or form telling you exactly how to do this and what numbers to use. Every car is different in weight distribution, motion ratios, front spring/bump stiffness, sway bar stiffness, rear spring rates, etc.

So, if we were to define numbers to use, some of you might benefit and some would be out to lunch so to speak. Take what we presented as a tool for thought and try to understand the concepts we explained. Apply those concepts to your car and experiment until you have gained bite while not hurting your mid-turn performance. Remember that any loading you can gain on the LR tire will help your bite off the corners.

Sources:

Eibach Springs
800-507-2338
www.eibach.com

Gale Force Suspension
251-583-9748
www.galeforcesuspension.com

Hyperco Springs
800-365-2645
www.hypercoils.com

Intercomp
800-328-3336
www.intercompracing.com

Landrum Performance Spring
574-353-1674
www.landrumspring.com

Longacre
800-423-3110
www.longacreracing.com

The post Cutting Edge Traction Techniques appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

History, Tips and Tech To Help You Prepare

Bristol Motor Speedway is hosting short track race cars once again. The races, slated for this May 19 thru 21st are always a racer favorite. Billed as the U.S. Nationals of Short Track Racing, it is sure to attract a lot of teams. And who doesn’t like Bristol! As for me, it is my favorite track of all time. That being said, there are some things you need to know about Bristol that you probably didn’t. If you are going there to compete, this is a must read.

My perspective comes from racing at this track in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s as both an engineer and Crew Chief. I worked with Goodies Dash teams, All Pro Late Model teams, Pro Cup and a part time Craftsman Truck team. And I have helped Cup engineers with their setup for this and other high banked tracks like Dover and Daytona.

The All Pro Series Super Late Models ran at Bristol from 1994 to 1997 and from 1999 to 2002. The Pro Cup series under various title sponsors ran Bristol from 2004 until 2008 in what were more like the XFINITY cars of that era. I was at the first race and I saw a lot of scrambling to adjust the cars to the high banking.

On my first visit to the track, I was helping out with a local team running the NASCAR Goodies Dash series, which also ran at Bristol for a number of years, but I was not in charge of the setup. Nonetheless, I evaluated it and said to the team owner/driver that it looked balanced, but too soft. It had 400ppi springs up front and I felt it needed at least 700ppi springs.

The guy who had chosen the softer springs was also the engine builder and made a smart remark like, “Oh, well then, we’ll just put in 2,000ppi springs. That should fix it…” I had to leave the trailer to keep from knocking him out.

I had developed a method of calculating the mechanical downforce and therefore the suspension travel based on the banking and G-forces that were expected here. From the calculations, the travel exceeded the ride height. You can probably guess what happened next, right? Yep, on the first hot lap, he bottomed out, took off the bottom of the oil pan and cooked a brand new motor.

I wanted to tell you that story to give you some kind of idea what you might expect. Bristol has not changed in its un-forgiveness, it’s only gotten more unforgiving. If you remember anything about this piece, remember this. Most teams new to Bristol show up with spring rates too light for the extreme downforce the car will experience. And there will be very few teams with previous experience running there.

Why Is Bristol So Brutal? – In years past, Bristol was advertised to be the highest banked track in the US and the fasted half mile. The later is true, but the former was exaggerated. The published banking was 36 degrees, or five degrees higher than the turns at Daytona. On my first visit there, I measured the banking at both ends, top to bottom and I came up with a consistent 26 degrees.

When I got home, I phoned a friend of mine who was one of the few Cup engineers around at the time and told him my results and he was very surprised. He confirmed my numbers on his next visit to the track.

That’s still a lot of banking to deal with. And it’s only gotten steeper. A few years ago, the track management decided to shake things up a bit and changed the shape of the track. They decided to create three different banking angles, a lower third, higher middle, and highest top third.

They did this by cutting the middle third down a couple of inches and then matching the top and bottom thirds to it whereby the middle is still 26 degrees, but the bottom is something like 24 degrees and the top is around 28 degrees. If you watch most NASCAR races run there lately, the cars mostly run the top third, they have to.

…probably the most important message I can give a driver running Bristol. Never, never ever, turn right at this place… I know, you think you can save it, but everyone familiar with this track will tell you, no you can’t.”

Comparison To Other High Banked Tracks – It is interesting to compare Bristol and its high banking to other high banked short tracks. For instance, the only three that come close to this much banking are Slinger (or what it is purported to be), Winchester and I-70 Speedway that is no longer there. I-70 was a true 26 degrees and looked the part. I won a race there in 1999 with Brian Hoppe.

As for Slinger, I had always heard it was twenty something degrees, but I had a few teams measure it and the reality was somewhere between 16 and 18 degrees, far off the banking at Bristol. Heck, Nashville Fairgrounds Speedway is around 16 degrees, so Slinger is not that far out of the ordinary. And Winchester is 16-18 degrees from what I have had teams tell me that have measured it.

At Daytona, the advertised 31 degree banking is a real number, I know. When I was in high school, myself and a friend of mine went into the speedway one night to look around. We weren’t there to vandalize the place, we just wanted to see what it was like. I think alcohol was involved.

We entered over the banking between turns one and two and I could hardly crawl down the banking. You cannot walk up or down it without using your hands for sure. So, with nearly Daytona like banking, Bristol is like no other short track speedway you have ever been to, that is a fact.

What I Think Will Happen – Based on past experience, here is what I think will happen. About 95% of the teams will show up sprung too light. The cars will bottom out at best, either hard on the bumps or hitting the track. Remember we are talking about not only Super Late Models, but Pro Late Models, Late Model Stock cars sanctioned by NASCAR, Modifieds, Street Stocks and Compacts.

The question arises, from a purely engineering evaluation, are these cars built strong enough to withstand the extreme forces both laterally and through down-force that they will experience? I ask that question so that those who will go there will think out how their cars are built and maybe make changes to strengthen certain parts of the car.

When Bristol spread dirt over the track a few years ago, and ran dirt late model cars there, it was a huge success. But many of the cars broke shock mounts, frames and control arms in the process. Some of that will happen this time around.

When short track cars ran back fifteen years ago or so, they were built differently. The Goodies cars were little Cup cars and built to be very strong. They could handle the extreme downforce very well. The Pro Cup cars were larger and built equally strong.

The All Pro series Late Models were what we call perimeter cars. This means they were built symmetrical and with strong frame rails and door bars on the right hand side.  Basically the offset late models of today are offset designs and the right side of those cars, the part that will impact the walls first, are built very flimsy in comparison to the All Pro cars of yesteryear.

I’m not sure of the construction of the Street Stocks or Compacts, but I do know they have never seen the punishment they will see here at Bristol. I have talked to a few Late Model teams who might go, and are not decided as of this date, and they all tell me they will be taking an older chassis.

What You Need To Do To Prepare – In preparation for this race, you will need to pay attention to a few things. Regardless of what type of setup you will be running, the forces on lower control arms, shock mounts especially and wheels and tires will be like you’ve never seen or will see again.

Reinforce your lower control arms, reinforce your upper shock/coil-over mounts and check them throughout the event for cracks. Bring strong wheels built to withstand the high lateral forces. Check with your wheel supplier to make sure you have sufficient strength in your wheels.

Reinforce your safety fuel cell mounts. Most current designs in late models do not do a good job of mounting the cells for this type of track. They are fine for normal banked tracks, but with the speed we’ll see here, a cell could exit the car in a hard sliding rear end hit with the wall.

Do not come to Bristol without a head and neck restraint system, period. I don’t know all of the rules for the five sanctions, but whatever they are, buy and use a H&N system here. Check all of your other safety equipment and make sure everything is in working order and within the proper dates.

Setting Up For Bristol – It used to be that if you went to Bristol, you would multiply your normal spring rates by three. So, if you were running a NE touring modified and were running 250ppi front springs, you would show up with 750’s on the front. If you didn’t, you soon would.

As for the Super Late Models in the All Pro series, normal spring rates for the conventional setups were around 250 to 300ppi back in the day before bumps and soft setups. So, the winning car at the last Bristol All Pro race had 700ppi front springs on the car.

Let’s think about that for a minute. We would usually jacked the ride height up an inch or more for Bristol for All Pro cars. The original ride height was four inches, so we came with say five inch ride heights. The wheel rate for the 700ppi springs was around 450ppi.

The right front traveled about 4.5 inches, so that times 450 = 2,025 pounds of force on the tire. That’s just the right front corner. Probably 80% of that is on the left side tires, or 1,620 pounds, so the total vehicle loading is twice each of those added together, or 7,290 pounds of downforce. That does not include lateral forces, only mechanical downforce. That represents 2.6 times the vehicle static weight. The G-forces will be a bit higher than that, or around 3.0 G’s.

If you currently run on bumps, either bump stops or bump springs, you can still run those and do well. What you do need to change are the ride spring rates. If you current run 150ppi front ride springs, you need to bump those up to 450-500ppi, seriously. Then you’ll be helping out the bump stops so that they won’t get crushed in the first two laps and disintegrate.

As for bumps springs, the same applies. Help them out and make them do less work and they won’t go into coil bind. With the above higher ride spring rates, the current shock rebound rates that will work with those bump setups will take care of the new higher ride springs and keep the car down on the bumps. We are just trading force on the bumps into force in the ride springs. The overall force will be the same.

For the other classes that do not run bumps, spring up my friend or suffer the loss of your car or worse. If you are running a Pro late model on 200-250ppi springs, you’ll need to go to what we ran years ago, 600-700ppi springs. And don’t forget to raise your static ride height.

For stock spring cars running in the 600-700ppi range, you’ll need to triple those rates and I’m not sure you can even find 1800ppi springs for those cars anymore. Hopefully you’ll go into coil bind before you bottom out and then the tires will be your springs.

For all teams and division, remember that there is no advantage to aero down-force at Bristol. There is so much mechanical down-force that any small aero down-force will be insignificant. Lateral grip here is never a problem.

How To Drive Bristol – I won a race here a few years ago, using a simulator program on my computer. Hey, I won. But I did get a chance to actually drive Bristol in my capable Acura Legend Coupe while helping dry out the track before a test day event. As it dried out, I could really get my car going and I had very good low profile tires. It is the most awesome experience you’ll ever feel.

From what I have observed and talking to drivers who have won here in Late Models, you drive hard into the turn, burp the throttle just before entry, and then when the car takes a set (and it happens quickly) you throttle up again.

You have to build up a trust for the banking that it will grip the tires and you won’t slide up the track. The G-forces are very high. Get used to the high groove because if you don’t run there, you’ll not make the show. I hear there will be a lot of entries and a lot of teams will go home early.

You can take a little time to work into that trust thing, but eventually you’ll need to go for it. I went there with a rookie driver near the end of the last era of late model racing at Bristol. I disputed the talk about “needing to hold it wide open all the way around” that was impressed on the driver by others. But when it came time to qualify on stickers, I told him, I had some bad news. Yes, you’ll have to almost flat-foot it all the way around. Such is Bristol.

Now for probably the most important message I can give a driver running Bristol. Never, never ever, turn right at this place. Yes, I know, you think you can save it, but everyone familiar with this track will tell you, no you can’t. If your car goes sideways entering the turns or in the middle, keep turning left and ride it out. If you try to correct by steering right, you’ll never be fast enough steering back left to keep the car from pointing into the wall and you’ll hit head on.

A Final Note – OK, maybe I have painted somewhat of a grim picture of Bristol you might be saying. No, I think I have painted a true and accurate picture of what you can expect when you go to race at the “World’s Fastest Half-Mile” race track. I did it this way because I want you to have fun, be safe, run well and come home in one piece.

Make no mistake about it, if you go, this will be the most fun you’ll have in your racing career, both for the drivers and for the team members and fans. There is nothing like the speed and excitement that this “Last Great Colosseum” creates. I will be there and supporting a few teams I have known since the last time we ran here. I hope to see you there too.

Sources:

Eibach Springs
800-507-2338
www.eibach.com

Gale Force Suspension
251-583-9748
www.galeforcesuspension.com

Hyperco Springs
800-365-2645
www.hypercoils.com

Intercomp
800-328-3336
www.intercompracing.com

Landrum Performance Springs
574-353-1674
www.landrumspring.com

Longacre
800-423-3110
www.longacreracing.com

The post Be Ready for Bristol appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Going In Circles

I had a recent déjà vu moment. I was reminded that common sense is not all that common after all. I also now understand why some teams seem to struggle year after year, sometimes having success, but mostly struggling. It’s not that they don’t care and just want to be “out there”, which I really once believed to be true. It’s because they are ignorant.

Before you jump to conclusions about using that “I- word” let me further explain. If you look up that word, it means among other things, according to Merriam-Webster, “…lack of knowledge”. An example given is, “parents ignorant of modern mathematics”.

We can substitute the word “parents” for racers in this case. Many of the teams I am referring to don’t necessarily lack specific knowledge about the race car, they just plain don’t know how to put all of that knowledge together into a package.

To be fair, I think it takes a special mind to decipher all of the various parts and pieces that go into a modern setup. The pieces must fit together like a puzzle and that is not a cheap metaphor, it is reality. To end up with a completed puzzle, one or more pieces left out ruins the whole picture.

So, how does a team that cannot put the pieces together get around this dilemma? They have to collectively agree to allow someone outside the team that can come in and put it all together for them. This is asking a lot and most egos will not allow such an intrusion. There, I have gotten to the root of the problem, egos.

Many teams have what I loosely refer to as “mentors” who might be out of racing at the present time, but who have raced a lot in the past. They still want to stay engaged in racing and I think it is a wonderful thing, to a point.

So, these mentors take control of the setup aspects of the team and are mostly resistant to anyone from outside butting in, no matter how briefly the encounter. And, it doesn’t matter how strong the intruder is in their knowledge base.

I have had well-known consultants, who were many times winners in their own right and are now many times winners with younger drivers they are bringing along, tell me that certain teams, who they are friends with, just won’t take the most basic of suggestions for improvement. It frankly boggles the mind.

In this world there are givers and takers. Almost every consultant I know is a giver, or they would never be trying to help other in the first place. Most of them can’t stand by and watch a team struggle when they know how to solve the problem at hand. But they have to at times or risk a rebellion.

So, they stay friendly and stand back and observe. It’s not easy, it’s just human nature. I know that with the articles we write on the pages of CT, as well as all of the other technical writers out there trying month after month to help the racers get better and have more success, we’ll get through to only a percentage of the readers.

There is even the phenomenon of people out there having disdain for those of us who dare to tell anyone how to do anything. I don’t have patience or time for those in that category. My thought is, if you already know what we are presenting, pat yourself on the back and move on.

Where all of this is leading is this. If you are caught in a situation where you have “advisors” who are resisting change and whose ego does not allow differences of opinion just because it is a threat to their control, find a way to urge them to move on.

It’s a fairly easy thing to do, just quit listening to them and doing what they say. Their egos won’t be able to stand the rejection and they’ll find another team to dominate. Your team’s performance will improve and someone else’s will get worse. Better them than you.

If all of that seems harsh, it’s got to be even harder going year after year with no success and struggling to finish in the top five. It is entirely your choice who you associate with and who you have relationships with. Look around you and evaluate which relationships make your world better and which ones drag you down.

There is nothing we can ever do about the past and it’s not worth worrying about. But the future is an entirely different thing. We should care about it and we should make changes now to ensure our future is going to be better than our past. It’s called growth and it’s one of the reasons we are all here, not my words, but nonetheless true. Hey, it’s a whole new day, right?

If you have comments or questions about this or anything racing related, send them to my email address: chassisrd@aol.com or mail can be sent to Circle Track, Senior Tech Editor, 1733 Alton Parkway, Suite 100, Irvine, CA.

Setup For Bristol

Hi Bob,

I was wondering if you could point me in the right direction for a decent starting point with springs and shocks for a 3100 lb metric 4 link car for the race at Bristol? Any help would be great, thanks.

Chris Titcomb 

Chris,

If you will read my piece about Bristol, you’ll begin to understand the challenges you will face running there. Although you, in your class, won’t be experiencing the high speeds the Late Models will be seeing, you will be traveling much faster through the turns than you ever have.

That puts a lot of loading on the suspension. My suggestion for spring rates for your type of car is similar to what we did back in the day with the Late Models. Basically triple your current spring rate.

So, I think most teams running stock classes are in the range of 700-800ppi spring rates. Triple would be going to 2,000-2,400ppi springs. Since your ride height is more than the late models and your speeds lower, you might get by a little softer, but I wouldn’t go there with less than 1,800ppi or so.

The first time out, you will pay close attention to shock travels to make sure you are not in danger of contacting the track with the cross member, or god forbid the oil pan. This brings up another important design requirement, make sure the cross member is lower than the bottom of the oil pan.

The other part of the presentation about Bristol is the part about the high loading on the other components of the car besides the springs. Everything must be in very good condition like your ball joints, control arm bushings, etc. This race will test how well you, or whomever, built your car.

Cheater Motors

Back many years ago when I was living in England and had a side business of building and racing “spec” engines for various formulae we faced the same problem.  The solution was the regulations were re-written to allow any competitor to buy a “winning” engine for a fairly low fixed price.  The owner could not resist.  A refusal to sell would result in the engines owner being immediately banned from that category and losing any winner’s purse from that event.

To race in that formula you agreed your engine could be bought at the end of a race meeting for the agreed price.  The price included the “accessories” such as headers, carburetor(s), fuel and oil and water pumps.  The “seller” was responsible for the removal under the eye of the buyer at the end of a race meeting.  Sometimes the “seller” would accept the “buyers” engine in part exchange, again, for an agreed price, but mostly they wanted cash only.

The result was that people did not invest much money in clandestine upgrades as they could lose them if their engine was bought.  Likewise, people did not invest much time in labor intensive upgrades such as blueprinting, port realignments and/or polishing.  It also meant any “secret” performance modifications were quickly learned by the competition and were not secret for long.

Here’s an example.  I raced in a saloon car category that required “stock” engines.  All parts had to be as supplied from the factory without modifications, meaning no grinding or filing of parts.  I had been building Formula Ford spec engines and had a “traders’ license so that I could go to the Ford factory in Dagenham and pick through their inventory to select weight matched pistons, roods etc.

I used to take my gauges and scales with me and sift through sometimes hundreds of parts just to find, for example, four well matched rods, where the small and big ends were closely matched across all four.  Likewise with pistons, valves, etc.  You can imagine just how long you could take, especially when you had three of something and needed a fourth!  You’d have to look for multiple sets and settle for the first set of four that were “good enough”.

I always did that for a customer’s Formula Ford engine.  Careful selection could improve a standard engine from rated 72 bhp to sometimes as much as 105 or more bhp.  I only did the above once for my street saloon.  That engine was bought after the first race of the season and the next race was the following week.  I had a full time job and couldn’t afford to skip work to sit and sort Ford parts for a couple of days or longer.

However, I discovered quite by accident that if I had a carburetor gasket that was torn in just the right place and was opened up just a little as the screws were tightened down it would create a fuel “leak” between the float bowl and choke when cornering around hard right hand curves and corners.  This was good because the engine would normally starve and misfire badly at racing speeds under these conditions normally but this “extra” fuel eliminated the problem with resultant quicker lap times.

One could even “tune” the amount by careful adjustment of the gap in the “torn” gasket.  I had three relatively cheap engines bought before the secret mod was discovered and everyone soon followed suit.  When the scrutineers learned of the practice they at first banned it as an “unapproved modification” but later reinstated it for “safety” reasons, stipulating precisely where and how wide the cut could be that replaced the “tear”.

The things we racers do to find an unfair advantage.  But fixed price buying of a competitor’s engine will keep the competition even and reasonably cost effective.

Phil Grice, Carlsbad, CA

Phil,

We already have claimer classes in the US. The plan you describe might be applicable to the crate or “strictly stock” motor programs possibly. If a sanction really wanted parity, and I truly doubt that is true in some cases, then they would enact the claimer rule for “stock” and sealed motor classes. The impression most sanctions give is that they want to be fair and everyone on the same performance level as to motors. Well then, let them claim. I won’t hold my breath on that one.

Outlaw Grill Openings

Bob,

I have noticed that a lot of outlaw asphalt Late Models don’t have any grille openings on the front of them and they pull air from the bottom of the duct work to cool the car instead of the front. Is there a reason why most pro/super late model guys don’t do this?

Would it not increase front downforce since the grille opening would be covered? This is just something I have noticed and wanted your input on the concept. The only drawback I see to this design is the duct work would be like a vacuum and suck all the trash off the race track. If you could help me out with input that would be great.

Thanks, Michael Murray

Michael,

I’m not sure what you are referring to, every outlaw late model I see has a grill opening in the front. If the body is black and the hole, screen and trim is black, it is very hard to see, but it is there, it has to be. Look much lower and you’ll see it.

What many racers have discovered is that they don’t need as big an opening as was previously thought. It helps to be out in the lead where you can get clean, undisturbed air to cool the motor. So, these openings find a way of moving lower and becoming smaller.

Torque Arm Systems

Hello

We are now in our closed season and are looking into our rear end setup. I’ve just read your article on mounting the 3rd link offset to help load the tires evenly through anti-squat. We currently run a three link system with a panhard rod. I’ve been looking but can’t find a article you’ve done on torque arms.

Is there any advantage on a torque arm system over a 3rd link? I’m trying to achieve more bite off the corners but can’t find good enough info to tell how the torque arm would work on circle track racing as they are all on old muscle cars.  Any info you might have would be great before we start altering bits about.

Thanks Carl

Carl,

There is a current stampede to find more rear grip for accelerating off the corners. At the Speedweeks show this past February at New Smyrna Speedway in Daytona Beach, we saw cars with huge amounts of bite off the corners. It seems like the more bite you can get, the quicker you can get back to the throttle coming off the corners.

As for the old muscle cars using torque arms, most of those are leaf spring cars and the use of torque arms or what used to be called traction bars was to prevent wrapping up of the leaf springs. I had a friend back in the day who hit third gear in his highly modified Nomad and pulled the driveshaft out of the tranny. My first engineering job on hot rods was to design traction bars for his car. It solved the problem.

In my article on traction in this issue, I explain in some detail the problem with un-equal loading of the rear tires due to load transfer. We can therefore go to what used to be thought of as “extremes”, but now know as necessary, lengths to add load to the left rear tire.

Any device or method that can get that done is worth looking into. There are two basic goals for adding bite for better acceleration. One is torque absorbing and this can be done with spring or rubber pull bars, torque arms, lift arms, etc. This method takes the shock of initial throttle application out of the tire and puts it in the device.

The other is the redistribution of rear tire loading and that is what we discussed in the current article. Both help gain forward bite, so keep looking around and incorporate the systems you think will work best for your application.

The post Why Teams Chase Their Setups appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Grass Roots and Beyond Racing Education

Racing schools are places high school graduates can go to learn about race cars, high performance engines and race team management. If you plan on pursuing a career in motorsports, these schools will give you not only important information and hands-on experience, they give you a head start in the employment competition for professional race teams. The information we offer comes directly from four well established schools located in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Ohio.

All of these schools will readily offer proof that graduates of their programs have been and are employed by major professional race teams in many different sanctions of auto racing. From constructors to crew chiefs, a great many of the current members of the top tier race teams got their start by attending schools like those described here.

It is common for community and technical college motorsports programs to come and go, but the ones we are presenting have been around for quite a while and will be here for years to come. If you are interested in a career in motorsports, contact these schools and see if they offer what you are looking for.

Forsyth Technical Community College – The Richard Childress Race Car Technology Program at Forsyth Tech offers an associate degree program that takes the student from “Introduction to Racing” to participation in completion of race cars and engines.  The degree includes detailed classes and labs with concentrations in chassis, race engines, race brake systems, race wiring, electronics, chassis and body fabrication, machine shop processes, MIG and TIG welding, and cutting processes.

FTCC offers North Carolina’s only two-year Race Car Technology degree. During the two-year term students also take their transferable college English, Math, Psychology, and Computer courses.  The program is designed to expose and train the students in general motorsport skills that are required to become gainfully employed in the industry.

The program recently added three certificate programs for students that want to concentrate in a specific area.  The certificate programs include Racing Engines, Race Car Setup and Chassis Fabrication Certificates.

Race Car Technology is an ever evolving industry.  The FTCC courses continue to change to reflect advancements in Race Engineering, Advanced Manufacturing, and Quality Control. The Business of Racing, including Marketing and Professional Ethics as related to the Motorsport Industry are all topics that have been recently introduced through our Introduction to Racing class.

The group of students is usually a 50/50 mix of some experience to those having no racing background at all. Students with previous racing experience could have worked as crew members, tech inspectors, and drivers.  Drag racing, road racing, short track pavement and dirt racing is the most common type of experience that students enter the program with.

The student body is quite a diverse group.  Not only do they focus on the Race Car Technology Program but the college also offers degrees in programs such as Advanced Manufacturing, Broadcasting, and Graphic Arts.  Students enroll from various parts of the United States and they come with a variety of motorsports interest including NASCAR, NHRA, IMSA, Indy, Formula One, NASA, Dirt Late Model and Motorcycle racing.

The graduates are currently being employed in various professional venues including motorsports, research and development and aerospace.  From the motorsports perspective the students are currently employed by several NASCAR Monster Energy Cup, XFINITY Series, Camping World Truck Series, NASCAR Touring Series. NHRA Drag Race Teams, NASA Road Race Teams, Formula Drift Teams, Indy and Formula One Race teams.  Students are also finding jobs with engine builders (automotive and motorcycle), chassis builders, manufacturers and vendors as well as the aerospace industry.

The college is privileged to be partnered with Richard Childress Racing and its subsidiaries.  Along with that the college is currently cultivating partnerships with race teams, vendors and manufacturers through our Work Based Learning program.  This program allows students to work for a race team or manufacturing facility while earning college credits.  This program develops resume skills, interview skills, and interpersonal skills related to working in a real life racing atmosphere.

Greenville Technical College – The Motorsports Technology program at Greenville Technical College in Greenville, SC is designed to prepare students for many different jobs in the motorsports industry, whether that’s close by in the Motorsports corridor from Charlotte to Atlanta or anywhere in the country. The program teaches a wide variety of courses related to high-performance vehicles, emphasizing hands-on learning both in the shop and through experiences such as field trips to racetracks and race shops around the Carolinas.

Greenville Technical College is the only college in South Carolina where students can enroll in the General Technology Associate in Applied Science degree with a concentration in Motorsports, a two-year program that provides extensive experience in Motorsports, with cross training in automotive and auto body techniques.

Greenville Technical College has two certificates that are geared towards the motorsports industries. The first is a race chassis and suspension setup certificate that takes two semesters to complete. The students learn how to MIG and TIG weld in this program and they spend much of their time learning to use metal shaping tools such as bead rollers, shrinker/stretchers, tubing benders, tubing notches, and the English wheel.

The students also have a very unique experience in this program as they will build a complete chassis as a team. The students begin with bare stock and form every piece to make a scaled down chassis that is complete with floor pans, wheel tubs, the complete cage, and suspension mounting locations. The students get an opportunity to use their learned fabrication skills to build these scaled down frames.

The other program that the college offers is the Engine Performance certificate. Students spend one semester in this certificate. This certificate expands on the student’s basic engine building skills by combining AERA’s curriculum with Greenville Tech’s lab exercises to teach the students’ performance engine building applications.

The students work through three courses to build a small block engine using basic theory. The students will then utilize software and research to find ways to gain power based on their calculations. The students will dyno test their engines many time throughout the process and verify power gains and losses. The college has a supply of various head configurations, cams, carburetors, and other performance parts to assist with the students dyno testing.

Greenville Technical College’s Motorsports program offers a real-world experience by working with the college’s race car, built to Rev Oil Pro Cup Series standards. The car was built from the ground up by students, with sponsorships and donations from many partners.

During the chassis setup courses the cars are carried to local tracks for testing and tuning. Students get the opportunity to experience first-hand what adjustments are made at the track in real time with a pit crew. The students are also exposed to many of the local motorsports businesses throughout our local market through internship opportunities, site visits, and guest speakers that come in and share their industry knowledge with our students.

To find out more about these colleges of motorsports technology, go to their websites and contact the recruiters. There is a lot to offer someone who wishes to make motorsports his or her career.

Get a head start on your competition for employment by including a degree in your resume that is specific to motorsports. It will be sure to impress any perspective employer.

We’ll be back with Part Two where we look at the Racing College of Virginia and the University of Northwestern Ohio tomorrow!

Sources:

Forsyth Technical Community College
www.forsythtech.edu
336-757-3247

Greenville Technical College
www.gvltec.edu
864-250-8000

The post Racing Technical Colleges (Part One) appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Yesterday we gave an overview of two schools that specialize in motorsports.  If you missed the information on Forsyth Technical Community College and Greenville Technical College, you can find it here.

In today’s second and final installment we look at the Racing College of Virginia and the University of Northwestern Ohio

Patrick Henry Community College – The Racing College of Virginia, a division of PHCC, is located in Martinsville, Virginia, right down the road from Martinsville Speedway. The college began the motorsports program in 2001 and quickly acquired over a million dollars in state-of-the-art equipment to provide the students with the best possible learning environment. In the classroom and the shop students learn about chassis dynamics, engine machining, metal fabrication, as well as conventional and CNC machining using state of the art equipment.

Students come from all over the country and the world to take advantage of PHCC’s hands-on, real-time learning environment designed by the motorsports faculty who are long-time racing professionals. Building engines, managing race teams, and serving as crew chief, the Racing College faculty have years of real-world industry experience. The faculty has helped over 320 students graduate and land jobs at high end race shops and fabrication/machining facilities.

In 2012, PHCC’s President, Dr. Godwin realized the motorsports students needed an opportunity to race a NASCAR Late Model Stock Car. With Dr. Godwin’s vision and determined search for private funding, Late Model Stock Car racing was soon added to the motorsports program and students began gaining practical experience at the track. Now, PHCC students not only have hands-on experience with top-of-the-line equipment, they also get real-world race experience. By Late Model racing, PHCC students network with industry leaders, build their resumes, and learn team work in a way that class work and shop work alone could not offer.

The program expanded further when Bruce Anderson, an experienced circle track driver from South Boston, a neighboring racing town, was picked to drive the Racing College’s #73 car. From day one, Anderson has worked side by side with the students at the track giving the students a true race crew experience.

On the track, he trusts the Racing College team with his safety and his speed. Off the track, Anderson connects the students with racing industry professionals and potential jobs. Through his wholehearted support of the program and the students, Anderson takes the student’s experiential learning to another level.

Being a part of a working Late Model Stock car pit crew and participating in competitive racing events is only one aspect of the Motorsports program at PHCC. The machining and fabrication classes students receive in the shop provide them with the foundation they need for successful careers in the motorsports industry and mechanical fields. The motorsports technology industry is rapidly evolving.

Employers require graduates to have high standards, work ethics, working knowledge of current technology, and advanced manufacturing. In preparation for the motorsports industry, the Racing College of Virginia offers an Associate Degree in Motorsports Technology and a Motorsports Technician Career Studies Certificate. In these programs, students will learn MIG and TIG welding, conventional mill and lathe operations, CNC mill and lathe operations, metal fabrication skills on equipment such as rollers and shears, as well as how to use a pull-down rig and shock dyno’s.

PHCC has also created a seamless transfer pathway with Old Dominion University for students pursuing their Bachelor’s in Mechanical Engineering Technology. Whether students are working toward a certificate, an associate’s degree, or a bachelor’s degree, PHCC strives to fulfill its motto in every student: “from here you can go anywhere.”

UNOH – In 1992, UNOH started the first high performance/motorsports program in the country and in 2006 the University took motorsports education to a new level. The seven acre, Dr. Jeffrey A. Jarvis high performance motorsports complex is the only one of its kind in the world.  Inside you’ll find cutting-edge technology and equipment, the same equipment used in the best facilities in America.

Outside, they have a test facility unlike any other anywhere, which includes an on-campus skid-track, huge fleet of training vehicles, four-wheel drive course, and the largest motorsports classroom, Limaland Motorsports Park, a NASCAR hometown track, owned and operated by the University.

Students have many opportunities to get involved in racing at UNOH. Students don’t just build cars in the shops; they compete nationally at tracks like Limaland, Eldora, I-55 in Missouri, Waynesfield, Charlotte, Bristol, Daytona, and Volusia. The students build, drive, and crew the cars they race in.

The University even sends more than 60 students, who are part of the Race Club, to Florida to work as pit crew members at Daytona International Speedway during Speedweeks. Drivers such as David Reutimann, Kenny Wallace, Austin and Ty Dillon have all driven for UNOH, giving students unprecedented access and experience to real-world professionals in the industry.

UNOH’s College of Applied Technologies offers degree programs in Automotive Technology, Diesel Technology, High Performance Motorsports Technology, Agricultural Equipment Technology, Robotics and Automation Technology, and HVAC/R Technology.  The University’s College of Applied Technologies has a limited student to teacher ratio of 20-to-1.

Each student is guaranteed personal attention, hands-on learning, and tons of opportunities for training within the industry of their choice.  Programs are 70% hands-on and 30% classroom work, plus all tools needed during their education are provided by the University. All of the students have the opportunity to take ASE tests to become ASE Certified, an industry-wide certification of excellence.  As a benefit, the university will cover the cost of up to two ASE tests for each student.

If a student wants to pursue a career in the High Performance/Motorsports Industry, the University of Northwestern Ohio is where their future begins.  The level of professionalism required by race teams, performance machine shops, and sanctioning bodies like NASCAR and ARCA, is at an all-time high.  Our University’s reputation for producing highly-educated graduates means a degree from the University of Northwestern Ohio will give students a distinct advantage in a competitive workplace.

The University of Northwestern Ohio teaches students everything they need to know for a job in the world of motorsports.  “The University’s High Performance program gives you extensive training in welding and fabrication, engine machining, custom engine building, steering and suspension, drive lines, accessories trends, fuels, electronics, and ignitions.  This will give you the knowledge you need to be a leader in any High Performance Motorsports career,” states Paul Higgins, High Performance Division Head.   Much of the student’s training in these courses will be hands-on utilizing the large fleet of race vehicles and may different training aids owned by the University.

Finally, students can join the ARCA Club at UNOH.  Students in the ARCA club travel to Daytona International Speedway and can be either ARCA inspectors, or work on pit crews during the Lucas Oil 200 each February.  Many of these opportunities lead to employment for students who take advantage of them.

Graduates from the High Performance Motorsports program have tremendous job opportunities.  This specialized education gives the students an advantage when entering into the work force.  Thousands of UNOH graduates are successfully employed in the field today living their dreams!

Conclusion – To find out more about these colleges of motorsports technology, go to their websites and contact the recruiters. There is a lot to offer someone who wishes to make motorsports his or her career.

Get a head start on your competition for employment by including a degree in your resume that is specific to motorsports. It will be sure to impress any perspective employer.

Sources:

Racing College of Virginia
Patrick Henry Community College
www.racingcollege.com
276-656-0356

University of Northwestern Ohio
www.unoh.edu
419-998-8854

The post Racing Technical Colleges (Part Two) appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

How It All Started – Part One

In this series we will study the beginnings and evolution of circle track racing. Over the years there were three distinctly different aspects that mostly influenced the performance of the cars in this sport.  First on the list is the all important chassis and overall design of the cars, next the power train technology and the evolution of power, and last and of equal importance is the improvement in the characteristics of the race tracks themselves.

Each of these three areas of circle track technology has evolved since the very beginning of circle track racing.  Chassis and setup technology had become very sophisticated as we plunged into the computer age.  Developments that came as a result of the space program and aircraft industries research and development enabled race car parts manufacturers to build stronger and lighter components.

The engines that power stock cars have evolved, not in the basic design of being simple heat exchange devices, but from the standpoint of improved ignition systems, intake designs, carburetion and exhaust systems. Improved valve train components have allowed these engines to live at much higher RPM’s than ever before.

With the improvements in chassis and engine design, also came a transition in track design.  The asphalt tracks are now designed by computer modeling before the sub-grade is shaped and the first yard of asphalt is laid down.  Even the dirt tracks are groomed better thanks to the availability of more sophisticated equipment and techniques that have come along over the years.

Many of us assume that circle track racing began in the post WWII era from 1947 on, but it actually began soon after automobiles first became popular.  Then later on, after the war as thousands of soldiers returned from the European and Pacific theaters, many were trained and skilled land vehicle and aircraft mechanics drawing their experience from helping keep the machines of war operational.

They had been forced into early adulthood, and knuckled down and done their duty.  They were now ready to take on the responsibility of raising a family, but also in need of recapturing some of their lost youth.  Racing was the perfect medium for many to achieve that goal. While the post WWII period certainly marked the beginning of the rapid growth and mass popularity of the sport, its’ debut on a national level came much earlier in our history.

The earliest circle track races took place more than twenty years earlier and attracted much public interest.  Here are some facts that many modern day circle track racers, including myself, were not aware of.

The First Speedways – The Indianapolis Motor Speedway, opened in 1909, and is of course the first great speedway ever built, but in the 1910’s and 1920’s many other large race tracks were constructed.  While the Indy track was surfaced with brick (originally of rock and asphalt), another surface was utilized that now seems quite odd, wooden boards.

During the period between 1911 and 1928, many wood race tracks sprang up around the country with relatively huge crowds attending the races.  Most were built by a company named the Prince Speedway Company.  At the time, the material and equipment was not available to construct these speedways out of a more durable material.  Asphalt paving was known and had been around in some form or another for thousands of years, but as with brick paving, it was hard to come by and very expensive.

The Des Moines Speedway which was built entirely of wood was typical of the tracks of this era.  These were not “short” tracks, most being 1.25 to 2.0 miles in length, and due to that, a considerable amount of lumber was needed.  Wood, at that time, was cheap, plentiful and could be easily assembled and shaped into a smooth surface with elevated turns.

The problem was that wood is not a durable material, especially when exposed to the weather.  Few of these tracks lasted for more than a couple of years and none more than five.  One vacated track disappeared in less than two years due to people stealing wood for heating and building material.

In 1911, the first of the wood tracks was constructed.  Oakland Motordrome was one-half mile in length and had 40 degrees of banking in the turns. It was a perfect circle, the first true highbanked track, designed after the popular velodrome bicycle race tracks.

Other notable board tracks included an oval track built in 1926 in Miami Beach that was 1.25 miles long with 50 degree banking.  The top speed was an astonishing 142.93 MPH.  Just one race was run before the track was destroyed by a massive hurricane that struck that same year.

Several wood tracks were built in California.  The first race at San Carlos, aka the Greater San Francisco Speedway, drew 40,000 fans in 1921. The Beverly Hills Speedway cost $500,00 to build in 1929 and lasted less than five years.  The Beverly Hills Wilshire Hotel stands on the site today.

Other Wood Tracks Around the Country – If you think that the Chicagoland Speedway was the first for that city, it is not.  In 1916, a 2.0 mile wood track was constructed with 17 degree turns and some 85,000 fans attended its first race. Stadium style bleachers were built to accommodate the thousands of curious spectators. By 1918 it was gone.  Its demise was probably hastened by the fact that the promoters ran off with the purse during a rain delay at the very first race.

Today’s Charlotte Motor Speedway again is not a first for the city of Charlotte, NC.  The Charlotte Speedway was built in 1924 of wood and was 1.25 miles in length and banked 40 degrees. Atlantic City Speedway, 1926 to–’28 was 1.5 miles long with 45 degree banked turns.  It was the fastest of the wood tracks with a top speed recorded at 147.727 MPH. Other states that had wood tracks included Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington State.

Interesting Notes – Other interesting notes collected from those who have knowledge of those days are that this racing had certain uncommon hazards.  It was not unheard of for a driver to spend some time after a race picking splinters out of his face.  Pieces of wood would be ripped from the surface, fly up, and imbed themselves in the drivers exposed skin.  At speeds that exceeded 140 MPH at these races, it is easy to understand how that could happen.

The payouts were substantial.  For a typical 150 mile race, the winner was paid $3,000.   That is equal to some $60,000 in today’s money while second received $30,000, and third $15,000 in equivalent money.  The average American earned maybe $500 – $750 a year in those days, so this was very good money.

The cars themselves were a far cry from what we would come to expect in a circle track car.  The straight axle front ends that were common with wire spoke wheels were no good for making high speed turns. The high banking was essential so that all of the forces on the cars were downforce with very little lateral force which the wheels and suspensions could not tolerate.  When a wheel did break, it was catastrophic.

There were a number of deaths associated with this period, drivers as well as spectators.  A political cartoon placed in the newspaper following a big race in which a death occurred showed gladiators carrying a fallen comrade out of a stadium, a reference that circle track racing seemed to be viewed as a “blood sport”.

The End of Early CT Racing – the coming of WWI, the Great Depression and WWII spelled the end of circle track racing to a great extent. After the second World War ended, racing resumed on a much larger and more permanent scale.

Tracks that were built during the post war period and that still stand today include: Greenville-Pickens, 1946;  Salem, Stafford, and Rockford, 1949; Martinsville, 1948; Riverhead, 1949; Hickory, 1951; Eldora, 1954; Ace, 1956; and the Grandest of them all, Daytona, built in 1959 after years of racing on the sands of the Atlantic Ocean beach.

Most of these early tracks were dirt surfaced tracks.  The Federal-Aid Highway Act was established in 1956 which created a network of asphalt highways across America. This created a huge market for asphalt and private manufacturing plants sprang up all across the country. Due to the large volume of sales to the government road contractors, for the first time, asphalt paving was accessible and cost effective for use as a circle track racing surface.

While many of the circle tracks across America and the world are now asphalt or concrete, most still remain dirt.  The surface we race on certainly dictates how our cars are constructed and how we setup those cars. Asphalt is characteristically consistent in grip and, in most cases, has a smooth surface.

Dirt tracks are constantly changing as to surface contour, composition (smooth black clay to slick sand coating) and grip related to the moisture content of the hour. Even features like the existence or not of a top berm or cushion to run off of or a soft, moist bottom to use to get more grip off the corners are all inherent and changing characteristics of dirt tracks.

While engines, setup, and chassis are common concerns between the two groups, tire selection and grooving treatment is unique to dirt racing.  Asphalt teams usually all run the same brand of tires with the same rubber compound for each race track.  For most dirt track teams, tire selection is open to all brands and they do their own preparation as to tire grooving.

As circle track stock car racing divided into the two distinct groups, dirt and asphalt, the construction of the cars necessarily became unique to each genre.  Stock classes in both of these groups remain very similar thanks to strict, “strictly stock” type of rules, but as we look to the future and move up the food chain into the faster fabricated chassis classes, we can see the evolution that has taken place.

From the late 1940’s to the mid to late 1980’s, all stock cars were just that, stock.  The process of preparing the cars for competition involved stripping off all unnecessary material such as back and passenger seats, floor and trunk covering, door and overhead coverings, etc.   The chassis were also strengthened in places prone to abuse and cracking.  Roll bars were installed for safety reasons and to stiffen the chassis.

In the late 1960’s, I watched as a show room stock Dodge was being prepared to compete as a Grand National (the fore runner of the Monster Energy Cup Series) stock car.  This was literally an everyday car bought at a local dealership and trailered to a shop in the Daytona Beach area.

The vinyl roof was stripped off, seats, chrome trim, head lights and tail lights were removed, the interior was stripped, the control arms were strengthened with strips of steel welded on, and new fender wells were welded in to accommodate the larger racing tires.   A full roll cage was built around the interior with supporting tubing extending to the front and rear suspensions. Today’s stock class cars continue that tradition.  Racers can still acquire a “stock” car and cheaply prepare it for competition.  This class of stock cars represents the bulk of circle track stock car racing in America.

Through the years, and in all of the types of circle track racing, the strongest transmissions, rear differentials and suspension systems were sought out and adapted through a process of elimination. As we entered the modern era in the 1970’s, little thought had been put to chassis setup technology.  Teams basically ran what was available and other than durability issues, lived with how the cars handled.

Early 1950’s through 1970’s front suspensions were either double A-arm types with coil springs, torsion bar sprung, or strut lower control arm with A-arm upper links using a coil spring.  Even the tried and true straight axle system was still used on some types of modifieds.

The rear suspensions could be coil spring supported or leaf spring design depending on the make and model of car.  Again, these 1947 to late 1970’s cars were stock from front to rear with little or no modifications to the primary suspension systems other than to make them endure the punishment of competition.

In Part Two of this series we will explore the golden years of circle track racing where the popularity of the sport will begin to grow on a national level.  From early 1970 through the early 1990’s, stock car racing became much more sophisticated and technology began to transform the way the cars were constructed, which made the cars somewhat safer and much faster.

Sources:

Chuck Groninga – Red Lion Racing

Larry Ball Collection

Klassix Auto Attraction

The post The History of Circle Track Racing (Part One) appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Ty Majeski is a Midwest driver who is always at the front and wins a lot of races at a lot of different race tracks. There is a lot of talk around his neighborhood and across the country among other racers as to why. Of course they want to know, everyone wants to duplicate that success for themselves. Here I will offer my opinion as to why Ty wins and how he does it.

It doesn’t matter whether you have ever heard of Ty or if you are racing against him or not, this story and the subject matter will apply to everyone who has to race against dominant teams. I base my evaluation and conclusions on some fifty years of observing drivers, setting up cars, winning races and championships and understanding the physics and psychology of racing.

What clues do I use to make such a bold statement and confident evaluation? With experience and understanding comes the knowledge of where to look for clues. When I explain how I evaluate performance and what clues I use, you too might agree with my conclusions. We’ll see. Not everyone will.

I was talking with a friend of mine recently whose name most everyone in the Midwest and other parts of the country would recognize and he talked about his curiosity as to why this certain driver wins so much. We talked about the basics first off.

Ty has arguably one of the, or the, best crew chiefs in the industry of short track racing. Toby Nuttleman has crew chief-ed for some of the best drivers in his part of the country including Steve Carlson who has won multiple Championships and was almost unbeatable at certain points of his career.

So, Toby knows how to setup a car. And he says, from what I hear around the campfire, that Ty is one of the best and smartest drivers he has worked with. Stories about the pair tell of a great relationship and unique cooperation. That doesn’t necessarily cause success in and of itself, but it helps. The answer we are all looking for falls somewhere among those two ingredients, great driver and great crew chief. But what we are looking for isn’t the overview, it is the details and that is what I am about to get into.

I recently watched some in-car videos taken during a few of Ty’s races including the recent Ice Breaker 100 held at The Dells Raceway Park. The clues are all there for the astute observer in both the visual and the sound.

I never met Ty or Toby, and never talked to them. I don’t need to in order to form my opinions. And if I had, I doubt anything either of them would say would tell the tale. There are plenty of drivers and crew chief who will tell you how they approach their racing and sometimes even the exact setup they use. That won’t necessarily translate into success for you.

Here goes. As I watched the videos, I noticed that early in the race, Ty wasn’t any faster than other cars around him when he had to come from several roes back. In fact, some other cars pulled him down the straights which might discount a horsepower advantage for him, not the other driver.

So, we look at the first ten to twenty laps and nothing jumps out except that Ty’s car is very smooth, never jumps out on entry or exit, when other cars definitely do. His throttle is very smooth both in lifting on entry and in application on exit. That I noticed right away. That is called throttle control and I cannot emphasize enough how important that is. This is clue number one.

Ty prefers to run down low and waits until the car ahead moves up and then makes his move. But most of these moves take place later on in the race. He might be staying patient, but then again he might not have the advantage just yet either, another clue.

The advantage I think he has is in the balance of the car. I see it and can feel it. His car stays more consistent than other cars he races against most of the time. This is defined simply as; his car does not fall off in lap times as much as the other cars do.

The observation of this takes some time. You’ve got to stay with the videos for a while, like 30 laps or more in some cases, to see this. But when it starts to happen, he has already cleared many of the cars and is starting to run down the leaders. Run down is really the wrong way to describe it, what is really happening is that they are backing up to him.

This is a phenomenon I am very familiar with having had the opportunity to observe it many times. But why don’t other teams develop the same balanced setup as Ty? It all comes down to both the philosophy of your approach to setup as well as where to look. No one is looking in the right place.

Most teams test and practice to find the fastest lap. I see this all the time. The setup that yields the fastest lap time will probably not sustain speed for a long period of time. So, you get the pole and you lead the early laps, but you fall back, or in your eyes get run down, by a faster car, one that has a more consistent setup. One we call balanced.

What I just described has been true of racers for a long time and will remain true for a long time to come. It is just human nature. It takes a very disciplined and experienced crew chief to understand this and to do the right thing, someone like a Toby Nuttleman.

For the drivers and teams who race against Ty, if you continue to try to find the quicker lap times and ignore the balance, you will continue to get beat by Ty or someone who is doing what that team is doing, plain and simple.

This combination of Ty and Toby is successful because Ty can drive with throttle control, which is always necessary, and because Toby understands the big picture and resists the urge to shoot for the fastest lap times.

What is the solution for those who get beat? If you fade at the end of a long run and/or at the end of a race, you are not running a balanced setup and you need to make changes. You might give up a tenth or two initially, but you will gain that or more later on, usually more.

And the other thing I think Toby does is that he maintains the setups that work. When you find that perfect balance, it is a very fragile existence and you must work to maintain it. But it will be useable for many different tracks that have similar characteristics.

So there you have it. This evaluation is solely my opinion, but based on a lot of experience and observation. If you can develop your approach to setup correctly and resist the “need to find the fastest lap” syndrome, you might just become more successful and be able to compete head to head with someone like Ty. As with everything else in life, it’s all up to you.

If you have comments or questions about this or anything racing related, send them to my email address: chassisrd@aol.com or mail can be sent to Circle Track, Senior Tech Editor, 1733 Alton Parkway, Suite 100, Irvine, CA.

Brake Bias Question

Bob,

Good morning. My name is Dan and I’m building a pro stock dirt car. I’m working on the brake system right now and I had a friend help who has been at this for several years of building and racing cars.  When he put the pedal assembly together he put together a Wildwood pedal and master cylinder. The front master cylinder bore is 7/8” and the rear is 1″. He also attached a 10lb residual check valve to both the front and rear master cylinders.

I installed a pressure gauge for bias adjustment to know exactly how much pressure there is in the front and rear.  When trying to adjust to mostly rear brake the best I can get is equal pressure front and rear. With the balance bar in neutral position I have more front brake. Should I have both master cylinder bore sizes the same to be able to adjust my bias better from front to rear?

Also with the 10lb residual check valve, I know those are designed for drum brakes not disc. After talking to my friend, he said the 2lb there was too much pedal travel. My concern is that there will be too much brake drag and heat the brakes up too much. Should I change back to a 2lb or stay with the 10lb check valve?  Also the master cylinders are above the horizontal plane of the calipers.

Thank you, Dan.

Dan,

The smaller master cylinder bore creates more line pressure with the same pedal pressure applied. That means the front will have more brake force than the rear, and that is not what you want.

So, if you reverse the two master cylinders, you would have more rear brake force and I think that is what you are trying for. If you made them the same, I doubt you will achieve “mostly rear brake”. Then if you don’t have enough rear brake, some adjustment in the balance bar will help you with your goal.

Since the residual check valve is designed for use with a drum brake system, and I assume you are running disc brakes, you probably should remove them. Having the master cylinders above the calipers is just what you want so that any air in the lines will move to the masters.

Torque Arm vs. 3^rd Link

Hello,

We are now in our closed season and are looking into our rear end setup. I’ve just read your article on mounting the 3rd link offset to help load the tyres evenly through anti-squat. We currently run a 3 link system with a panhard rod.

I’ve been looking but can’t find a article you’ve done on torque arms. Is there any advantage on a torque arm system over a 3rd link? I’m trying to achieve more bite off the corners but can’t find good enough info to tell how the torque arm would work on circle track racing as they are all on old muscle cars.  Any info you might have would be great before we start altering bits about.

Thanks, Carl.

Carl,

I recently ran through the affects of the torque arm verses what the third link does. Here is my assessment. The 3^rd link uses part of the force of rear end rotation upon acceleration to apply force to the rear end. This force serves to push down on the rear end at the point where it is mounted over the rear end while also equally pushing up on the car at the point where the front of the link is mounted to the chassis.

The remainder of the force is unused as far as helping drive the car off the turns. The torque arm is different in the way it works. All of the force trying to rotate the rear end is available through the torque arm. So, in a similar way, the rear is pushed down at the point where the arm is mounted on the rear end and the chassis is pushed up at the point where the front of the link is attached.

With the torque link, you can adjust the length of the link to manipulate how much force is applied, the longer the link, the less force and that has to do with leverage. The longer link will also apply the force farther to the front of the chassis.

What everyone needs to understand about both the 3^rd link and the torque arm is that the force pushing up on the chassis takes load off of the springs and does not provide more loading on the rear tires. What both do is redistribute the existing load that is on the springs between the two rear tires offering the opportunity to gain more equal loading and therefore more overall grip from that pair of tires.

Panhard Bar or Watts Link

Hi Bob,

I enjoyed reading the article “Adjusting your Setup” in the Dec. ‘16 issue of Circle Track Mag.  In the section on changing your race car from circle track to road racing you did not say what to with the pan hard bar or j-bar .Do you move it right or left of the chassis? Maybe a watts linkage would work better on the rear of the car for road racing?

Thanks, Raymond Hann.

Raymond,

You’re right, I didn’t say. You can use either the panhard/J-bar or a watts link for road racing, but most teams prefer to use the watts link, because with that system, there is no movement of the rear end laterally and the roll center stays more consistent.

With the panhard/J-bars, always mount them so that on the side of the chassis where it is mounted, you place the end of the bar higher by half of the shock/chassis movement on that side. Here is why.

If the bar were mounted on the right side chassis and you are turning left, the right side will droop or dive and on road courses, the left, or inside corner, will mostly remain at the same height. This keeps the bar more level in both right and left turns.

The problem with using the panhard/J-bar system is that the rear roll center, a major component in setup balance, changes height in the left turn scenario we described above. This changes the setup balance and makes the car tighter as the bar runs lower.

So, the left hand turns will feel different in handling than the right hand turns when using a panhard/J-bar system on road courses. I guess I just defined why you should change your car to a watts link system.

The post Why Does Ty Majeski Win? (Bob Bolles Commentary Plus Q&A) appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Editor’s Note: We have explored several educational opportunities for those who are interested in pursuing a career in motorsports. In this third edition, we wrap up the series with a look at the NASCAR Technical Institute. Parts One and Two are still available on the Circle Track web site.

Part One: Racing Technical Colleges Part One
Part Two: Racing Technical Colleges Part Two

NASCAR Technical Institute – The NASCAR Technical Institute is a division of UTI Technical Institute. It is the country’s first technical training school to combine a complete automotive technology program with a NASCAR-specific motorsports program. It is also the exclusive educational partner of NASCAR.

The school campus is located in Mooresville, NC about 20 miles north of Charlotte. This town bills itself as “Race City, USA”, because there are so many race teams located in and around Mooresville. It has to be the highest concentration of race teams and race parts suppliers in the country.

The lead administrator for NASCAR Business Alliances and NASCAR/Media Contacts is V.P. John Dodson. Before joining NASCAR Tech, John had worked for many years in the NASCAR community directly with professional race teams.

NASCAR Tech opened in July, 2002 and graduated its first class in August, 2003. It is housed in a 146,000 square foot facility and has the capacity to train up to 1,800 students at a time.

NASCAR Tech is on the 2016 Military Friendly Schools list that is published by Victory Media in recognition of efforts to ensure the success of America’s military service members, veterans and spouses as students. The school has approximately 120 employees serving the students at this campus.

The NASCAR Technology 15 week program teaches students the skills, speed and precision NASCAR teams demand from its technicians. The school further provides training necessary to excel as an entry level automotive service technician. The Automotive Core Program teaches students how to diagnose, maintain and repair domestic and foreign automobiles.

There are manufacturer specific advanced training programs. Ford FACT (Ford Accelerated Credential Training) is a 15 week program specific to Ford and Lincoln service departments across the nation. The Nissan Automotive Technician Training is a 9 week program designed for Nissan and Infiniti vehicles. And the Mopar TEC (Technical Education Curriculum). Education Curriculum training program is specific to Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Dodge, FIAT, Jeep and Ram trucks.

NASCAR Tech is accredited by the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges which is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. And, ACCSC has recognized NASCAR Tech as a 2014 ACCSC School of Excellence. UTI, NASCAR Tech’s parent company, has been designated as a 2016 STEM Jobs Approved College by Victory Media as well.

The post Racing Technical Colleges (Part Three) appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

In race car aero design, one often overlooked component of aero down-force is what is called Flat Plate Aero. On this Outlaw Late Model, the front nose is angled down at about a 45 degree angle to create Flat Plate down-force. We’ll explain how that works.

This is not your average, run of the wind tunnel aero story. Nope, this one you’ve most certainly never heard before. It is sure to shake up a few individuals in the industry who engage in the promotion of wind tunnels and extol the benefits thereof. This is for you, the racer, not the professors or proponents of the more conventional aero technology. It will make sense and you’ll see my point unless you have an agenda that unfairly contradicts this point of view.

First off, these are not my thoughts or conclusions, far from it, although I have come to completely agree with them. This comes from persons deep within the aero design and engineering industry who rather than teach the properties of aero, live the properties of aero and there is a marked difference between the two.

When you design an airplane that you will ultimately have to fly, you must make sure you understand the subject of aerodynamic engineering. The classroom or cozy control room in a wind tunnel presents little risk and there is nothing to prove the results wrong, until you “fly” the airplane or race car.

A senior NASA scientist once told a friend of mine that wind tunnels give you tendencies and probabilities’ only, and that is why we have test pilots. Not one airplane ever designed and “flown” in a wind tunnel ever flew in test flights the exact same way. It’s the same with race cars. Otherwise, every multimillion dollar F1 team would have the perfect aero properties in their cars design, and we know for a fact they don’t.

Why Wind Tunnels Have Errors – The whole premise of a wind tunnel is to move air at a given speed into and over an object to measure lift, down-force, drag, etc. In a wind tunnel, the air is accelerated to some predetermined speed and the stationary object is bombarded by the oncoming, energized air that has a lot of momentum. This is not what happens in nature with airplanes and race cars. They travel through relatively still air that has no energy or momentum.

Many aero engineers will tell you, “Well, it’s the same thing.” No it is not. Air moving at 60-100mph has a lot of energy and does not want to deviate from its path. When this energized air hits an object, the way it moves around that object is much different than if that object were moving through still air at the same speed. It has to.

Most veteran aero engineers, if they are honest, will tell you that the primary problem with wind tunnel data is converting it to reality. There exists very expensive Computational Fluid Dynamics software programs that attempt to duplicate the wind tunnel data and/or make it more real world. The conversion is very complicated and obviously not perfectly accurate. And again, that’s why we have race tracks and test pilots.

The other thing that causes errors in the data we get from a wind tunnel test is the close proximity of the walls. Most wind tunnels are too small because it is cost prohibitive to build it big enough so that the walls don’t influence the results. Air is disturbed well beyond the distance to the walls in most wind tunnels when using full scale models. The presence of the walls restricts the movement of the surrounding air and causes a compression which alters the results.

The only “wind” tunnel that comes close to reality is the one Chip Ganassi is said to own called Laurel Hill in Pennsylvania. It is actually a tunnel through a mountain. There a test vehicle is run for a mile through the tunnel, through still air, and the pressure distribution that produces drag and down-force is measured. At least the test object is traveling through the air and not the other way around, like an airplane or race car really does. While it still has walls that are too close, the results are much closer to reality.

The ideal aero testing for race cars would be done on a smooth flat surface outdoors at speeds that replicate the speeds the car would experience on a race track. Then the load and pressure sensors would record the aero influence on the car, much like test flights do with airplanes.

That Being Said – Now that we have that out of the way, let’s get into how aero really works. The age old depiction of an airplane wing, and one that I have used, is not perfectly correct. Yes, the air traveling over the airplane wing travels farther and faster and thus has less pressure than the air traveling under the wing. This is the Bernoulli principle and it provides lift. But that’s not the only component of wing lift.

Most every plane cruises with a wing attitude where the underside of the wing is at a small angle (the front higher than the back) to the air it is moving through. So, it acts much like a water ski to assist in holding up the airplane. This is called Flat Plate (FP) aero.

Many aerodynamicists tend to discount this affect, but it can be 20-25%, or more, of the total lift component. I think it is more, but without real world testing, I’ll stay with the published data. This is where we get into an important area of race car aero design.

In a race car, we may have flat plate areas where we can develop down-force to increase the grip of the tires. That is called FP aero down-force, but what about other areas of the car that are flat? What about the sides? We’ll get into that in a minute.

Down-force From Flat Plate – The sloped front of an Outlaw Late Model, the nose and hood on a ‘70’s era super late model, the nose on a modern dirt late model and the wing on a sprint car all offer FP aero down-force possibilities.

One of the early proving grounds for short track racing was the annual Daytona Speedweeks races at New Smyrna Speedway. Back in the late 1970’s and early ‘80’s, teams from all over the country would show up with “stock” bodied super late model cars that adhered to the strict rules of their perspective sanctioning bodies only to discover that there were no body rules at NSS. The local teams already had their car bodies tricked up.

Those who remember noticed that after about the second or third night of racing in the nine night series, most of the cars had been transformed into sleek, wedge shaped oddities with huge fantail rear spoilers attached. This is what we now understand to be an effective use of FP down-force.

With each of the examples, we may, or may not, have a low pressure on the other side of the FP, but the FP still generates its own force. The angle is critical, just as it has proven to be with airplane design, but up to a certain angle of about 15-20 degrees, a lot of force can be developed.

As for the wing on a sprint car, most of the down-force from a sprint car wing is FP derived from air flowing over the top flat plate. It acts much more like an outlaw nose. The air going across the underside, while being curve shaped like a wing, is disturbed and does not provide the “lift” that we see on an airplane wing. And you can have too much angle in that wing. As the speed increases, the wing angle must be reduced in order to have maximum down-force.

Flat Side Lateral Force – The concept of FP aero can be turned 90 degrees to assist in helping the car to turn. If a race car has a relatively flat side on the side of the car to the outside of the turns, then if the car is run at an angle to the direction of travel, it can produce a force in a direction opposite to the centrifugal, or lateral, forces.

Cars where this can be a benefit are easy to pick out. Late Model dirt cars, dirt Modifieds, Outlaw late models are just a few. And, if we look at the large sideplates on a sprint car wing, we see where FP aero can be used if the car runs at just the right angle through the air.

In the case of the dirt Late Model, we know these teams rear-steer the car so that the rear is running outside the front tires. This puts the large flat side of the car at just the right angle to the air to produce FP forces that are opposite of the lateral forces. Not equal to, but opposite in some amount. The tires still have to do the rest of the work, but the car goes faster with this FP advantage.

It’s a similar situation with Sprint Cars. I have watched Outlaw sprint cars qualify at Volusia during Speedweeks at upwards of 135 MPH average. The tires cannot hold the car in the turns at that speed. There must be FP aero down-force and side-force helping out big time.

Spoiler Down-force Vs. Drag – When racers have run tests with their cars in a wind tunnel, they experiment with spoiler angles. Sometimes the results can be miss-interpreted. Here is what I mean. A more vertical spoiler will produce much more drag than one angled at say, 55 degrees.

The wind tunnel operator must compare changes in loading on each axle with the total loading of the car. So let’s say a vertical spoiler added 50 pounds to the rear axle, but removed 45 pounds from the front axle. This is only 5 pounds of added down-force combined with a lot more drag, and represents more of a displacement of loads due to the leverage of drag. If the total loading on the car does not increase, you have no gain. You might as well take weight from the front of the car to the rear and remove the spoiler.

With the 55 degree spoiler angle, we might see a 40 pound increase in the rear loading and a 15 pound decrease in the front loading due to the same leverage affect from drag, but in this case the drag is much less. In this example, we see a total increase in the vehicle loading of 25 pounds from actual aero FP down-force.

Traditional Low Pressure Down-force – In a more traditional sense of looking at aero down-force, there is the phenomenon of high pressure opposite low pressure. The shape of the body on our race car can help produce low pressure inside the body panels to create even more down-force. What we need to do is design our bodies so that we can direct some of the air we are driving through around the car in order to vacuum air out from within the area inside the body.

If we can use the swift flow of air that is flowing past the sides of the car to help vacuum air out of the engine compartment under the hood, we can lower the pressure along the underside of the hood, similar to the airplane wing. A higher pressure on one side of an object will push that object in the direction of the lower pressure, or high towards low.

To accomplish this, teams use wider, angled front noses that will direct the displaced air around the sides of the car past the wheel wells in such a way that a low pressure area is created just outside the wheels. Air is pulled out of the engine compartment to fill this “void” and the pressure under the hood is reduced.

The average atmospheric pressure at sea level is 14.7 pounds per square inch on all sides of an object, even on our bodies. If we reduce the pressure under the hood to 14.5 PSI, a drop of only 0.2 PSI, over an area of just a square yard we would generate about 260 pounds of down-force (0.20 X 36² = 259.2 pounds).

Rear Aero – At the rear of the car, we can manipulate the shape of the spoiler, the rear window posts and the body just in front of the rear wheel wells. By routing the air that is flowing past the sides of the car out and to the sides of the rear wheel wells, a similar suction effect takes place to create a low pressure area under the rear deck. There are obvious limits as to body shape in this area, but a little reshaping can help.

Race tracks that are longer and have more banking require less down-force and would benefit from reduced drag. We can rethink how the air flows past the roof (green house area) and onto the rear spoiler. If we reshape the post that connects the rear window with the side window openings, we can direct air away from the spoiler and greatly reduce aero drag.

Conclusion – The key goals with stock car aero design and development is to create a body shape and running attitude that will provide more down-force and side-force to enhance turn speeds, produce less drag, and promote a more balanced race car. We can now see where and how we can utilize Flat Plate aero to increase down, as well as side, force.

Everything we do has to be done within certain limits. If we work hard to develop 600 pounds of down-force on the front end and the rear is not able to keep up with that high amount of grip, then the car will be loose and nobody can drive a loose car fast. So there are limits to how far we can go.

Work towards a good balance of front to rear aero down-force to help produce more overall grip. Do not overdo your efforts to help the car aerodynamically at the expense of handling efficiency. Make sure the basic chassis setup is balanced, and then the combination of both aero down-force and handling will enhance your on-track performance.

The post A New Way to Utilize Air Forces appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

The first test day for the upcoming Short Track U.S. Nationals presented by Vore’s Welding & Steel was on Saturday, April 29^th. We attended and made what I think are valuable observations. I had a lot of anticipation for this race and presented a previous piece on the uniqueness of Bristol hoping to help any teams who might decide to race here.

As you recall, the banking at Bristol is progressive starting at about 24 degrees and going up to 26 degrees in the middle groove to about 28 degrees at the top. The Cup race was run this past Monday due to a rainout on Sunday and the track had applied a sticky substance to the lower groove. That was still present and caused many to run the bottom starting out.

I stayed around for the early running of this test and had to leave in the early afternoon to get back home from an extended trip to Mooresville before coming here. What I saw was plenty to further aid in preparation for anyone deciding to run these races. And I can tell you that most of the teams were well prepared and might I say some were over-prepared and that’s OK.

The speeds the various classes ran were much higher than would be seen at the local tracks they usually run on. Here is the rundown of the top speeds I measured: Super LM 129.01 mph, Pro LM 127.00 mph, Late Model Stock Cars 122.75 mph, Modifieds 114.70 mph, Street Stocks 108.18 mph and Compacts 94.82 mph. Compare that to the top speeds at New Smyrna Speedway of around 105 mph and Bristol is over 24 mph faster.

Starting off, the Super Late Models ran the first practice and Steve Wallace showed his experience here by getting up to speed right away. The first casualty came soon after as Dave Russell got loose coming off turn four and tagged the wall with the rear and the front of his car. He said he had a pre-loaded right rear spring, something that can work well at lower banked tracks, but not here.

The Pro Late models, Late Model Stock Cars and Modifieds all ran relatively without incident. We noticed that some cars were loose with the rear drifting out, some has too little left front camber and some of the Modifieds looked like they had Ackermann in their front ends that is sure to slow them down. Some of the cars eventually moved up a groove, but mostly stayed on the bottom.

In a previous tire test, low tire pressures caused a car to contact the wall, so Hoosier set mandatory tire pressures for the late models of 22psi left sides and 32psi on the right sides. Several Hoosier tech officials were seen taking tire temperatures and pressures at random. The teams had been told in the drivers meeting to expect that and to cooperate.

For a more detailed analysis, refer to the photos I took. All in all I was impressed with the preparation and the speeds these drivers were able to attain with most of them coming here as “rookies” at Bristol. For any of them who had raced at Winchester Speedway, it was easy to get used to this track since Winchester has somewhere around 30 degrees of banking.

For those who are waiting to test in the second day of scheduled practice slated for May 13^th, just remember to spring up 2.5 to 3.0 times the spring rate you are used to running for conventional setups. For those who run bumps, let your ride springs take 80-90% of the force and the bumps only 10-20% for this track.

Be sure to prepare your car for the additional travel and set your cambers accordingly. Check for Ackermann and even if it works for your normal bullring track, with the higher speeds and geometrically longer turns, you won’t need the added toe.

Your rear springs should be normal springs like on conventional setups even if you run pre-load or bumps in the rear. Those trick setups will get you in a lot of trouble at Bristol. The rates of the rear springs should be at least double your normal average rate with less spring split.

So there it is, a successful tests and a lot of teams who are better prepared going forward to race day. Again, this will be an exciting event that we hope will catch on with the teams and fans of short track racing. If you plan on competing here, have fun, go fast and keep turning left no matter what.

The post Observations and Lessons from Bristol Test Day appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

CIRCLE TRACK, the number one source for advanced racing technology in the world of short-track racing, announced today it will be celebrating its 35th anniversary this July.

To commemorate its past 35 years, CIRCLE TRACK will recount on its website and in a 35th anniversary issue on newsstands July 14, the many technological advances and personalities featured by the brand since it first hit the industry in 1982. CIRCLE TRACK will explore the state of racing when the brand was launched and its advancement to present-day trends. Former General Managers C.J. Baker, Patrick Utt, and Rob Fisher will lend insight into their time with the brand. Also, CIRCLE TRACK will dig deep into the archives to find wisdom from one of its original contributors—the legendary Smokey Yunick.

“We couldn’t be more excited about this 35th anniversary” says Editor Matt Panure. “I grew up reading Circle Track. Now, to be a part of its history is an incredible honor. When it comes to technology, there isn’t a bigger voice in our sport than this brand. We look forward to seeing how we got to this point with the anniversary coverage. We also look forward to many more years of exploring technology trends and providing racers with the knowledge it takes to find success.”

The CIRCLE TRACK brand is part of the HOT ROD Network, garnering more than 1.5 million website visitors in 2016, and focuses on utilizing web-first content to reach consumers on any platform they choose, such as Facebook, where it has more than 55,000 page likes, and on Twitter, Instagram, and Google+.

About CIRCLE TRACK

Written specifically for racers by racers, CIRCLE TRACK is the largest motorsports media platform in the country and the only one focused exclusively on short-track racing technology! With print, web, video, and event components, CIRCLE TRACK is your one-stop source for everything related to oval-track racing. Our experienced and award-winning staff of journalists explains complex technical theories in an easy-to-understand format bolstered by practical application through “How-To” content. This content covers five primary categories, including engine building/tuning, chassis setup, drivetrain, safety equipment, and the business of racing.

About TEN: The Enthusiast Network

TEN: The Enthusiast Network is the world’s premier transmedia network of enthusiast brands, such as MOTOR TREND, AUTOMOBILE, HOT ROD, SURFER, TRANSWORLD SKATEBOARDING, and GRINDTV. With more than 60 websites, 50 publications, 50 annual events, the Motor Trend OnDemand subscription video-on-demand service, as well as the world’s largest automotive and action/adventure sports media platforms, TEN inspires enthusiasts to pursue their passions. For more information, visit enthusiastnetwork.com.

The post Circle Track Celebrates 35th Anniversary appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

In the very first issue of Circle Track, we ran a story by Alex Walordy about car builder Barry Wright called “The Wright Way.” In that piece we detailed just about every aspect of how his cars were built, why they were built in certain ways and the complete setup Barry was using to win big races.

The age of dedicated car builders had already begun and Barry was right there in the mix. Along with him in 1982 were C. J. Rayburn and MastersBilt among others who specialized in Dirt Late Models. Let’s see where technology was at that time and how it progressed to the present since the first days of CT.

What surprised me when I read the Wright Way article was the depth of thinking that went into the design and setup of the car. Note that this car was winning against the best of the best at the time and Barry had some help from a few of the more innovative participants in racing at the time.

His aero package would be considered by today’s standards, advanced. He was running coil-over shocks in the front and composite leaf springs in the rear. The rear coil-over setups would come late on. His brake package was adaptable to any track condition and his shocks were the best money could buy at that time.

I will quote from the last paragraph before we move on, “Just having a race car is only half the battle; understanding ever-changing track conditions and having the ability to modify a race car to meet the challenge of those changes is another.” That statement is as true today as it was back then.

Dirt or Asphalt One Race Car – As I got into the progression of technology from the mid-1970’s up to our start in 1982 and beyond, I learned that there was a common ancestry between dirt cars and those running on pavement. In the years prior to the first issue of Circle Track in 1982, the cars were mostly built to run on both surfaces. Basically, back then, a circle track car was just that no matter where you drove it. So, they were mostly the same construction. Builders like Barry Wright started the evolution that would separate the two.

For our 35th Anniversary celebration, I think it would be interesting to look back over those years from out first issue through the eighties and nineties and analyze how setups were developed and how technology evolved for dirt track racing. I will concentrate on the Dirt Late Model because the stock classes basically used mostly cars out of the current manufacturer’s stable of cars the public drove.

Since the cars Ed Howe (our feature figure from the paved car section) was winning with were his own out of his garage, many teams began asking him to build cars for them. Out of that demand grew probably the very first full time short track race car manufacturing businesses in 1971. Many more would soon follow like Port City Race Cars, Lefthander, CJ Rayburn, MastersBilt, Barry Wright, Rocket Chassis, etc. And early on, most of the builders that came after used Howe parts.

It would not be until the late 1970’s that the dirt teams would seek out different designs for their cars due to the much different needs. The earlier cars that were built more for asphalt would be fine as long as the track stayed moist and had grip, but once it went dry slick it would be very hard to find grip.

Car builders began to experiment with different designs and what came out of those early attempts made up what we now call the Dirt Super Late Model. The front of the cars didn’t evolve much at all going from the standard stock type of lower control arm to a strut type of coil-over system. But the rear suspensions were all over the place. There were the four bar cars, swing arm cars and even a cantilever car design for a time.

Early Setups On Dirt – Most race cars then were setup up tight. That was to say they didn’t turn well, abused the right front tire, and ended up with a severe push or went tight/loose eventually. On dirt, the teams mostly lived with the push and were more interested in getting bite off the corners to win the drag race down the front stretch.

In Dirt Late Model racing, it was common to run a softer RR spring up until the mid-1990’s. Then around 1996, a friend of mine, who gets little credit for the way he has influenced Dirt Super Late Model racing, experimented with running even rated rear springs.

The New Age Of Setups – Dewayne Ragland decided to try running even spring rates in the rear much like asphalt cars to setup a Dirt Late Model at a local track in Indiana. On the Monday after the race he called me to report that they had won and were running four 400ppi springs on the car. After I told him you couldn’t do that with the rear springs, he explained the car was a swing arm design and the rear of the car felt half the installed spring rate, or about 200ppi. A new era of Dirt Late Model setups had begun.

A few more teams experimented with running even springs across the rear and lowering the front spring rates. This was against the advice of the car builders, some of whom were understandably irate. Then during Speed Weeks sometime around 2002, Don O’Neal ran a stiffer right rear spring (than the left rear spring) winning at East Bay and then Volusia.

In conjunction with the transition in spring rates, teams were fooling around with their front geometry and finding that locating the roll center in a certain area helped the front to gain grip and to help turn the car.

The design of both asphalt and dirt cars was influenced by what the racers were doing outside the manufacturers “playbook”. It upset some of the car builders and woke up some others. The smart ones realized that if a new technology could help their cars win, sales would increase. It had always worked that way and they did.

Things were looking good for common sense setups where the car was happy, the tires were happy and the driver, team and car owners were happy. Could there be more performance out there. We were soon to find out.

Mid to Late 2000’s – In what we can now call the modern era of dirt car racing, we see a gradual change associated with the way setups were developed and the goals associated with development of the Dirt Late Model setups.

Most of the car builders had been influenced by what the teams had done through the early 2000’s with improvements to their front end geometry as well as the arrangement of spring rates. The cars were now more balanced, faster and easier to drive.

We saw front runners starting to keep the left front tire on the track in a more level attitude, less rear steer and a more straight ahead driving style when track conditions permitted. But there was more to do.

That was a good start, but having four tires on the ground did not solve all of the problems. While the paved track cars were going with the soft front spring and stiffer right rear spring and bump setups, some dirt teams decided to try it out too. It came as an early surprise to see the attitude of those cars, but the truth is in the pudding so to speak.

The cars that were down in front, up in the left rear and that ran at an angle to the direction of travel through the turns ran faster and were winning. It really doesn’t matter what you are doing or how strange it looks, if you’re holding the trophy at the end of the night, strange becomes normal in a hurry. And it did.

Soon teams were rear steering the rear end to the right to cause the large flat side of the car to catch the air and put side force on the car to help it gain aero “side bite”. They were running on bump springs or rubbers on the right front while still keeping the left front tire on the track. It was the best of all worlds.

As of this year, much work is going into forcing load onto the right front and left rear tires under dry slick track conditions because it has been learned that two tires carrying most of the load will cut through the slick surface and grip better than four tires equally loaded that tend to skate across the slick surface.

It’s been fun watching these Dirt Super Late Models evolve through the years and I’m sure the evolution won’t stop anytime soon. These cars are still the most technically complicated race cars in the world and the most fun to watch compete. That is why dirt racing is the most popular motorsport and has the largest number of race tracks in the country. Long live dirt track racing.

The post Dirt Cars: Then to Now appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Oh Behave!

Today, most teams are focused on the setup du jour with bump setups on asphalt and softer, less aggressive setups on dirt. With all of this attention on the springs, gadgets, and overall attitude of the car, we sometimes get away from the basics and get lost in the trees. It may be time to step back from the forest and look at the big picture. We can still have our modern setups, we just need to make sure the all important basics are not askew.

The most basic rule of handling and speed for a race car lies in increasing the speed we can go through the middle of the turn. It has been said before, and rightly so, speed gained in the turns will be carried throughout the lap.

There are other factors that will make your race car faster, but most of the gains are turn related. Given that we can all agree on the above basic principle, we further break the gain down into three turn segments; entry, mid-corner, and exit. The slowest portion of the lap is spent in the mid-turn segment, so that is where we are most interested in gaining speed.

Granted, increased average speeds in the transitions of entry and exit help reduce lap times, but the gains there pale in comparison to gains we can achieve at mid-turn. Speed gained in the middle of the turn will be carried all of the way around the track.

Mid-Turn

We start out solving our mid-turn handling problems. We do this because our mid-turn handling affects both entry and exit to a large extent. A car that is tight in the middle will most likely be tight into the turn and tight off. If excessively tight in the middle, the car could be loose off and here’s why.

When we turn the steering wheel and cause the front wheels to create and/or increase their angle of attack, or angle differential to the direction of travel of the car relative to the racing surface, we increase the traction of those two tires. The more we turn, the more traction we get, up to a point. If the wheels are turned beyond a certain angle, the tire skids and we lose all front grip. But until then, we gain grip.

Suppose we have more rear grip overall than front grip. When we drive through the turns, with the normal steering angle that follows the radius of the turn, we will notice that the car does not want to follow the radius and instead moves up the track toward the outside of the turn. Instinctively we will turn the steering wheel more until the car follows the radius of the track. It does that because we are causing the front tires to produce more front grip in reaction to the increased angle of attack of the front tires.

If our car isn’t too tight, we will just roll through the turns with a slightly greater steering angle and maybe never know we are tight.  But, if we are too tight, we will need to input excessive steering angle and we may just overdo the adding of front grip from the increased steering angle and change from a car that is tight to one that is loose. Here is what happens.

We go into the turn and feel the tendency to not turn. We quickly apply more steering input and keep adding until the car responds. But the motion is so quick that we inadvertently over correct and add too much front grip just as we are ready to accelerate. Now with more front grip than rear, the car changes from tight to loose and with the power applied, to very loose off. This is a very common occurrence.

To change mid-turn balance, we can do one of the following:

Raise or lower the rear Moment Center by moving the Panhard bar or J-bar up or down. For leaf spring cars, we can raise or lower the actual spring, but that is not easy. Metric four-link cars also have a tough time changing the rear Moment Center height and must rely on other methods for changing the balance.

Change rear spring rates. Softening the right rear spring, and/or stiffening the left rear spring will increase the rear roll angle and will tighten the car, as will softening both rear springs. The inverse is true, stiffening the RR spring and/or softening the LR spring will loosen the car.

Softening the front springs will help the car turn, but to a lesser degree than making rear spring changes. Spring split at the front also has less affect and has more influence on entry characteristics than on mid-turn. More on that later.

Installing larger or smaller sway bars will have an effect on handling. The stiffer the bar, the less the front will want to turn. So, to help cure a tight car, we can go to a softer sway bar.

Increase or decrease the cross weight percent. As we make changes to the cross weight, we affect the handling of the car and we can easily make the car neutral in handling by making cross weight changes. But, this is not the ideal method by any means, it is just the easiest.

The reason this method is not ideal is because for every car and combination of springs and weight distribution, there is an ideal cross weight that matches up with a dynamically balanced setup. The correct amount of cross weight is directly related to the front to rear weight percentage. If we knew this magic number, we could just dial it in and then make spring or Moment Center changes until the car was neutral and then everything would be just right.

Increase or decrease stagger? This is never an acceptable way to tune the handling of your race car. For every turn, there is an ideal stagger that will allow the car’s rear wheels to roll around the radius and not influence the direction the car travels from following that radius.

Speed gained in the middle of the turn will be carried all of the way around the track.

Entry Problems

Once we have set up the car to be neutral in both handling and dynamic balance, we need to evaluate the entry handling. If our entry is without issues meaning it is straight ahead, not tight or loose, and no excess steering input is needed beyond the normal transition from straight to left turn, then we are good to go.

If all of the alignment issues have been sorted out, there should never be entry problems, but there are influences that could affect entry stability and balance. Here are the top ones to consider.

Rear alignment is the number one cause of entry problems. Either by misalignment of the rear tires or by rear steering of the rearend. The truth is, you should have checked and corrected any rear alignment problems long before you came to the track. Rear alignment and rear steer are not tuning tools.

Shocks affect entry. Shock rates that restrict movement of one or more corners of the car can negatively affect entry. An LR tie-down shock will help cure a tight-in condition by loosening the rear, but this is only a crutch.

The two corners most affected by the dynamics of corner entry are the LR corner and the RF corner. An RF shock that is stiff on compression can cause a tight condition on entry and an LR shock that is stiff in rebound can cause a loose condition on entry.

Brake bias changes affect corner entry. There is an ideal brake bias that will allow maximum braking of each set of tires based on the loads those tires carry. Different cars with different Centers of Gravity will require different brake bias.

Tune your brakes so that wheel lockup occurs simultaneously at the two ends of the car under heavy braking. We do not want the brake bias to influence entry handling characteristics. Never try to correct a tight car by increasing the rear brake bias or fix a loose-in car by increasing front brake bias.

Setup Changes to solve corner entry problems? We never want to make changes to our spring rates, sway bars, weight distribution, or Moment Centers to try to solve entry problems. When we do that, we will certainly change our mid-turn handling in a negative way. We should have already tuned the car so that the mid-turn handling was balanced correctly.

There is an exception to the above rule. We can initially plan out our spring selection so that our entry transition is best for the type of track we will be running. For flatter tracks, running even spring rates across the front, or a softer RF spring rate as opposed to the LF spring rate, will help the transition into the corner. It is best to make that choice before you go to the track so you won’t need to make changes after you tune the mid-turn.

Stiffer RF spring rates over the LF spring rate can help the transition into a high-banked track where the outside of the track rises up to form the high banking. In this case, the vertical forces are high at the RF on entry and we need more spring rate at that corner to control those forces to limit excessive RF wheel travel.

Throttle Modulation on entry can help solve problems with abrupt release of the throttle. If we quickly jump off the throttle and into the brakes, we can upset the car to where it affects our entry speed and stability. It can also cause us to slow too quickly and attain a slower speed than is necessary through the entry portion of the turn.

Corner Exit Handling

Most of the time, solving the mid-turn handling will solve corner exit problems. If we were tight in the middle, we would most likely be tight off or tight/loose off. If we were loose through the middle, then we would be, well, loose off, of course.

The process of increasing mid-turn speeds means that we have also increased our exit speeds, or the speed at which we begin to accelerate. This is a big deal and the reason why we spend so much time perfecting the mid-turn balances and trying to increase speed through that portion of the turns.

The way that some tracks are laid out contributes to corner exit problems. A flat track offers less grip than a banked track because we have none of the dynamic downforce created by the banking to help improve overall grip. So, we need to enhance bite in other ways. The transitions in the track banking angle on higher banked tracks may also contribute to exit woes.

Loose Off Condition

Rear Steer can be used to solve loose off. If we know we are good through the middle, then a loose off condition can be solved with the application of rear steer that happens only upon the application of power. Basic rear steer from chassis roll does not help us because it will change our mid-turn handling.

There are several ways to mechanically cause the rearend to steer only when we accelerate. We have experimented with some of those methods with our project cars and reported the results in previous articles. It might help you to look those up.

Shock rates can increase the cross weight percent on exit to tighten your car off the corners. If you run shocks with a stiffer compression rating on the LR corner than on the RR corner, then when the shocks move as the car squats coming off the corner under acceleration and while the loads transfer to the rear, then the LR corner will carry more load and the LR and RF will then share that increased load.

Throttle Control will allow the rear tires to maintain their grip on the track surface and help to provide better acceleration. Once we lose grip in the rear, we must back off the throttle until we regain grip before we can continue to accelerate. By exercising throttle control, we may feel like we are giving up performance, but in reality, we are providing the most acceleration possible.

Throttle control is defined as the modulation of the gas pedal through a range of motion, never moving quickly from one position to another, in order to keep the tires in contact with the track surface. The rate of change in throttle position must be altered depending on your position on the track and through the corner, so the driver must develop an educated foot.

Conclusion

The above suggestions may at first seem like a bit few compared to all of what we know about chassis setup, but remember that we have supposedly already solved the critical issues facing our race car. We have aligned it, checked the Moment Center design, checked for binding in the suspension, rebuilt the shocks, and done all of the other maintenance things we know we should.

The last thing to do is run the car. Teams that are conscious of the effects of all of the various changes and know basically how much affect each change has on the handling of the car will go through the process fairly quickly. Three or four times out with 10 lap runs or less will be all they need to get to the sweet spot.

If you’re just learning these things, take good notes and concentrate on what is happening. Ask lots of questions of your driver so you can know exactly what the changes do and how much they affect the car. And when you do get the car all dialed in, be sure to maintain that good setup.

The post How to Fix a Race Car That Won’t Handle Correctly appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Over the 35 years that Circle Track has been reporting on the technical aspects of short track racing, we have seen a lot of change take place. It is our duty and honor to present those changes in a timely manner and in a way that helps the racer understand it and make use of all of that information. And we think we have done a very good job of that.

As I look back in short track history, I learned that there was a common ancestry. In the years prior to the first issue of Circle Track in 1982, the cars were built to run on both surfaces. Basically, back then, a circle track car was just that no matter where you drove it.

For our 35th Anniversary celebration, I think would be interesting to look back over those years and analyze how setups were developed and how technology evolved for stock car racing. We can easily go back to the late 1960’s and early 1970’s by talking with early racers who reflect the mindset of the teams on that subject.

How Modern “Factory” Chassis Started – Prior to 1971, every circle track race car was a transformed street car originally built by one of the major manufacturers. Teams stripped out all of the un-necessary components, added roll bars, strengthened the suspension pieces, maybe used truck spindles and brakes, and worked on the motors to get more power. There were no dedicated car building companies before that time.

During the late 1960’s, one racer from Michigan named Ed Howe began to dominate short track racing and won everywhere he went. When he came down to Florida to race during the winter months, he again dominated. Dick Anderson sought out his expertise and a friendship soon developed to the point that Dick would drive the Howe cars during testing and then get to keep the car for that seasons racing, paying for it at the end of the year with the winnings.

According to a recent discussion with Dick, Ed was working near General Motors and somehow had access to the automotive engineers working there. He developed very advanced methods of setups and geometry that no one was working with in the short track industry at that time. I saw for myself the notes Ed had made and that Dick has kept over all these years and the information was cutting edge.

Since the cars Ed Howe was winning with were his own out of his garage, many teams began asking him to build cars for them. Out of that demand grew probably the very first full time short track race car manufacturing businesses in 1971. Many more would soon follow like Port City Race Cars, Lefthander, CJ Rayburn, MastersBilt, Barry Wright race cars, Rocket Chassis, etc.

Dirt or Asphalt One Race Car – Back in the day before the split, a short track car could and would be raced on either dirt or asphalt, sometimes in the same week. There was no dedicated one or the other and the setups would probably have been different, but the chassis were the same.

It would not be until the late 1970’s that the dirt teams would seek out different designs for their cars due to the much different needs.

Early Setups On Asphalt – Most race cars then were setup up tight. That was to say they didn’t turn well, abused the right front tire, and ended up with a severe push or went tight/loose eventually. Even the Grand National cars running at Daytona were setup tight to where the right front carried most of the front load and so we saw what were referred to as freight train springs of upwards of 2400 ppi rates.

In the mid-1970’s, Ed Howe ran his cars with mostly even up rear spring rates when many teams were running softer right rear springs. I saw one of his early setup sheets that showed the spring rates for “low banked”, medium, medium-high, high bank, extreme banking. In the first two, the rear spring rates were the same going from 175 to 185ppi rates. But for the high banked tracks, the right rear spring rate was always less by 25ppi going from 250/225ppi to 325/300ppi for the extreme high banking.

We believe this was because at higher banked tracks, the transition off the turns caused the cars to go loose. Running the softer right rear spring would have helped solve that problem.

Later on in the early to mid-1990’s, teams were fooling around with their front geometry and finding that locating the roll center in a certain area helped the front to gain grip and to help turn the car. Wayne Lensing, founder of Lefthander, was an early supporter of proper front geometry.

In the Midwest, the Late Model team owned by John Beale and driven by Brian Hoppe completely bucked the system with their setups in 1998 and won the Re/Max Challenge Series. After finishing second in that series twice they finally came out on top in a classic battle with Steve Carlson.

In the Southeast, the father and sons team of Jim, Jon and Jeff Craig made changes that balanced their Goody’s Dash car using even rear spring rates and won four races in a row going on to win not only the championship in that division of Nascar, but also the late model touring division numerous times later on.

Out west Craig Raudman, then owner of Victory Circle race cars, won the NASCAR touring division there with this new concept. And I began writing for CT in 1998 with much the same message for the readership. The car builders were curious as to why certain teams running their cars were winning on a consistent basis. It was because they were changing the cars designs themselves.

Mid to Late 2000’s – In what we can now call the modern era of stock car racing, we see a gradual change associated with the way setups were developed and the goals associated with development of the asphalt setups.

What happened, I think, is that a small percentage of teams were truly working the balanced setup deal and they were dominating. When other teams could not find out how that was happening, it became easier to just bolt on parts to try to go fast.

So, we saw in Cup racing, as a direct result of the aero engineers taking over the lead in developing setups for those teams, that the teams made all of the setup decisions based on improving the aero efficiency of the cars and damned be the handling. The drivers would just have to adapt. It was a tough road, but one every team pursued because, hey, they were all doing it. Nice logic.

Many short track teams were paying attention to what the Cup teams were doing and began to copy them. Before you know it, we saw very large sway bars, very soft front springs and much stiffer right rear springs. The body shapes changed too and the newer designs would produce more aero down-force at the front.

Now the teams who couldn’t decipher how to create a balanced setup before merely had to bolt on parts and hit the track to go fast. The problem with that involves several areas of science.

When you radically change the mechanics of the suspension in this way, you lose control of the fine tuning. It was soon discovered in all asphalt divisions including Cup, that finding the handling balance was like walking on a knife edge. It was hard to find and harder to maintain.

What resulted from that was a full circle trip back to the early ‘90’s where, as we have stated before, teams sought out the fastest lap time and disregarded the pursuit of longevity, or the goal of being fast at the end of the race, where it counts.

Fast Forward To The Present – Now that we have this overview, and admittedly it is my personal account and others may differ on the exact progression, we need to look at where all of this is ended up.

I wrote the following in 2010. “The asphalt teams will need to back off on the big bars to a more reasonable size. They will need to get off the bump rubbers and coil binding and get back to running on a suspension like race cars are supposed to do, not like a kart.”

What has happened since then is that most teams are now using much smaller sway bars in the 7/8” to 1 ¼” diameter range and using bump springs, a much higher rate spring like the “old” days. Aero is still at the forefront of thinking, but teams are concentrating on balance through the middle of the turns, with a transition to more bite off the turns through mechanical manipulation in the rear suspension.

The new thinking about pavement setups puts the teams in a much happier place. There is a return to consistency for many of the teams and in due time, more teams will follow suit. They just need to follow the simple rules we have outlined in countless articles over the past 35 years success will come, I promise.

Sources:

Howe Racing Enterprises
www.howeracing.com
888-484-3946

Port City Race Cars
www.portcityracecars.com
231-767-8586

The post Pavement History of Setups appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

A lot of our toys don’t get used often enough to keep the battery fully charged. When we do find we need to boost a battery that might be down on power, we need to use the right equipment and perform the task safely. Optima’s Digital 1200 12V charger is designed to charge whatever type of battery you have.

With any battery charger, we need to follow certain basic rules because some batteries emit combustible gases, and any spark near those batteries will cause an explosion, which would ruin your day. Here are the basics:

One) always plug in your charger last after hooking up the leads.,

Two) for a negative ground system with the battery in the vehicle, always attach the positive lead to the battery first.,

Three) for a negative ground system, always attach the negative lead to a part of the chassis, not the negative battery post.,

Four) always follow the battery manufacturers recommendations for venting the battery during the charging operation.,

Five) remove the battery charger after the battery is fully charged.

With the Optima Digital 1200, the operation was easy, we just attached the leads as described above, checked the Pre-Charge Battery Status, then selected from the panel which type of battery we were wanting to charge. It will charge AGM style such as the Optima Red we used, as well as flooded batteries (with liquid electrolyte in the cells), small engine batteries and deep cycle types.

The features of the Digital 1200 include: Enhanced performance of AGM batteries; Charges, conditions and maintains 12V AGM and flooded batteries; Recovers deeply discharged batteries; Includes a USB charging port; Is rated at 12 amps maximum.

The Digital 1200 has storage for all of the cords within the case and a handle and hook for placing it where it is convenient. The display has a convenient “Fuel Gauge” style meter to show the status of voltage, amps and percent of charge in the battery and is designed to be very user friendly. Bringing the battery up to full charge on our 19’33 Ford Factory Five coupe kit car was a snap.

For all of your battery charging needs, be sure the identify the type of battery you are using, find a charger that will best handle that type of battery and always follow the basic safety rules for charging 12V batteries. And use those toys more often.

The post Product Spotlight: Optima Digital 1200 Charger appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

I was made aware recently of a couple of incidences of complete disregard for safety and/or equipment at a couple of tracks. I won’t go into detail about who or where, you can Google search on Youtube to find videos I’m sure. But in both instances, everyone watching was asking the lead title question.

In the first, the driver got out of a car that had begun to burn. The “fire/safety” truck crew drove up behind the car, downwind of the smoke no less, and then proceeded to watch as the car nearly burned to the ground with no effort to put it out. The driver and a helper from somewhere grabbed fire extinguishers out of the “fire/safety” truck and were able to put out the flames.

It’s one thing to not have adequate equipment available, but to not use what you have? Maybe, in defense of that crew, the lead officials might have told them not to go into dangers way to try to fight the fire. Then why be there in the first place? What if the driver had been in the car, would that crew have waited for a professional fire-fighting crew to arrive? And shouldn’t one of them at least have had a fire suit on?

The reason we have dedicated fire and safety crews at race tracks instead of the community fire trucks and crews is mostly about cost. The professionals have to get paid and it’s not cheap. So, most tracks have their own crews that may or may not be trained and/or motivated to react to a fire or extraction, which leads us to the other incident.

At a dirt track in the mid-west, a racers car rolled over and he was trapped inside. There was no fire, but the driver started to smell fuel leaking and we all know what can happen next. There was, understandably, panic on the part of the driver.

The “fire/safety” crew took every bit of fifteen minutes, from what I was told, to roll the car over. Meanwhile, with a lot of personal effort, the driver did get out on his own. The bystanders were left with that same lead question, what just happened here?

Had the car caught fire, the driver would have been badly burned and possibly killed. In our new kinder and gentler society these days, maybe some of us don’t feel the need to react quickly to serious and dangerous situations. Maybe we need to.

These kinds of “What just happened…” events don’t ever need to happen. Is it the lack of training, lack of caring, or lack of direction? Did we as a society stop caring about other’s lives and property? That is exactly what the bystanders and everyone else who watch such things on video are saying to themselves.

No race is worth a life, period. That is why races get canceled when someone gets killed in a race car. That race just isn’t that important. But accidents will happen and a few racers a year will die. That is a fact we all must live with. But we all want the number of fatalities to be lower or non-existent, don’t we?

That’s why I even bothered to write this, to let everyone who deals with these types of things that it’s time to wake up and do a better job. There are wonderful fire and safety crews out there in greater numbers than the bad ones. Yes, a few bad apples shouldn’t ruin it for the rest of us, but they do.

I hope that lessons have been learned and steps have been taken to correct the obvious lack of concern shown in the above examples. Back in the early days of racing, many fellow crew members would have jumped in to help in both of these situations, but are now restrained from helping. But, you cannot expect them to just stand by and watch what happened.

I guess it’s time to do another track safety story. In addition, we might ask race teams to take a little survey to rate their tracks safety performance/readiness. Then we will post the name of the tracks and the results of the survey. Hey, if the shoe fits?

In fact, let’s get started right now. My email is listed below. If you want to chime in, please tell us your track name and your evaluation of the performance of its safety crew on a scale of one to ten, ten of course being wonderful. We won’t publish your name or any information about you. This is about rating race tracks safety record and performance. Let’s see where this goes.

If you have comments or questions about this or anything racing related, send them to my email address: chassisrd@aol.com or mail can be sent to Circle Track, Senior Tech Editor, 1733 Alton Parkway, Suite 100, Irvine, CA.

Jacking Effect Discussion

Hi Bob,

Can you explain the jacking effect principal for the front suspension. I have been looking around can’t find much on it.

Thanks, Grant Howard

Grant,

I am really glad you asked. I dove into that subject about a year ago after I saw a video espousing the benefits of it by arguably the “inventor” of that concept who started writing about it some ten years ago. Well, he really wasn’t the true inventor, it was mentioned in the popular book on vehicle dynamics, Race Car Vehicle Dynamics, by William F. and Douglas L. Milliken. He just tried to expand on the concept. I’ll call him Mr. Video because I’m not sure he wants his name used.

In my copy of the 1995 edition of the book jacking is referred to and talked about on page 614. The most important part of the bottom paragraph is the statement, “This is most apparent on older cars with swing axle rear suspensions such as the Formula V.”

The Volkswagen rear suspension was a swing axle design and the outside wheel would jack up under the chassis in a hard turn. This is what they were talking about, not necessarily the double A-arm suspension in the front of most stock cars.

So, after seeing the video, I called Mr. Video and had a little discussion. I told him I could find no significance to Jacking Effect as it relates to the AA-arm suspension, but that I would research it and build a model that would test the results. He asked if I would send him a drawing of the model so he could ascertain if he agreed with the design and I did. He thought it was a wonderful model and would give us the results we were looking for.

I built the model and started testing. I applied the loads at the tire “contact patches” in proportional amounts, like in real cornering. I put 35% of the total force at left tire and 65% of the total in the right tire in weighted buckets that pulled on the contract patch horizontally. The chassis was restrained at the Center of Gravity. I then measured the roll angle to record a measure of roll resistance, which is the only measure we have. Remember that Mr. Video agreed with the method and fixture I was using. Here are the results.

In the model, I could set upper and lower arm angles in many different configurations, but starting out, I used common arm angles that we would see on a typical modern asphalt super late model. When I applied the force, I got a roll angle of 6.0 degrees.

I then put 100% of the lateral force loading on the left tire and 0% on the right tire. The roll angle was again 6.0. Then I put 100% of the loading on the right tire and 0% on the left tire and got 5.9 degrees. So, basically, I got no difference in roll angles and/or roll resistance from huge differences in lateral load distribution on the tire contact patches.

What that serves to do is dispute the theory of Jacking Force dynamics as it is being preached. I reported the results to Mr. Video and then took the model to a neutral spot near where he lives and a place that specializes in vehicle dynamics testing, Morse Measurements in Salisbury, NC with Bob Simons. There we all did the experiments with similar results.

So, Grant, I don’t think much of the theory of jacking force having tested and proven it to be of no consequence. But those of us who live and breathe vehicle dynamics and work with race cars on-track will tell you that there is definitely something to roll center/instant center location associated with control arm angles. What we suggest, and coincidentally what proponents of JF suggest for moment center/instant center placements are in agreement. Isn’t that all we need to know?

Spotters Causing The “Big One”

Bob,

I believe spotters cause as many wrecks as they prevent. At NASCR super speedways the call from the spotter, “he has got a run on you”, is causing the driver to try and block causing the big one.

I believe the radios should be shut of the last 20 laps so the drivers have to drive and not block. NASCAR can have a frequency to radio to all drivers if there is a safety concern.

Clem Zahrobsky

Clem,

I don’t agree with you in concept. Granted, there might be a problem at times on super speedways, but the blame for “the big one” could be put in a lot of places. I know for a fact that spotters save many more incidents than cause them.

In fact, you’d be hard pressed to find any spotter who has actually caused a wreck. The spotters I know take their duties seriously and would never put the driver in a situation that would/could cause a wreck.

I could name off many instances of spotters saving a situation and this response could go on and on. Suffice it to say, most, if not all, spotters do their jobs well and continually keep aggressive driver from making bad decisions.

Ty’s Throttle Control

Bob,

I just read your April, ‘17 article on the Hot Rod network about Ty Majeski. Sounds like he and Jimmie Johnson came from the same mold. Both of these guys have mastered the art of throttle control, corner entry and exit strategy.

What you wrote about Ty I could visualize Jimmie doing the same. Thanks for the review. I now know who will succeed Jimmie when he retires next year.

John Dimmick

John,

Throttle control is a well-kept secret among the very elite drivers in history. I recently heard a very successful past racer who is now a consultant say, “there are a thousand positions in that throttle pedal.”

The late Dale Earnhardt, Sr. showed his skill one time in a test at Richmond. I heard this first hand from a data specialist who was working for a newer Cup team at this test. He said their regular driver was about a half second slow of the best times. The owner apparently knew Earnhardt and asked him if he would take the car out for a few laps to see if he could help them find the problem.

He took the car out and soon had made up the half second. He brought it back in and said it felt pretty good to him and walked away. I asked the data guy who was telling me this story, so what is the punch line?

He said in the data he had from both runs, their drivers throttle “curve” looked like the Manhattan skyline. He was either on or off the throttle with no in-between. On Earnhardt’s curve, it was actually a curve. He rolled off the throttle and then rolled back on and that was worth a half a second in lap times. So, there ya go. I‘m sure Jimmie Johnson knows something about throttle control too.

Brake Bias Tech

Good morning,

My name is Dan and I’m building a pro stock dirt car. I’m on the brake system right now and I had a friend help who has been at this for several years of building and racing cars. When he put the pedal assembly together he put together a Wilwood pedal and master cylinder.

The front master cylinder bore is 7/8ths and the rear is 1″. He also attached a 10lb residual check valve to both the front and rear MC’s. I installed a pressure gauge for bias adjustment to know exactly how much pressure is front and rear. When trying to adjust to mostly rear brake the best I can get is equal pressure front and rear.

With the balance bar in neutral position I have more front brake. Should I have both MC bore sizes the same to be able to adjust my bias better from front to rear? Also with the 10lb residual check valve, I know those are designed for drum brakes not disc.

After talking to my friend, he said with the 2lb there was too much pedal travel. My concern is there will be too much brake drag and heat the brakes up too much. Should I change back to a 2lb or stay at the 10lb. Also, the master cylinders are above the horizontal plane of the calipers.

Thank you, Dan Wilson

Dan,

Your main problem is the master cylinder size, they are backwards. If you want more rear brake, switch the masters and put the smaller one on the rear brake side. The smaller size bore develops more line pressure with equal foot pressure.

I’m not sure about the residual check valve, but if they are made for drum brakes, they might not be a good idea for an asphalt car. You can ask your Wilwood brake distributor and they will help you decide if you need that.

As to the location of the master cylinders above the calipers, a good bleeding of the brake lines will clear any air, no matter where the masters are located. Maybe you have air in your lines and that is why you have so much pedal travel.

The post Has Track Safety Gone to Hell? appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

35 Years of CT Ads: Documentation of Evolution of Technology

When the first issue of Circle Track came on the scene, short track racing was in a major transition. Racing as an industry that we now know was being formed then and had only been around for several years. Prior to that time, most race cars of the 1960’s and up to the mid-1970’s were home built with parts scavenged from the junk yard. Soon after that, some enterprising individuals began what we commonly know as members of the Performance Racing Industry.

For the chassis, parts like brakes, rear ends, hubs and wheels were usually components found on production trucks. These were stronger than those that came on production automobiles and could withstand the rigors of racing.

For the engines, there were truck clutches, truck intake manifolds, truck cams and heads that produced more horsepower than stock parts, etc. But, the racing was becoming more sophisticated and so the suppliers became more innovative. You would be surprised to know what was available then, in 1982 in comparison to what is used today. Here is a review that you might find interesting.

Brake Systems – Up until the mid-1970’s, brakes systems in circle track race cars were usually borrowed from trucks where stopping heavy loads was necessary. The friction material was a shoe rubbing against a steel drum. Somewhere along the way, probably as a result of Indy car racing and aircraft design needs, the disc brake system was made available to the general racing public.

In the summer of 1982, a racer had access to four-wheel disc brake systems offered by several companies, some of which are still around. Wilwood brakes was an advertiser in that first issue and still provides the best in brake systems for short track racers, along with PFC Brakes and many other companies that were spinoffs.

The system consisted of a disc of varying thicknesses and aluminum or steel calipers bolted to the spindle or rear axle tubing, just like today. In fact, other than significant improvements in friction materials and disc designs, the two are the same. And what that did for us was eliminate brake fade that was common before the disc brakes became available.

Custom designed calipers, rotors and brake pads can be used to enhance any setup on dirt or asphalt. With the use of brakes becoming more prevalent and the racing conditions being more intense than ever, brake systems have become more and more a tuning tool to take a team to the next level.

Springs and Shocks – Back in the day, we were starting to see dedicated spring manufacturers and shocks built for racing applications. The use of coil-over shocks meant we needed good, quality springs in a variety of rates to use to setup our cars.

From those early companies came quality spring makers like Landrum Springs who advertise with CT today. And racing shocks have come a long way too. Gone are the days of the twin tube shocks. Now, almost every shock used on a wide variety of race cars is a gas pressure variety of varying pressures.

We have dedicated shock companies who can build any shock combination you need. Current advertisers Keyser Manufacturing, QA1 and RE Suspension are some of the many who offer full service shock sales of their own brands plus Penske shocks for a custom build. The modern shock dyno makes possible the designs that enhance the current setup arrangements.

Coil-over force rigs are used by racers to know the distribution of forced in their cars when going through the turns. These are offered by Gale Force Suspension, Intercomp and Longacre while we also have specially designed pull-down rigs by Mittler Brothers and DRP Performance.

Driveline – In 1982, we were starting to see quick change rear ends made of aluminum and even magnesium alloys. Quick change gears were offered by several companies to keep up with the high demand associated with the switch from the common 9 inch Ford types to quick-change. Winters Performance offers low friction quick-change rear ends and Quick Performance is the supplier for a variety of rear ends and parts based on the 9 inch Ford design.

At the other end of the driveshaft, the multi-disk clutch was making a lot of waves. Way back in the mid-1960’s a drag racer running a regional race in NHRA competition decided to build a clutch with multi disks to see how that would work. He wanted to slip the clutch rather than the tires.

He broke, or shattered would be a better description, the world record for AA Fuel dragsters on his first trip to the track with that invention. In doing so, he changed the way racers transmitted power from the engine to the transmission. And in 1982, Ram Clutches was offering three disk clutch systems.

Engine Components – Wow, where do I start? Just about every part of the engine was undergoing modifications, re-design and improvement over the stock components. From high compression pistons connected to aluminum rods to heads and valve train parts that get their fuel mixture through redesigned carburetors and intake manifolds, the old V8 motor had never been dressed so well.

The ignition systems that were being introduced in ads gracing the pages of CT were high capacity capacitive discharge types and multiple spark discharge, by MSD. The older points-in-the-distributor ignitions had gone by the wayside and racing engines were burning much more efficiently than ever before.

All of that fuel/air was being mixed in a Holley carburetor, flowing through a Weiand manifold bolted to Brodix heads, around valves lifted by a Lunati cam and ignited by an MSD spark that drove down that Mahle piston. It then flowed out of the engine through a tuned exhaust header system. In short, the “modern” 1982 racing engine components were far superior to any of the production automotive engines of the day.

Safety Items – Safety had come a long way, but not nearly as far as we see today. Still, with the help of Bill Simpson efforts in the mid-1960’s, drivers now wore fire resistant suits, gloves and shoes. The helmets were being made better and soon, more drivers would be wearing full face types.

We saw six-point seat belts being offered in that first issue too. Longacre, who had advertised in 1982, sold a specially designed roll bar padding to adsorb the impacts of arms and legs against the roll bars. There were quick release steering wheel hubs available and surround racing seats were starting to become popular too.

One of the deadliest safety items of the day was fire. In the pages of CT in 1982, ATL had already worked to help solve that problem by offering crash resistant fuel cells, anti-spill “dump tanks” as well as Nomex fire suits for the driver and fueler.

Speedway Motors offered the seat belts, fire resistant “Heavy Nomex” driver suits and the “high back” fiberglass seat with rib and leg support. And all of the cars featured in CT in 1982 had the latest designed roll cages and door-bar layouts.

Parts Suppliers – In that day, by evidence of the ads we see in the first three issues of CT, few parts suppliers were in the business of short track racing. Most of the existing suppliers were basic automotive and hot rod suppliers who either changed to racing suppliers or were replaced by others who saw opportunity.

Speedway Motors out of Lincoln, Nebraska was an original advertiser in CT in 1982 and grew its business into one of the largest racing and hot rod retailers in the country. Many more would come, and go, and today we see both store front and online retailers vying for a piece of the racers marketplace.

Longacre was another supplier that was there with us in 1982 and has been there ever since. They are dedicated to the racer and also manufactured their own line of parts including scales, dash gauges, tire pressure gauge and tire pyrometers, even back then.

Chassis Parts – By 1982, you could buy aftermarket upper and lower control arms. The fabricated front clips were becoming popular too. There weren’t many chassis parts advertised in CT in that year, but from looking closely at the various articles, we could see different suspension types.

The leaf spring rear was popular, but we did see a Z-link already in use as well as a three link economy chassis and an X-ray view of a “modern” 1982 Grand National race car. That GN car was the precursor to the present day Nascar Cup cars, except that the basic design has not changed one bit from then. It was/is a rear truck arm system with springs mounted on the arms and a double A-arm system at the front.

The bodies on the race cars were original OEM fenders, doors and roofs, but fiberglass was quickly becoming very popular and cheaper to produce. Looking through past issues we see where Five Star Bodies was advertising in 1988 and later on came AR Bodies.

Plastic replaced fiberglass at the front and rear to adsorb and survive the impacts that come so often. As time went on, body rules became more uniform and the body kits were made easier to assemble.

Conclusion – I encourage you to take a look at the ads we present from the 1982 era and compare them to today’s ads. What you will find is that short track racing was fairly sophisticates back in that day and time. And, some systems in use twenty or thirty years ago might just work well in today’s technical climate.

Sources:

AR Bodies
www.arbodies.com
615-643-8827

Capital Motorsports Warehouse
www.cmwraceparts.com
800-278-2692

DMI / Bulldog Rear Ends
www.diversifiedracing.com
717-397-5347

DRP Performance Products
www.drpperformance.com
888-399-6074

Five Star Bodies
www.fivestarbodies.com
262-877-2171

Intercomp Racing
www.intercompracing.com
800-328-3336

Integra Shocks and Springs
www.integrashocksandsprings.com
800-472-3464

Longacre Racing Products
www.longacreracing.com
800-423-3110

Mittler Brothers Machine
www.mittlerbros.com
800-467-2464

Performance Friction Brakes
www.performancefriction.com
800-521-8874

QA1
www.qa1.net
800-721-7761

Quick Performance
www.quickperformance.com
515-232-0126

RaceQuip
www.racequip.com
813-642-6644

Race Day Safety
www.racedaysafety.com
770-505-0193

Speedway Motors
www.speedwaymotors.com/CT715
855-313-9175

Wilwood Motorsports
www.wilwood.com
805-388-1188

Winters Performance
www.wintersperformance.com
717-764-9844

The post Evolution of Circle Track Technology appeared first on Hot Rod Network.