Quantcast
Channel: Bob Bolles – Hot Rod Network
Viewing all 114 articles
Browse latest View live

The AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour, Part Nine

$
0
0

It was a long run from our last stop at Eldora to the big state of Texas so we took our time. Making stops in Clarksville, Tennessee, and Hot Springs, Arkansas, made the trip bearable. And we picked an RV park once we got there that was to be one of the most fun out of the entire Tour.

Lakeside RV Resort located on Lake Livingston near Onalaska, Texas, was a place we could rest ourselves. It was a bit out of the way due to the fact that we had to re-align our schedule when we discovered that one of the racetracks near Houston didn’t have an event the weekend we needed it. So, we would be camped right on the lake for the next week and this rare time spent not traveling would be well used.

That was OK, because after we visited the U.S. National Dirt Track Championships, we were able to rest ourselves before moving on to the last stop in Mississippi. It had been a long trip spanning more than four months in two segments and covering some 12,000 miles total.

Texas Motor Speedway
We really didn’t know what to expect when we arrived at this relatively newly constructed dirt track outside one of the premiere NASCAR facilities in the country. Built similar to The Dirt Track at Lowe’s Motor Speedway, I knew it would be a well-built facility, but some aspects of it surprised me.

First off, and I will further explain the significance of this later on, there was no police security on duty at this event. Literally, every race I’ve been to had local police or sheriff’s officers on site to make sure nothing gets out of hand in the stands or the pits.

I know when you go to a large track to watch a NASCAR race anywhere in the country, there are dozens, if not more, of officers on duty to watch over the sometimes-drunk crowd. It only makes sense. Not so here.

What was here in abundance was a huge number of Modified class cars representing two classes and a sprinkling of Late Models, 22 to be exact. The paved pits were full and more cars were parked in the grass pits adjacent.

The three classes were the Limited Modifieds, Modifieds, and the O’Reilly Auto Parts SUPR Late Model Championship. All three main events would prove very competitive and exciting to watch. The Late Model series is mostly composed of teams out of Texas and Louisiana. And most of the Modified teams were Texas-based, although a few teams made the trip from Oklahoma and beyond.

We parked our Tour bus right outside of the asphalt pit gates and right at the entrance to the grass pits where a group parked nearby would bring new meaning to the term “grassroots.” I would later on learn how much “fun” this group could generate.

The facility was run much like what you would expect from a primarily NASCAR track, but the attendees made it a dirt event separate and apart from the big
track overtone. A crowd of more than 8,000 watched as some of the best racing we’ve seen unfolded.

The track itself almost looks like it’s oiled. The dark dirt, common to this region, is not necessarily clay in composition, but is heavy. Deep ruts developed in the second groove in Turns 1 and 2 and high in Turn 4.

The fast way around the track was through the middle of Turns 1-2 and running high off of Turns 2 and 4. Unfortunately, this is where the track got rough. I soon learned from watching a few of the heats, that if a driver kept the car up high, it was smoother there and he could keep his momentum up.

There were only a few smart ones in all of the races who figured that out. The rest fought the ruts and gained and lost ground to the ones who ran high. The bottom was just not productive for speed although it was smoother there too.

It was interesting to see some of the Modified cars launch off the ruts and to see “daylight” under all four wheels at times. And all of that bouncing around took its toll on the equipment. I saw at least four cars whose radiator hoses came off and spilled all of their coolant.

I thought about that. The weight of the coolant in a large hose must be significant. When the cars hit those holes, the forces would certainly put a lot of stress on the fittings and clamps. I wondered how many of those who lost their hoses had double clamped them?

After the races, we settled into our motorhome while the “grassroots” teams celebrated outside. They celebrated, and celebrated, and…well it went on till about 5:30 in the morning. Along about 3 a.m., one of the drivers fired up his Modified and began spinning donuts in the grass. I told my wife, Karen, “That can’t be good!”

The next morning I went outside and the Ft. Worth police were there writing up a report on the five, new port-o-lets that were damaged, one being destroyed, within 100 feet of the bus. And most of the teams had left. I would guess there were more than a few drunk drivers on the road judging from the way the beer was flowing.

The lack of security contributed to the whole thing getting out of hand. And while talking with a vendor at the track I learned that a similar party had occurred in the spring race here, so there was a history of this happening. Oh well, boys will be boys. I hope no one got hurt.

We made our way back to the Lakeside RV Park after a not-so-good night of “sleep” for a much needed rest. Our next race was up the road in Mississippi and we would need an overnight stay on the way there. Meanwhile, we had a whole section of the park to ourselves along with the pool and hot tub.

Columbus Speedway
We rolled into town for the 21st annual Magnolia State 100 race at what is billed as the “Baddest Bullring in the South” just outside Columbus, Mississippi. To say this track was unique would be accurate. From the “cut out of a pasture” feel to the custom, individually erected “sky boxes” that lined the track, you could feel a certain local attachment to the venue.

When a racetrack has a serious connection to the community, it shows. This was admittedly a big event that drew name drivers and teams from the top ranks of Dirt Late Model racing, but it had even more. It had the support of the surrounding community and that is what makes it special.

This track only runs limited local and several major events each year, the biggest being this one. We counted a total of just 10 events on the website schedule. Since racing in this area is shared with Magnolia Motor Speedway, the Columbus Racing Alliance was formed in order to schedule races without conflict between the two facilities.

Johnny Stokes manages both area speedways right now and has been instrumental in making both racetracks a success and removing conflicting goals and scheduling. Johnny is a hands-on promoter and it shows. Everything about this race was carefully orchestrated and overseen by him. Every time I called Johnny, he was either working on preparing the track or on the way to do some other task associated with the promotion or preparation of the event. We rarely see promoters actually work.

A few big name teams arrived hoping to win the $25,010 purse. Names like Billy Moyer (no, we’re not following him around on purpose!), Wendell Wallace, Shane Clanton, Chris Madden, and Steve Francis headlined the show.

As I walked around the pit area, I couldn’t help but notice individual, elevated, homemade sky boxes, about 20 of them across the backstretch and around to Turn 1. Each one had the name of a team or sponsoring company painted on it.

This is exactly what I refer to as community support. Each of these companies must feel a unique connection to the track. Each has a “lease” on a piece of ground on the speedway property, and a great view of the races.

The races were very competitive and in the end, Mike Marlar from Winfield, Tennessee, bested Shane Clanton, Billy Moyer, and 70 other cars that showed up for the win. Mike has been on a rampage this summer, recording multiple wins and mostly Top 5 results when not wrecked or having engine problems. This is one up and coming driver in the top division of dirt track racing to watch.

The End of A Journey
And so, as we left the Columbus area, we felt several emotions. We were first of all exhausted and tired of traveling. But as we made our way toward Florida and home, we couldn’t help but reflect on how unique this Tour has been and the great amount of friends we’ve made.

What we gained can’t be fully explained here and so we will submit a full report on the whole of the Tour in the May issue of CT. But be sure that we took a whole lot away from this experience and were able to take in a ton of information that we still need to sort through. I call it information in the can-there when we need it.

I hope that we can successfully compile all of our experiences and observations into a composite review that will lend some insight into where our sport is and where it’s going, at least in this particular region. And most of all, we hope to influence in a positive way where it ends up. Be looking for our final review of the entire 2010 AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour of the Southeast in the next issue.

The post The AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour, Part Nine appeared first on Hot Rod Network.


Kids Racing – The Young Racers Debate

$
0
0

Author’s Note: The following are two email letters sent by the parents of young racers in response to my Q&A topic on the subject of youth in racing, “Be Careful What You Ask For,” in the Nov. ’10 issue. I will respond to their comments with my entry signified by text in italics. This might give you a range of opinion on this important subject.

First Letter
Bob, in response to your article concerning youth racing dangers, my 8-year-old is currently driving a Mini-Cup race car and was the youngest driver in the Western Scale Racing Association last year in California. Prior to that, we started in Quarter Midgets at age 4 and a half.

I have serious doubts that a 4 1/2-year-old made a conscious decision to begin a racing career. It’s this point that drives much of the debate about youth in racing. Is it more the parents’ desires to race vicariously through the child that drives the effort? We need to think more about that.

As for safety, you’re right; no expense was spared from HANS to helmets. Safety equipment is not an issue. On any given week youths are injured and tragic deaths occur when they play “other” sports, but you’re not concerned with negative attention that those incidents may receive. I have a deeper burden to keep my child safe and would be beyond devastated if my child was hurt or injured racing or riding a bicycle. We race, that’s what we do.

Let me say, unequivocally, that I’m indeed concerned with the negative attention “those incidents” may receive, but here we are talking about racing. I have yet to see a BMX bike explode in flames. Some have the opinion that sports, such as BMX racing, are ultimately more dangerous due to the lack of protection offered by a race car with a rollcage. But point taken as to the dangers inherent in all kids’ sports.

Motorsports in these times shouldn’t, and can’t, afford to limit interest and growth based on a magic age number. It’s the parents’, associations’, and tracks’ jobs to monitor, train, and evaluate each driver based on ability, not a set age.

My 8-year-old is far more mature and able to handle his on-track emotions than many of the racers I see at our local NASCAR tracks on any Saturday night. Actually, he could teach them a thing or two about sportsmanship and control. An age of “drivers license eligible” before racing is not reasonable, my 8-year-old, as many other racing kids, will show those 16-year-olds how to race if they are just starting out.

My opinion is that motorsports can afford to (and will) limit racing participation based on age. Liability is one consideration that must be addressed by track owners and promoters.

In closing it’s simple, if you don’t feel your child is safe, don’t race. You as the fan, race promoter, or track owner bear no greater responsibility for my child than me. My guess is driving to the store in an SUV is more dangerous.

Nicky Ezell
Jacksonezellracing.com

Second Letter
Hi Bob, I just finished reading the reader comments in the latest issue that came in the mail today. One headline caught my attention regarding an age limit for kids racing. I have a little insight regarding this subject.

I thought you might be interested in hearing a few thoughts and a story from a racing family that was heavily involved on the leading edge of youth racing in our area. In fact, my son, John (not his real name), was one of them. Editors Note: “John” is a former Young Racers’ Club winner.

John is now 19 and entering his second season driving tour-style asphalt Modifieds with the Modified Racing Series. We’re firm believers in earning the right to move up a division. John has been hands-on since day one, and went from four-cylinder to V-8 strictly stock; after winning 16 races in one season, we moved him into entry-level “crate” Mods. He’s also a freshman in college doing a double major in education.

My husband and I were the first locals to put a 12-year-old into a race car. At that time there was no such thing as a Youth division around here, so John was finally allowed to race four-cylinders-stock with a full driver’s rollcage and racing seat-with the adults. After being wrecked by a 17-year-old who admitted to looking at his gauges instead of where he was going, we were down one car. I think that was the scariest moment of my life.

Note here, that this child began his racing career at age 12. There is a documented case a couple of years ago of a 12-year-old racing a Super Late Model dirt car. In this case, the class was indeed a lower one and probably the bottom class at the racetrack.

My husband has raced since he was 16, but it’s different when it’s your kid’s butt in that car. Anyhow, John felt terrible about the time his father had put into the car, but we convinced him to get back on the horse and in a week’s time had another racer together for him.

Four weeks into the season, John was holding his own-fifth in points against the adults. That’s when the youth division was finally born and that season I can honestly say was one of the best ever. Those kids went into that track every week with attitudes way better than most of the adults who raced-but that’s another story of its own.

That winter, we got together with a few of the local die-hard racers and put together a comprehensive rules package (for young racers) with safety as the first priority. We found ways to restrict the cars if they were dominating, so that sportsmanship-give and take-could be taught and competition would be tight.

We even had the idea that we would invite local racing “heroes” each week to work as flagman, tech, or race director to give the kids people that understood and whom they could look up to as role models.

I took all of this information, put it together, and presented it to the owner of our local racetrack who, at first, blew me off. But before the race season began, he gave us the green light and bought an insurance rider to cover the kids. This is a key point: insurance.

Up until now, the issue of insurance and liability hasn’t come up. I’m so glad this reader raised this question so early on in her experience. We can learn something about this important aspect of youth in racing.

It’s only recently that insurance companies have allowed coverage for young racers. I’m sure there aren’t many that have even questioned it; however, before the rules were changed, it would have been the promoter who was held personally liable should anything bad happen.

Inevitably, the track took over the division. Things have gone a long way since then; we haven’t been involved with the kids division for several years now and, quite frankly, I’m more than disappointed with what it’s become.

One of our main goals was to keep it honest and not have “hockey dads”-and unfortunately it turned into just what we didn’t want within two years after we moved on. That’s the track’s fault, however, for not keeping a tight lid on it in my opinion.

The important point made here is that it’s the responsibility of the track personnel to ensure fairness in the racing program and not allow undue interference from the parents of the racer. Also, kids should race with kids and not be mixed with older drivers.

I’ll get to my point. John was dominant as a youth racer. He truthfully had less of a car than the others, but does have raw talent. Youth divisions are a great way to introduce the kids to racing if it’s done the right way.

Buying them wins and cheating their cars accomplishes nothing; but making them get their own hands dirty instills a sense of pride and care in most of them. John was ready to move up after two years in a youth car-and two championships-however, at that point he was 14 years old and we were faced with an issue: he wasn’t old enough to race in the regular divisions.

More good points are presented here. Racing should be, first of all, the child’s choice and then the child should work for the privilege of racing. On the CT Tour, we met one father who insisted that his child attain a straight A report card in school in order to be allowed to race.

We went back to the track that he started at, and put him in a Strictly Stock for a season. He learned really quickly that it’s not always a bowl of cherries. He blew up several engines and ended up sitting out many races. Alternately, when he was having a good night, it was a very good night!

We sold that car at the end of the season when the Crate Mods were introduced and had the track owner’s permission to put John into one. Now, this is the part where it gets interesting.

I guess it was about February; we had a Modified in the works for him, putting it together as the checkbook allowed. One day we got a phone call from the track owner, who told us that he couldn’t allow John to race in that division. Mind you, this was after he had already given his permission. As it turned out, it wasn’t so much the promoter as it was the insurance company that wouldn’t allow it.

I even went to them myself, because I wanted to know how the 14- to 15-year-olds who were racing in PASS Pro Stocks were allowed to race, but in this class they weren’t? The Pro-Stocks have more hp and so on and were a touring division.

Come to find out, the insurance company told me that this indeed was an issue that was (at the time) on the table between all the motorsports insurers. I was told that the kids under 16 years old racing on these touring divisions were either sneaking in, or the promoters were not aware that they had no coverage and that if anything were to happen, the promoter would be held liable for all expenses.

Indeed, this does get interesting. With the emotions that come with an injury to a child in any sport also come the inevitable lawsuits. A jury of 12 would certainly sympathize with the parents of a child injured, or worse, in a stock car crash. Can our insurance companies afford this level of exposure? Only they can tell you that.

The person I was speaking with at K&K Insurance asked me the million-dollar question: “Are you that confident that the promoter could cover damages in the event of a serious accident? Would you trust him to do the right thing?” That’s all it took. I don’t trust anyone except my husband when it comes to my son’s safety. It’s just the Mom in me I guess.

We shelved the Modified, and built another Strictly Stock from the ground up and documented the whole thing on our website. It was sort of fun, we had loads of followers and John kicked some major butt that season, winning 16 out of 19 races.

Fortunately, the insurance “rules” also changed to allow him to race the higher division. Unfortunately, we were already hip deep in the Strictly when we got word. John was disappointed a little, however he also pointed out that it was a fun division, and to quote him:, “That’s where I learned to drive.”

I agree whole-heartedly that 12-year-olds do not belong in 350hp (or more) race cars. I also believe that they should not be handed the whole package, they need to do their share of the work. That’s where they learn to respect it; and that will carry over onto the track. At least it did with my kid.

But remember, youth in racing isn’t a bad thing; it’s all in what you allow. With all the video games and computer time these days, we need to get these kids off their butts and back to the racetrack. This allows them a way to find out if racing does for them what it does for us.

What I disagree with is putting them in karts when they are 5 years old. By the time they are old enough to get into a car, they’re burned out and a car certainly isn’t a kart. I’ve heard that line too, “I’ve driven karts since I was 5!” And that was from the kid who didn’t know enough to take his foot out of the throttle when he dumped John in his Crate Mod on championship night during a tight point’s race.

An important thing to consider is this: We, as parents, are the ones responsible for deciding if our child is mature enough to race. We, as parents, are the ones responsible for being certain there is the proper insurance in place for our kids to race at any particular track; and that all the proper safety equipment-right down to the rescue team-is in place. And, ultimately, making the wrong decision for the wrong reasons not only puts our own children at risk, but also other people’s children. This isn’t hockey.

Point well taken, but I will inject this. It’s not only you and your child at risk, it is, in reality, everyone associated with his/her racing that will ultimately be putting it on the line. I can say too that encouraging irresponsible behavior in children is in itself a liability risk.

There are some parents who before the “event” speak of taking full responsibility for their actions, but when faced with the loss of their child suddenly change their opinion and begin to blame others with lawsuits to follow. That’s the hard reality of the world we live in.

Really, there’s so much more to the story that I didn’t touch on, good things-for instance, how close your family becomes when you all race together. It truly does create a different atmosphere than most families share. It’s not all fun and games, either; there are a lot of blood, sweat, and tears that go into a Saturday night racer, particularly when you live with your team (and Dad races too).

But if you do it right, it’s well worth the trouble. And we need to ask these questions: What does this kid have to give up to race? Is it worth it to him/her? Is he/she willing to work for this? What I failed to tell you is that John has been around race cars his entire life, and has worked on them since he was old enough to use a wrench. Maybe that makes a difference.

Name withheld by request

Probably the best thing about youth in racing is what you have said here, it’s the family being able to share time together and becoming closer. I believe racing accomplishes this more than most other kids’ sports because of the time spent away from the track working on the car. Yes, it does get the kids away from the Playstation and the TV. And for that, I applaud the parents.

Conclusion
Let’s face it, we have said before that racing needs a youth infusion and it would be hypocritical to speak out against that movement. What needs to be done is to implement reasonable rules and age limits for kids who chose to race.

We, as a society, have shown in other areas that we’re sometimes not responsible enough to regulate ourselves as evidenced by our drug laws, speed limits, helmet laws, and so on. This is no different than those. An important argument in court cases involves the question of is an action universally accepted as “reasonable and responsible?” In other words, would a reasonable and sane person undertake this action?

Courts have further ruled that an adult parent can’t make legal decisions for a minor such as waiving of liability. If the parent can’t execute a contract for a minor and the minor can’t execute a contract, then there is no waiver of liability and the track owners assume all liability.

Then there is the arena of public opinion, and believe me it counts. If the majority feels that allowing an 8-year-old to drive a Mini-Cup car on a half-mile asphalt track at an average speed close to 100 mph isn’t acceptable, those who wish for their kids to race in that way will need to respect that opinion, just as we accept our seatbelt and motorcycle helmet laws that are designed to protect us from ourselves.

We encourage debate on this subject and one reader suggested that we only print those opinions that agree with us. That’s not true, and we encourage track owners, promoters, sanctions, and insurance companies to chime in on this so we can put together a set of reasonable rules and move forward. The future of circle track racing is at stake.

The post Kids Racing – The Young Racers Debate appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

The AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour

$
0
0

This installment marks the last entry into the monthly journal of the 2010 AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour. It has been one remarkable year for me personally and for our magazine. What we had hoped would be the result of our efforts has paid off multiple times.

When we first talked about doing this U.S. Tour, we hoped that we could, first of all, observe and report on the condition of stock car racing in this country. If we could do that successfully, then, maybe, we might have enough significant information to begin to draw conclusions such as where we’ve been, where we are now, and where we need to go to grow this sport.

Every good business person will tell you that you need to be ahead of the curve as to trends and the direction each type of business needs to steer toward. And let’s face it, above all of the excitement and competition, racing is a serious business.

The tracks we race at are businesses, the parts we buy come from businesses, and indeed this very magazine is a business-and all of the parts and pieces of racing related to business must not only survive, but prosper. And to do that we need a plan. CT won’t necessarily develop that plan, but we hope to provide enough information gained from this Tour for others to use to develop their own business plans.

The following are some interesting observations we made on the 2010 portion of a Tour that will eventually encompass the entire country.

Class Structure
One of the first things we came across was the combining of classes that were already similar in rules. When you have Late Model and Limited Late Model classes that are losing numbers, you can combine those classes, and then numbers will be equal or exceed previous sizes for either class.

It’s fairly easy to do, just equalize the multiple classes with different engine combinations by using weight penalties for the cars with higher horsepower engines, or if you’re a positive thinker, weight breaks for the less powered cars. This happened in the F.A.S.T. series here in Florida and it’s a method used at numerous tracks we visited including Old Dominion Speedway on asphalt and Crossville Speedway on dirt.

We witnessed a Crate Late Model beat out two high-dollar Super Late Model cars at Crossville and a driver at Old Dominion who races with an open trailer and running what was previously a Limited Late Model win the track championship. This stuff works.

We saw more “compact” foreign-which really aren’t foreign-made anymore, only foreign-owned companies-cars used for the stock divisions on both dirt and asphalt. Some teams switched from asphalt to dirt with the same cars.

IMCA-style Modified racing is still strong across the South with a race at The Dirt Track at Texas Motor Speedway attracting more than 200 Modifieds for a special show there held twice a year. And Bowman Gray Stadium hosted a Northeast-style Modified class that filled the stands with more than 17,000 screaming fans.

Another trend that we saw more than once was the inclusion of scale-sized race car classes such as Legends cars, Bandoleros, Mini-Cup, and Allison Legacy cars racing on 3/8- to 1/2-mile tracks, dirt and asphalt. In past years, these classes were not considered feature worthy, but not anymore.

The tracks need more back gate and allowing the scale-sized cars to run does increase the back gate, but at the expense of a good show some wondered? Not at all. In fact, some of the best racing we’ve seen this year happened at Old Dominion in a Mini-Cup race where on the final lap the leader’s engine stumbled, there was a mad dash for the lead among several cars and the previous leader ended up rolling down the front straight.

The driver emerged unhurt and smiling and waving to the crowd, which was giving him a standing ovation and cheering. It was the best race of the evening. So, who can argue when fans thoroughly enjoy the show? Not me.

Racetrack Promotion
One of the things we observed was the management of each track and how well the owners and/or promoters organized the events. What were the fans’ and race teams’ satisfaction levels and did the venue appear to be successful? Because we were traveling in the Southeast on the first leg of our tour, we were able to hit several “first race of the season” events.

We were amazed at the large crowd that came out for the first race at Southside Speedway in Richmond, Virginia. The stands were almost filled. We asked the owners, who happened to be sisters, what they did to attract such a large group and they couldn’t come up with anything special they had done.

We did observe that the announcer was a local DJ who did a magnificent job of promotion and kept the crowd entertained throughout the event. He announced our attendance more than 25 times-excessive or not, it was appreciated. Later on, we thought that maybe during the DJ’s regular radio show, because he was being paid for the racetrack event as a side job, he promoted the races for free on the air and that may have contributed to the high attendance.

We saw where some tracks were kept nicely with the landscaping, track facilities, and overall look and feel, and some where, frankly, run down. You each know who you are, no need to name names here.

One very important factor was the attention to the younger fans and their entertainment. Lanier was our first out-of-state stop and the race coincided with Easter. This track did as good a job as we’ve seen with entertaining the kids. It had a special “school” bus that drove the kids around the track and all over the outside of the track.

It was equipped with flashing emergency lights and a siren and ahhooga horn. The kids had a blast. And it was a way to keep them occupied while the track workers hid Easter eggs near the grandstands in preparation for a huge Easter egg hunt later on that evening.

There was also a small Quarter Midget track located on the property at Lanier and that same Saturday the younger racers were having their own races. When a track takes care of the kids, the parents want to come back often. Where else can you go and be entertained and have the kids ask to go back?

This scenario reminds me of the post WWII era when drive-in movies were popular. Mom and Dad could go take in a movie and the kids had playgrounds to go to and be entertained. It worked for all and those tracks that care about the entire family are definitely more successful from our observations.

Large Events
Our overall goal for the Tour was to visit the average racetracks across the region, but we also attended a few larger shows such as the World 100 at Eldora Speedway, the Topless 100 at Batesville Speedway, the USAR Pro Cup event at Hickory Motor Speedway, the USAC Sprint Cars at Salem Speedway, and the U.S. National Dirt Track Championships at The Dirt Track at Texas Motor Speedway.

The best-run show by far was the Eldora event, but then this race has been around for some 40 years now. You’d think they would get it right, right? And they did. The whole track is being modernized and made more fan friendly than ever with the help of the new owners, Tony Stewart and company.

We were provided with a prime location for our motorhome and the crowd was fantastic and controlled. Speaking of controlled, almost every major event we attended had law enforcement present to provide security if needed and 95 percent of the smaller weekly events had the same.

One large event, and we spoke of this in our monthly review this past year, didn’t and there was trouble. We want to stress that at any public event with a large attendance, there needs to be security that has law enforcement capability.

Bowman Gray was a weekly event that was in itself a large event due to the huge number of attendees. It had a sufficient number of law enforcement personnel on hand and everything went smooth as glass. The promoter at Bowman Gray did an excellent job of keeping the events on schedule throughout the night and that allowed the crowd to get home at a decent hour. That is important to parents who need to get the kids to bed at a decent hour.

Technical Observations
As the Tour went along, I couldn’t help but notice some of the more technical aspects of the racing we were witnessing. After all, I am the Tech Editor for the magazine. The evolution of the setups for dirt and asphalt continues and gets interesting.

First off, at Lanier, I saw a BBSS setup car take off like a rocket ship and put a half-lap on the field in 20 laps. It was a 100-lap race and by lap 50 or so, a car that started around fifth had move into second and then overtook this early leader to go on to win.

I’m an astute observer of setups and I can tell you that the car that won was running a more conventional setup. It rolled, it rode higher, and it was very consistent-never slipping once in the entire race, whereas several other cars lost their handling balance at some point.

We saw a young racer, who told me he reads CT religiously and races on a limited budget, win at Old Dominion in much the same fashion, coming on later in the race. This driver, running his Limited Late Model against full Late Model cars, also won the track championship.

On dirt, most of the top cars in each Super Late Model event ran with all four tires on the ground. There was less sideways attitude with the cars of the front runners and at Crossville as we stated, a Crate Late Model beat two full-on built-motor cars with a straight ahead driving style and a smooth, error free run.

Later on we would witness a man named Billy Moyer drive in much the same fashion to a $5,000 win at Paducah International Raceway. You can call it saving tires, or making fewer mistakes, or whatever, but running with less of your tail hanging out is good for the win column.

Most of your top drivers in the touring Dirt Late Models have adopted this style of driving. What confused me was seeing some strange shock setups on these cars. The experimenters were largely lost. There is some success with tie-down right front shocks, but the successful teams limit the extent of the rebound rate. Too much of a “good thing” ends up being a bad thing.

The double spring setups have made their way back into this arena and have their place as long as the transition is timed correctly. This is where you run down the straight and enter the corner on a softer combination of two stacked springs at the right front and sometimes the left rear.

Then as the suspension compresses up front, the shock hits a stop where the upper and softer spring is removed from the situation and the car is now running on the lower and stiffer spring as it moves through the middle of the turn. Then as the car exits, it’s back to the double spring on the right front and onto the stiffer spring at the left rear as that corner compresses.

The bars on a four-bar car must be set so that the left rear will compress on exit or the double spring setup on that corner won’t work. But all in all, I think experimentation is good as long as the team doesn’t get too far away from reality. It’s what makes racing so interesting.

Conclusion
Looking back on this whole experience leaves me with a feeling that we are indeed on to something with this whole tour thing. It started out as a somewhat hefty goal to be able to cover so many races and so much territory in this first year, but we did it. We hope you learned something as we learned. There is much more to do for the second year of the AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour as we visit the Northeast.

That’s a very rich racing region unlike any other in this country. The traditions and history are felt across the land. Think of how many racers from that part of the country have become part of the huge NASCAR nation as drivers, crew chiefs, mechanics, and so on.

I can’t wait to study the ways of our northern friends who as track owners, promoters, race teams, and loyal fans may well show us a thing or two about short track racing. We hope you follow along. We’re in the process of putting together a plan of attack and a list of racetracks we’ll be visiting. If you have any suggestions or comments, please forward them to me or to Editor Rob.

The post The AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

New Safety Products – Racing Safety Equipment

$
0
0

For the new season of racing, we wanted to remind all of our racers of the importance of safety. As you prepare for battle this year, please don’t forget to spend a few minutes thinking about all of the areas of safety connected with your racing.

Check each piece of equipment for age, wear, and effectiveness. That old kart suit that worked so well for your Quarter Midget racing won’t help you if your Street Stock catches fire. Most of the kart and Quarter Midget equipment might not be fire rated because of the reduced risk of fire in those race cars.
Inspect seatbelts for wear and chafing. If you had a few encounters with other cars or the walls at your speedway last year, your helmet might be damaged to the point that it needs to be inspected and possibly rebuilt. If you ran hot last year, then maybe a cool helmet is in your future.

We always stress the importance of using a quality head-and-neck restraint system and we continue to push for all racers, regardless of the class, to invest in one of these. You won’t need it until you need it, and then if you don’t have one on, it’s too late. Suck it up and shell out the bucks.

If you’re the owner and/or major sponsor of a race team, ask if the team has thoroughly planned out its safety situation. In the unfortunate event that an accident happens, bad results reflect on all those associated with the team including the sponsors.

For you track owners and sanctions, if you haven’t required proper safety equipment in the past, it’s time to rethink your rules for 2011 and with all of the cost saving mandates issued over the past few years, the teams should have plenty of money to go out and buy the proper safety equipment. We just know that was your intent all along, right?

Here are a few companies which offer quality safety products that would like to present some of their latest offerings. The descriptions are provided by the manufacturer.

Bell
The Snell SA2010-rated BR.1 from Bell is the first model in the industry that can be used as a traditional helmet, side forced-air or top forced-air helmet. By utilizing an innovative kit system, racers can now customize the BR.1 to adapt to their individual needs, different seat configurations, and other forms of racing throughout their career.

The BR.1 features a lightweight composite shell, leading-edge styling, aero front lip, and a large eyeport. The standard BR.1 is sold in the rear vent configuration featuring a venturi air exchange system. As air flows over the helmet, the venturi effect increases cooling inside the helmet and prevents the shield from fogging by creating a vacuum that pulls airflow through the helmet.

The BR.1’s rear-facing chin-bar vents and top vent provide ventilation while preventing dirt and dust from entering the helmet. These features make the BR.1 an outstanding choice for racers competing on dirt.

Thanks to the helmet’s versatility, racers no longer have to choose between a side forced-air or top forced-air model. By using the optional kit system, racers can easily switch the BR.1 to the desired forced-air configuration for their type of racing. Installing either the side (left) forced-air or top forced-air kit, the BR.1 becomes a full ventilation forced-air helmet.

The BR.1 incorporates Bell’s air chamber technology to increase pressure and accelerate airflow (when used with an external forced-air system) to maximize airflow for improved ventilation and comfort. Bell’s 2011 forced-air helmet features the Quick Lock forced-air nozzle that locks the forced-air connector in place yet allows for easy release when it’s time to exit the vehicle.

The smaller nozzle design helps accelerate airflow into the helmet. The Quick Lock nozzle can be used with traditional 1.5-inch diameter forced-air hoses by using the air adaptor kits that connect the hose with the Bell Quick Lock nozzle. In addition, customers have the option of using a top or side forced-air kit using the traditional round or standard barb nozzle.

Crow
Crow Enterprizes offers a full line of safety gear and tie-downs for your type of racing. Driver restraints are available for Off Road, Quarter Midget, Drag Racing, Sprint Car, Formula, and Stock Cars.

A new item that is available from Crow for harness applications is the Dog Bone tapered design for the shoulder belts. The harness tapers from 3 inches to 2 inches, and then back to 3 inches to accommodate head-and-neck restraint systems.

When ordering your belts, just add $12 and an “H” to the part number to add the Dog Bone harness to any restraint system.

DefNder
For many racers, head-and-neck restraints have two big drawbacks: they tend to be pricey and they are cumbersome to wear. Well, the new defNder team-issue head-and-neck device addresses the issues of price and fit and still provides great protection.

While it may look similar to other HNR devices on the market, defNder’s unique design incorporates flexible formfit belts and a stabilizer bar chassis design that offers drivers unparalleled comfort. The design of the system allows you to put it on straight over your head, just as you would your helmet, and gives you complete freedom of mobility by allowing you to turn your head to the left and right.

The device has easily achieved the SFI-38.1 certification for HNRs in testing. The defNder’s figures were very consistent in both frontal and 30-degree tests, a testament to the significant amount of emphasis defNder’s design team placed on side-impact protection.

The defNder is constructed from high-performance injection composites, and features the highest grade hardware and technically advanced nylon in the Motion-Max tether system, the heart of the side impact protection. Motion-Max incorporates something the manufacturer calls VST geometry which acts as a stabilizer in side-impact scenarios. This is also the same system that allows you the freedom of turning your head left to right.

A big plus in the design of the defNder are the harness flares which locate your safety belts and keep the device from sliding around. You can easily exit your vehicle in an emergency situation.

Everything you need to set up your defNder, including the helmet anchors, is included in the MSRP of $549.99 (excluding tax and shipping). It comes with a simple-to-follow instruction/owner’s manual, a baseball cap, decals for your race car, and is all contained in environmentally friendly packaging.

G-Force
G-Force Racing Gear offers a complete line of racing belts in Latch & Link, or camlock design that are sold in five-point or six-point configurations. They offer dual ratings for both SFI-16.1 and FIA. All belts are sold by G-Force Racing Gear Dealers starting at $149.99.

Features include pull-down lap and shoulder adjustment. Belts come with bolt-in hardware, but can be used as wrap-around or used with optional snap-in hardware.

G-Force Racing is also proud to offer a re-webbing program for both the Latch & Link and the camlock-designed systems. When you send back your outdated G-Force Racing Gear harness set, all hardware is thoroughly checked for wear and replaced if necessary. Then all webbing is removed, discarded, and replaced with brand-new G-Force Racing Gear webbing. All appropriate FIA and SFI labels are attached and the rebuilt belt system will be shipped directly to you. This program takes two to three weeks and costs $54.99 plus shipping for the Latch & Link, and $109.99 plus shipping for the camlock system.

RaceQuip
The RaceQuip SA2010 Full Face helmet is an all new design that incorporates prepreg construction based on steel tooling. In this process, the optimum ratio of resin is impregnated into the composite fabric (a combination of carbon fiber, Kevlar, and FRP) prior to molding.

Next, the prepreg is forced into the steel mold using vacuum pressure, then oven cured to precise thermal specifications. This manufacturing technique eliminates excess resin weight and ensures uniform shell thickness while leaving the outer surface smooth and blemish free. The shell is then mated to an expanded polystyrene (EPS) liner to create a modern lightweight helmet design.

The RaceQuip Snell SA2010 Full Face helmet is loaded with many features you would expect to find in a helmet costing much more. These features include a lightweight composite shell, aluminum pivot kit with an adjustable friction lock, plus a silicone shield gasket to keep out dirt and dust.

Dirt racers will especially like the fact that all the vent holes have been removed from the front of the helmet. A wide eyeport provides great peripheral vision and allows for the use of personal eyewear. The distortion-free, low-fog polycarbonate faceshield is a full 3 mm thick and comes with eight positions and hand ratcheting tear-off posts.

Of course, the SA spec means that both the helmet’s paint and interior are fire retardant so it’s suitable for use in the highest forms of auto racing competition. The helmet incorporates a Kevlar chin strap for strength, a comfort-fit blended Nomex interior for great feel, and pre-drilled holes for easier installation of head-and-neck restraint anchors.

Wrap all these features in a lightweight aero design composite shell for just $249, and the result is the outstanding value delivered by RaceQuip.

Simpson
The Simpson Air Inforcer Shark helmet has all new styling with attitude according to the company. The Snell SA2010-rated helmet’s design features a stylish top cap designed for better pipe placement and a low profile for multiple roof/driver height, a newly designed shield pivot system, and a newly designed shield latch that opens with ease.

The recessed eye port offers a 100-percent shield seal. This helmet is designed to be head-and-neck restraint compatible, and radio communications are available. The unit is shipped complete with two 3mm shields (clear and smoke) and includes a helmet bag. Best of all it’s made in the USA.

However for its 2011 offerings, Simpson didn’t stop just at the helmet. With its recent acquisition of Safety Solutions, its new Hybrid Pro is the next generation in head restraints. It offers excellent protection combined with the security of a hybrid design. With its patent-pending triangulated tether design and patented seatbelt anchoring system, this is truly a multiple-angle, multiple-impact device that is undetectable in the seat system for unbelievable comfort. And it’s SFI-38.1–certified. This is the smallest carbon shape on the market, has a low top, and provides an easier exit from the vehicle.

The Hyrid Pro is easy to use and goes on like a backpack. It has a simple chest buckle and straps that hook to the seatbelts stabilizing the device in angular and side impacts. With it strapped to you, it works with you as opposed to against you.

Also new for 2011 is Simpson’s Hybrid Fire Suit, an SFI-5–rated, multi-layer fire resistant suit that is all new and will be available around the time you read this. It has contrasting premium V-Quilting and trim with dimension and style. The 360-degree arm gussets allow more freedom of movement of the arms. The suit comes with straight cuffs and the colors are black/white, yellow/black, blue/white, and red/white.

The Simpson Hybrid suit is a multi-layer standard suit that exhibits unmatched breathability in a lightweight and comfortable design and is constructed of Simpson’s newest Satin Fire Resistant fabric which exhibits a semi-shiny finish and a smooth even drape.

Conclusion
These are just a few of the many great safety products available to you this season. As I said earlier, please don’t forget to spend a few minutes thinking about all of the areas of safety connected with your racing. It’ll be better for all of us.

The post New Safety Products – Racing Safety Equipment appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Racing Shocks – Extreme Shock Technology

$
0
0

Most of us are aware of the newer setups being run in both asphalt and dirt racing these days. Many of us are experimenting with trying variations of softer front springs combined with either coil-bind or running on bump rubbers for both types of racing. Interest is high as to how to accomplish those setups correctly.

What is happening on a large scale is that racers are guessing on spring rates, shock settings, and so on and getting way off on the balance of the cars and the performance suffers. But, we do know that some racers are getting it right and making it work.

So, we had a little discussion with Jason Enders, one of the founders of RE Suspensions in Mooresville, North Carolina. It supplies shocks, springs, and other components to almost all stock car racing classes and works with road racing teams too. RE’s level of knowledge is up there as to staying on top of current trends and making them work on the track.

We divided this discussion into two segments, first asphalt racing and then dirt racing. Each is different in the goals and approaches we use. There are some similarities, but the information is best divided. Most of the information you will read here is a result of explanations Jason provided. The plus in all of this is that I totally agree with the information provided, as do many professionals who are winning races with this knowledge.

The discussion centers on the use of bump rubbers. It’s generally understood and accepted that coil-bind reduces the suspension to a solid state whereby the tires provide the only “spring rate.” This isn’t acceptable to the author or Jason and not the most efficient way to set up a race car.

Asphalt
For the purpose of this section we’ll refer to asphalt setups used for the straight-rail cars. There are some differences between this class and other asphalt racing classes, but those differences are mostly spring rates and the resulting shock design to go along with those rates.

The BBSS setups require that we run on either coil-bind or bumpstops on one or both front corners of the car. Please choose bumpstops or rubbers. When deciding on which corner to do this, we need to think out the process. The whole intent of the BBSS setups is to attain a low and more level profile of the front of the car. Most racers interpret this to mean getting the left front down to make the front more level and parallel to the track.

That is a good goal, but can be taken too far. If taken to extremes, the balance of the setup can be disturbed and the car won’t handle or be fast. Most successful application of BBSS setups incorporate getting the left front down.

There is a term that has been around since the late ’90s and originated in Cup racing in setups for Daytona and Talladega. It’s “tie-down” shocks. Many of us professional engineers reacted harshly to that term insisting that you can’t tie down any corner of the car since we can’t bolt the tire to the track.

So, I will still use the term tie-down, but the meaning will be related to higher rebound settings in the shocks, which will produce a slow rebound movement to restrict rebound of the suspension to hold the spring in compression longer. There is a logical reason why we need to do this that will be explained.

Getting the car down on bumpstops at the left front is, in actuality, causing a change in spring rate. You might be running a 150-lb/in spring in that corner and mechanical downforce causes movement that takes the shock down onto a bump rubber that has a rate of 1,000 lb/in to 1,500 lb/in.

The trick is to match the movement or ride of the shock so that you will be operating in that range and not higher. If you move too hard onto the bump rubber, the rate could well increase to upwards of 2,500 lb/in on to infinity.

This is just the mistake most racers make. By running a right rear spring rate that is too high, you force more load onto the left front suspension and cause the bump rubber to compress to very high levels of spring rate.

Jason states, “Too many racers are overly concerned with how the car looks.” The front end doesn’t have to be perfectly level to the track and the valance doesn’t have to scrape the asphalt in order for everything to work correctly.

A solid suspension doesn’t promote
continued and high levels of adhesion. Loss of grip at any corner will cause loss of performance. When the suspension goes solid, the tire spring rate will need to control irregularities in the track. Most asphalt racing tires have a spring rate of upwards of 2,500 lb/in.

What is encouraged is a setup where you use as much rebound in the shocks as is needed, and no more. Jason stressed this in our conversation. I’ve seen some shock graphs where the rebound was unusually high and that concerned me. But now, knowing more about the process and the spring rates that are associated with bump rubbers, I’ve concluded the rebound rate must control the spring rate.

If the bump rubber rate is 1,500 lb/in, then the shock must control that rate. If the rebound rate is not high enough, then that corner of the car won’t stay on the bump rubber and the setup won’t be consistent.

Sure, the rebound rates I’ve seen appear high in relation to more conventional setups, but we’re not comparing apples to apples when we compare shock rates. That is why going from conventional setups to the BBSS setups requires much different shock designs. Organizations like RE Suspensions can be utilized to get the correct shocks for your application. The above illustrations tell why.

The key to reliable setups that are fast and consistent is in the combination of spring rates, bump rubber rates, and shock design to produce a balanced setup. This is the same balance we have talked about for many years now. It’s the same process with a different approach.

Dirt Racing
The trend in Dirt Late Model racing has been to force the front ends lower with softer springs and then to a higher-rate spring to control the roughness of the track. This is a tall order but it can be
accomplished.

A dirt car can’t run on bumpstops for 99 percent of the tracks it runs on. Sure, there are times when a track goes black and remains very smooth, but we can’t rely on things being that way very often. So, what will work to accomplish the above stated goals?

Double, dual, or stacked springs were introduced to me back in March 1998. Kelly Falls and Dewayne Ragland put together a plan to use stacked springs to soften the ride at one ride height and then cause a much stiffer rate at lower ride heights. Many combinations of stacked springs were tried on different corners of Dirt Late Model cars with varying success.

Until recently, honestly, it was
hit or miss and I think the missing ingredient was in designing shocks that could work with that system to produce the desired results. Jason and I talked about this setup phenomenon and how racers can make stacked springs work.

If you read the asphalt section leading to this dirt section, you will understand the goals of going from soft to stiff spring rates. The goal is similar with dirt setups except that the corner in which we need to transition is the right front, not the left front as in asphalt racing.

The successful use of stacked springs at the right front on Dirt Late Model cars is becoming more and more popular. The result is an attitude that is lower to the track and a spring rate that handles the forces of rough dirt tracks.

The shock is fitted with a stiffer top spring and softer bottom spring. The softer combination of the top and bottom springs allows the car to reduce its ride height using the same mechanical downforce we talked about in the asphalt section.

The movement of the shock causes the bottom support ring of the top spring to contact a locking ring located on the shock body. Then only the stiffer top spring rate comes into play. Now the car is lower and on a sufficient spring rate.

This higher, single spring rate is usually about what is recommended for single spring setups, but arrived at utilizing a much lower ride height. So, the setup hasn’t changed, only the attitude of the car.

A lower attitude accomplishes several things. It improves visibility for the driver, a benefit not unnoticed by many top drivers. It’s hard to see where the groove is located when the front end is above the sight line.

A lower attitude also improves aero downforce to produce more front loading. More grip up front helps the car turn which allows more rear grip to be dialed in for bite off the corners. Most of the gains come without any negative complications.

What racers need to understand is that other settings need to be adjusted to match the new ride height of these setups. If the overall position of the right front, and to some extent the left front, is lower, then the cambers will change more dramatically. Initial camber settings will need to change to compensate for increased camber gain at the RF and camber loss at the LF.

If you always ran 4-5 degrees of negative camber in the RF, you might now need to run less, up to 3 or 4 degrees less. The camber gain (more negative camber) will increase as the travel increases while maintaining the same relative roll angle.

Again, the use of higher spring rates through the turns requires the redesign of the shocks so that you can control those rates. Higher spring rates require a higher rebound rate. That is simply the way shocks are supposed to work. You provide just enough control to keep the spring movement under control and no more.

As with the asphalt setups, excess use of rebound in the shocks won’t improve performance and may well cause loss of performance. Tune your shock rates to the spring rates the car is experiencing in the turns.

Testing
One thing Jason impressed upon me, and something I’ve always agreed on, is that shocks are the last tuning tool as far as setup is concerned. He stressed that teams must get their basic setup correct and all of the other settings such as cambers, moment centers, Ackermann, and so on straightened out before starting to work with shock settings.

When he agrees to attend a test with a team, he always shows up in the afternoon, after the team has sorted out all of the various “problems” usually associated with arrival at the track and the start of a test. That way, he can concentrate on the shock changes and their affect on a car that is sorted out for the most part.

He’ll never allow a team to believe that shocks are the primary setup parameter, but instead a very important tuning tool to use once the basic balance and geometry issues have been taken care of. Then, and only then, can the shock expert help the car.

Conclusion
Be it asphalt or dirt setups, things have definitely changed over the past few years. Making sense of the new setups helps teams choose the correct components and settings. Low attitudes help with several long-established performance enhancing concepts.

Low causes a lower center of gravity and along with that, less load transfer. Low allows better aero efficiency and downforce which translates into more grip. And in the dirt cars, low provides a better view of the racetrack.

If you decide to try any of the new softer spring setups, or you’re in the process of trying to figure this out, I recommend you consult with experts such as Jason who have had a lot of experience working with these types of setup. The savings in time and money can be substantial, not to mention the value of success. How do they say it in the commercials? Priceless.

The post Racing Shocks – Extreme Shock Technology appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Leaf Spring Rear Suspension – Leaf Spring Tech

$
0
0

I ’ve had many requests for information about the leaf spring rear suspensions. These types of springs are popular in Dirt Modified cars and earlier stock divisions. We collected information from several sources in 2005 and published an article. The following is basically a reprint, with some refinements, of that original piece.

The leaf spring suspension is the oldest suspension used for mobile devices with wheels. The leaf spring system was used most recently in 1970s production cars, some of which are still in service today as race cars. Many racers even prefer to utilize the leaf spring rear suspension design in their fabricated Late Model stock and Modified race cars.

There is a science and methodology to the use of leaf springs in stock cars, for both dirt and asphalt. The construction of the car may well depend on the particular type of leaf spring to be used and where it will be raced. Making installation mistakes can reduce performance.

Four Basic Designs
There are four basic designs of leaf spring that are used in stock car racing. They are:

1. The Mono-Leaf Spring: The mono-leaf spring is usually characterized by being a low rate, thinner spring that serves to locate the rearend fore to aft and laterally. It basically replaces the trailing arms and the Panhard bar used in three- and four-link systems. It offers little spring rate to hold the car up nor much stiffness to bending to help control axle wrap-up. The design of the car must include additional springs to support the car plus a third link or lift bar system for controlling accelerating forces that will try to rotate the rearend.

2. Multi-Leaf Springs: Multi-leaf springs are just as described, made up of multiple leaves of varying length. These tend to be increasing rate springs in bump and decreasing rate in rebound and are useful for supporting the car as well as controlling axle wrap-up.

3. Parabolic Leaf Springs: Parabolic leaf springs can be a single-leaf or multi-leaf design whereas the leaves are thicker near the axle and have a tapered thickness design out to the eyes. These too support the weight of the car without the need for extra springs and do a fair job of controlling axle rotation under acceleration and braking. They can provide a much smoother ride due to the fact that the leaves don’t develop the friction associated with standard multi-leaf designs.

4. Composite Leaf Springs: Composite leaf springs are a fairly new product in racing that have been further refined recently. They’re made of fiberglass instead of steel. The mounting portions are composed of steel that is bolted to the fiberglass leaf. These leaves come in various rates and, with the lower rates, may need additional coil springs to support the weight of the car.

Advantages to Using Leaf Springs
From the information we have gathered from several excellent sources, leaf spring suspensions are very forgiving on tacky and rough dirt surfaces. The leaf cars seem to be a lot more consistent under those conditions.

The leaf serves several functions that other suspension systems might need additional hardware to serve. The leaf does the following:

1. Supports some or all of the chassis weight
2. Controls chassis roll more efficiently by utilizing a higher rear moment center and a wide spring base
3. Controls rearend wrap-up when not mounted with birdcage-type mounts
4. Controls axle dampening
5. Controls lateral forces much the same way a Panhard bar does, but with very little lateral movement
6. Controls braking forces when not mounted with birdcage-style mounts
7. Better at maintaining wheelbase lengths (reduced rear steer) under acceleration and braking

The reason why the leaf spring design is so good for higher g-force conditions is because the design has a very wide spring base. The wider the springs are mounted apart, the less roll tendencies there are. Also, the moment center height can be fairly high with a leaf spring design. This shortens the moment arm in the rear and that also produces less roll.

As the g-forces increase with a tighter track, the rear roll increases at a higher rate than the front. It’s important to control this increase in roll rate in order to provide better balance in the setup and more overall grip.

There is much less rear steer when going over heavy bumps or holes in the track with the leaf design and so the rough conditions that upset a three- or four-bar car are welcomed by the leaf-spring car.

The overall cost of a race car is less when using leaf springs mostly because you don’t need many of the mounts, linkages, and other hardware that must be used with three- or four-link rear suspensions. And, maintenance is less not having to worry about rusting Heim joints or broken mounting bolts that are in constant, high stress, high shear conditions.

Also, a leaf spring can be used in conjunction with a coil or coilover spring to enhance the spring rate adjustability function for chassis setup balance. Teams will often put a high rate leaf spring on the left rear and a low rate mono-leaf spring on the right rear along with a coilover spring and shock. That way they can change the spring fairly easily on the RR to adjust for changing track conditions. The LR spring also controls most of the axle wrap-up and is about half as stiff in that regard as would be two stiff leaf springs.

Disadvantages of the Leaf Spring
There are pluses and minuses for every suspension system. The leaf spring system has a few disadvantages when compared to a three- or four-link system. Although the typical bar-link-type of system doesn’t handle tight, tacky, and rough dirt conditions as well, the money race is usually run once the track has become slick. So, at the end of the night under dry conditions, more times than not, the suspension that favors a slick track will win out.

The steel leaf springs may tend to lose shape and that means the car may loses ride height. If the “sag” is uneven between the two springs, it can alter the amount of bite, wedge or cross weight in the car which changes the handling. Some teams are said to go through three or more sets of springs per season. Spring sag also changes the rear steer characteristics of the car because the height of the front eye changes as the spring loses height and that changes the axle-to-mount angle.

There is very little, if any, adjustment for rear steer characteristics with a leaf spring system. Some builders will put several mounting holes at the front bracket and some only put one hole keeping with the theory that less adjustment means less rope to hang yourself with, setup wise.

To change rear steer, you would have to make height changes to the front mount and the same amount of change to the spring spacing between the axle tube and the spring to maintain the original ride height.

It might also be possible to have multiple height adjusting holes in the front mount as well as in the shackle. If the distance from the axle tube to the front mount and to the rear mount are different, then the hole spacing in the front and shackle must be different in order to maintain the original ride height with rear steer changes.

With the bar cars, the teams have a choice of adding lift bars, pull bars, push rods, front or rear spring mounting options, a wide range of rear steer adjustability, and variable moment center height adjustment. Available for the leaf spring cars is a mono-leaf floater that can be clamped or left open. This allows for a lift arm or pull bar to be added to the leaf system to control acceleration forces.

The rear moment center height is not easily adjustable on leaf-spring systems and the RR bite effect of angling the Panhard bar toward the RR tire contact patch can’t be done with the leaf spring system like it’s done with a four-bar system.

Leaf springs are not easy to install properly. The pinion angle is not easily adjustable and the mounting pad on the rear axle tube must either be repositioned to adjust for pinion angle or wedge-shaped blocks must be used between the spring and the housing pad. There is no adjustment for the amount of axle wrap-up dampening either. What the spring gives you is all that you get.

The use of rubber or other compliant material as bushings in the spring eyes will help cushion acceleration and braking forces, but overall, compared to the pull bar and lift bar systems used with the three- and four-link system, there isn’t much in the way of dampening or adjustment for what is there.

Proper Installation
During installation, we must be careful to make sure the leaf spring is not inadvertently bent or bound up when we bolt it into the car. Longitudinal twisting (looking forward or rearward) can add spring rate to the leaf.

If the spring pads on the rearend axle tubes are not parallel from a side view, then when we bolt the leaf springs up, the springs on each side will be bound in opposite directions. It’s best to bolt up one side and then check the other side to see if the pad is flat to the spring. If not, angled spacers must be used to relieve any bending tendencies.

The angle of the spring shackles to the leaf is important too. The shackle needs to be at 90 degrees to a line drawn from the center of the rear mounting bolt to the center of the axle when the car is at ride height. That way there will be less change in the spring rate due to mechanical binding that would take place if the shackle were angled more or less than 90 degrees.

The pinion angle is to be taken into consideration during installation. If the pinion angle needs to change, wedge shaped blocks must be inserted between the axle pad and the spring to change the angle of the pinion. Always check the pinion-to-driveshaft angle with all of the weight on the springs.

The spring eye height determines the rear moment center height. Lowering the spring in relation to the chassis means lowering the rear MC height and causing more rollover at the rear. This serves to tighten the car all of the way around the corners.

Changing the front eye height will affect the rear steer characteristics and alter the handling of the car in the middle and off the turns. Many chassis builders will only place one hole in the front mount and position it where it will do the most good under most racing conditions.

Steel vs. Composite
The newest innovation in racing leaf spring technology is the composite design, or what some would call a fiberglass leaf, although there are other materials involved in the construction of these products. Composite leaf springs are not a new concept. The Chevrolet Corvette has been using this design of spring for quite some time now.

The primary advantages of using a composite leaf spring are a 60-70 percent weight savings over steel springs and the tendency of the composite spring to maintain its shape (doesn’t sag—according to the advertisements and feedback we got from users). The composite leaves, just like the steel, come in various rates from 35 to 250 pounds. They can be used as a “single” leaf in low rates or as a “stack” leaf, still a mono-design but thicker like a stacked steel spring.

It’s the characteristic of maintaining a constant arc and shape that most appeals to current users of composite leaves, not necessarily the weight savings. The minus we discovered was that the composite must be protected from heat and contact with anything that would chip it, starting a process that might lead to failure. Failure with a composite leaf means breaking whereas a steel leaf will definitely bend, but seldom break.

Nonetheless, lovers of leaf-spring cars swear by their simplicity and consistency and that’s what makes them so attractive. For the hobbyist
racer who doesn’t have the time or patience to decipher all of the complexities of the three- or four-bar systems, much less afford all of that “mess,” the leaf car offers a good system for a reasonable price that can, and does, win races.

The post Leaf Spring Rear Suspension – Leaf Spring Tech appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Dirt Four-Link Suspension Tech

$
0
0

The parallel four-link rear suspension is common to Dirt Late Model, Dirt Modified stock cars, and Sprint Cars. The original purpose for using the four-link suspension was to have a suspension system that produced very little, even zero, rear steer as the chassis moved vertically. Racers, being true to their nature decided to experiment with various angles in the four-link and found that zero rear steer was not the most efficient under all circumstances.

Today, we have various schools of thought on where to position the links on a four-link system and many more theories on why. Let’s examine what happens with the various changes and look at the big picture to try to understand what is really happening to our cars. Even though the current trend among top Dirt Late Model racers is to minimize the steering characteristics of the rear suspension, there are times when even these teams must get radical.

Basic Four-Link Designs
We’ll be analyzing two basic designs of the four-link rear suspension, the “standard” four-link, that we’ll call a four-link, where both links are forward of the rearend axle tube, and the “Z” link where the top link is rearward and the bottom link is forward. Both of these designs can be positioned to produce near zero rear steer. The four-link design can be made to produce somewhat more rear steer than the Z-link.

One of the big differences between these systems is the effect of weight jacking and forced loading of the left rear tire with the four-link system. As we introduce more rear steer which moves the LR wheel forward, the angle of the bars is such that the wheel is forced down and in trying to lift the chassis, load is transferred onto the LR tire. This loading is desired by some in order to produce more bite under dry and slick conditions.

If you look at the way the car is situated when the rear is severely steered to the right, the LR tire is pointed more to the middle of the front tires and is driving from the middle of the car. Because of the added loading of this tire, most of the rear weight is on this tire. The RR tire is helping to locate the rear of the car, but does little to drive it off the corners.

Both of the suspension types are usually attached to a birdcage that isn’t locked to the rear axle tube and where the rearend is free to rotate. A separate structure is attached to the rearend to control rotational movement of the rearend upon acceleration and braking. This could be a “third” link or pull bar, similar to that used on a three-link suspension, a lift arm that runs forward and is attached well in front of the rearend or a combination of several systems.

If the link brackets were mounted solid to the rear axle tube, then as the car rolled in the turns, there would be a significant amount of binding going on because the birdcages would be moving different amounts and possibly in different directions. The suspension would be trying to twist the rearend as each axle tube would be rotated separately.

If we change the angles of the links so that one side of the car produces more fore/aft movement at the birdcage, we cause that end of the rearend to move in a direction that will cause the rear of the car to steer away from straight ahead. This is called rear steer and most of what is used for dirt racing is steering to the right.

Under some conditions, rear steer is less desirable, especially on hard and tight dirt tracks that act more like asphalt than dirt. Rear steer on dirt tracks that are slick is not only acceptable, but downright necessary under certain conditions.

Understanding Rear Steer
To even begin to understand how the car will rear steer and to what extent, we first need to completely understand the movement of the chassis and what causes this movement. The chassis mounting points of the four-link and Z-link will move vertically as the car transitions into and out of the turns and even down the straightaway and the amount of movement dictates the degree of rear steer.

As a chassis rolls in the turns, three basic things can be happening overall: 1) the left side of the chassis may move up and the right side may move down, 2) the right side may move down and the left side may stay near that static location, and 3) the left side may move up and the right side may remain unchanged. With the same set of suspension link locations at each side, a car may well produce very different rear steer characteristics from each of the three scenarios.

A four-link can be made to produce varying amounts of fore and aft movement of each end of the rear axle in either direction, depending on the combined angles of the links. If we start at a neutral setting for the links, meaning that for a certain range of movement up or down, the axle won’t move fore and aft, let’s see how we can produce axle movement.

If, on a four-link, we move the chassis mount for the bottom link up, then as the chassis moves up, the rear axle will move more forward. On the Z-link, we see the same effect for the bottom link. The opposite is true if the chassis moves down. For both systems, the axle would move to the rear. That is exactly why we need to know which way the chassis is moving at each side of the car under all conditions.

Knowledge of the extent and direction of shock travels will come in handy as we plan out our rear geometry. We can translate shock movement to suspension movement. Using either shock travel indicators or data acquisition will tell us what is really happening. I don’t see widespread use of electronic data gathering on dirt cars, so some mechanical device must be used to help us understand our true movements.

A direct influence on chassis movement in the turns is the J-bar or Panhard bar. If the bar is mounted more parallel to the ground, then it will have little influence on the vertical location of the chassis in the turns and the chassis will move similar to Examples 1 or 2. If there is a lot of angle in the bar with the left end higher than the right end (chassis mount to the left side as is most popular), then as the car turns left, the bar angle will have a jacking effect causing the left side of the bar to want to ride up over the right side of the bar as in Example 3. This movement would raise the entire rear of the car.

Under those conditions, if the car rolls, and we know it does, and the whole chassis rises up, as we too can visually see, then the right side links may well remain in their static locations producing near zero rear steer at that side. On the other side of the chassis, there will be a combined vertical movement of those links to where the lift associated with the bar angle will be combined with the roll lift so that they can produce a large amount of forward movement of the left rear wheel. This movement pulls that end of the axle forward and the rearend will steer to the right.

Upon acceleration off the corners, the rearend will be driven forward and if the forward ends of the links are higher than the rearends, there’s a further movement of the chassis to a higher level.

If we just look at the way the car steers, we might conclude that this isn’t a very good idea. On asphalt this would produce a very loose car that would be undriveable. But if we look at the whole picture, including the aerodynamics of the body, we start to see why our lap times may be lower by doing this on dirt, especially on a very dry slick racetrack.

Winged Sprint Cars will generally run at an angle to the direction they are moving through the turns. The tall sides on the wing catch a lot of air and will produce a lateral force that is the opposite of the centrifugal force that tries to take the car to the wall. Long story short, the aero force counteracts the lateral g-force and helps the car go faster through the turns, just like having more tire grip.

The combined effects that raise the whole rear of the car also put the rear spoiler higher into the wind stream and that can produce more aero downforce at the rear. This helps give us more traction to
provide better bite off the corners.

If the track has a lot of grip already, then we need much less rear steer and the associated aero help and so we make changes to our rear links so that less rear steer occurs. We may even benefit from creating opposite rear steer, to the left, to gain more rear traction, just like we do on asphalt. The operative word here is change. We must be willing to make changes and a more thorough understanding of what happens with each change will make it easier to do with better results.

What happens at many dirt tracks is that the track is wet and tacky as the day starts out. A car that is jacked up and rear steered to the max just won’t get through the mud as well as one that is more level with all four tires on the ground. We can position the links so that there is very little rear steer for these conditions.

As the track dries out and becomes more slick, we may need more rear steer and rear jacking to get the rear spoiler up into the airstream for more rear downforce and to drive the LR tire into the track. The rear steer has more effect on the angle of the body related to the direction that the car is traveling and an aero side force helps pull the car to the left to keep it from sliding. Putting more angle in the J-bar is warranted now.

Once we fully understand how link angle changes produce rear steer at each side, we can make helpful adjustments at the track as the conditions change. We need to plan out which changes to make and be able to do them fast with little effort. A setup sheet that shows which holes to mount the links to for each set of conditions would help the crew make fast changes. If you don’t want your crew to know why you’re doing things (secrecy is an asset at times), then just number the different sheets and tell them to set the car to “Sheet 3,” period.

Because we need to adjust other parameters on the car for changing conditions, we can include spring rate changes, shock changes, and fifth- and sixth-coil changes as well when we make up the setup sheets. Once we develop our setup sheets, as we race the car, we can tweak the numbers according to the results. The process of dialing in the car to the conditions using our setup sheets may take a few races, but at least we’ll have a plan that takes us in a positive direction.

The post Dirt Four-Link Suspension Tech appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

The AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour

$
0
0

As of this writing, in about three weeks we will embark on the second phase of our four-year-long U.S. tour of racetracks. This year we’ll be visiting a number of venues in the Northeastern United States and, because of the distribution of states involved in our four-year plan, we’ll be including Ohio which is, in reality, a Midwest state.

Where To?
As was the plan last year, we will divide the 2011 Tour into two parts, the first covering tracks in Maryland, Ohio, and all of Pennsylvania and a race in New Jersey. In the second half we’ll be moving up the East Coast through New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and into Maine.

We’ll be hauling a lighter load this year as we’ll leave the 28-foot trailer behind. In going over last year’s travels, it seems that the one thorn in our sides, continually, was that trailer. It carried our Jeep Wrangler and some promotional material. This year, the Jeep will be towed behind the motor home and we’ll store the material under the bus.

As far as our plan of attack and what we will be focusing on this year, it’ll be basically the same as last year, just new turf. It’s a fact that regions of racing have their own special trends and ways of doing things. It’s our intent to monitor, record, observe, analyze, and report on the class structures, how the promoters promote, car counts, and generally test the health of oval track racing in the Northeast region.

Unexpected Results
We never knew when we planned out our four-year tour of the country what we could, or should, accomplish. One of the surprises that came after our last installment was an email and call from the promoters of West Virginia Motor Speedway.

It seems they read my input on racetrack design and how some tracks were too fast and long and the racing ended up single file with no possibility for passing. I spoke with Lynn Chapman who helps manage WVMS and he told me they were planning on redesigning their track for much the same reasons.

He wanted my input on the new design and because of the importance of that input, I decided to consult with several others in the sport who were experienced enough to have good ideas. I ended up talking first with Earl Pearson Jr., a multi-time national Dirt Late Model champion, then Scott Bloomquist—no intro required—at the PRI show, and also my friend Dewayne Ragland who is a field rep for Allstar Performance and someone who is right on top of everything happening in dirt track technology.

All three of these experts agreed on most of the items needed for a competitive track design. Scott spent a lot of time with me drawing out on my Day Timer page what he thought would be essential elements of the perfect dirt track. I took those comments along with the others and developed a sketch to present to Lynn.

So, the former 1/2-mile-plus length track is now going to be close to a 3⁄8-mile track with a special design for the shape of the inside of the track that should allow better passing both going into the turns and coming off the turns. It also will sport two different track banking angles, not too high, and no outer walls except along the grandstands.

The design of racetracks is just one of the issues we get into with this Tour. If we can observe and analyze various aspects related to good competition, and influence the sport in a positive way, then this whole U.S. Tour thing will have been a huge success. And that’s why we’re doing this and what we’re hoping for. Only time will tell.

Where We’ll Stay
In between weekends, we are staying at various RV parks in Ohio, Pennsylvania (east and west), New York, Vermont, and Connecticut. We experienced a few very nice parks on our 2010 Tour and that gave us some idea of what to look for this year.

We like wooded parks. We stayed in a small park in what was actually the middle of Edinburg, Virginia, but secluded and next to a nice flowing stream. It was a little tight getting in and out of, but well worth it. And we had easy access to most of the Shenandoah Valley and all of the forest surrounding it.

Because we “work” on Fridays and Saturdays at the tracks and spend most of Sunday moving back to our RV park, we obviously don’t have the time off like regular folks do. So we take some time during the week to explore. The advantage of that is you miss the weekend crowds in state parks and national forests. Hiking is nicer when you aren’t running into people every few minutes.

We’ve also become Full Timers in RV’ers lingo. That means you spend all of your time, for longer periods of time, in your RV. This is different than doing weekend or week-long trips. The RV becomes your home and all of your personal possessions are along for the ride. At the end, no matter how well it went and how many wonderful people you meet, it’s always good to get home. But until then, we’re ready to hit the road.

Conclusion
At any rate, we’re getting excited about our road trip now that it’s close; and if you’re racing at any of the tracks we’ll be visiting, come by the bus or look us up and say hi. If you want to discuss any topic concerning racing, RV’ing, or things to do in your area, we’re all ears. We look forward to meeting you.

3/25 Potomac Speedway, Mechanicsville, MD
3/26 Hagerstown Speedway, Hagerstown, MD
4/1 Attica Raceway Park, Attica, OH
4/8 Kil-Kare Speedway, Xenia, OH
4/9 Columbus Speedway, Columbus, OH
4/15 Motordrome Speedway, Smithton, PA
4/16 Sharon Speedway, Burgill, OH
4/23 Off Weekend – No Races
4/29 Lernerville Speedway, Sarver, PA
4/30 Mahoning Speedway, Lehighton, PA
5/7 New Egypt Speedway, New Egypt, NJ
5/11 West Virginia Motor Speedway Media Day, Mineral Wells, WV
5/13 Williams Grove Speedway, Mechanicsburg, PA
5/14 Susquehanna Speedway Park, York Haven, PA
8/5 Chemung Speedrome, Chemung, NY
8/6 Shangri-La Motor Speedway, Tioga Center, NY
8/13 Canadaigua Speedway, Canadaigua, NY
8/20 Oswego Speedway, Oswego, NY
8/27 Fonda Speedway, Schenectady, NY
9/2 Thunder Road Speedbowl, Barre, VT
9/3 Mohawk Int. Raceway, Hogansburg, NY
9/4 Devils Bowl Speedway, Fair Haven, VT
9/10 Riverside Speedway, Groveton, NH
9/16 Unity Raceway, Unity, ME
9/17 Beech Ridge Motor Speedway, Scarborough, ME
9/22 Thompson, Thompson, CT
9/23 Stafford Speedway, Stafford Springs, CT
9/24 Seekonk Speedway, Seekonk, MA
10/1 Waterford Speedway, Waterford, CT
10/5-9 New York State Fairgrounds, Syracuse, NY
Schedule Subject to Change

The post The AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour appeared first on Hot Rod Network.


Young Driver Development – Track Tech Q&A

$
0
0

In 15 short years, Trevor Bayne went from racing karts at the age of 5, to becoming by far the youngest winner of the Daytona 500. In doing so, he may well have launched another Jeff Gordon-style phenomenon whereby many youngsters would aspire to be where Trevor is and their parents would wish the same success on their children. It happened before, it can happen again.

I would be willing to bet that a majority of short track racers don’t follow Cup racing. That being said, all are aware of it and it’s the dream of many young drivers to become highly paid and recognized Cup drivers. Heck, we all aspire to be something when we grow up and many now realize this career path is not an impossible dream.

Some 15 years or so ago, another young driver’s rise to fame drove a multitude of youngsters and their families to pursue the dream of one day becoming a NASCAR “insert major sponsor du jour” Cup driver. Jeff Gordon worked his way into a top ride coming from much the same early start as 20-year-old Trevor.

Jeff had jumped into a Quarter Midget at age 5 and when he was 6 had won 35 main events and set five track records. In 1997, at the age of 25, Jeff won his first Daytona 500. Trevor also started racing at age 5 and coincidentally was born on February 19, 1991, just two days after the running of that year’s Daytona 500 race. The winner of that race, Ernie Irvan, also started his racing career in karts at age 9 in California.

Trevor first raced the karts for eight years taking home three World Championships, won more than 300 feature events and 18 State and Track Championships. At the ripe old age of 13, he moved on to racing 3/4-scale stock cars in the Allison Legacy Race Series. In 2005 he became the National Champion of that series.

His professional career began with a call from the folks at Dale Earnhardt, Inc. where he became a development driver going on to race in the NASCAR Camping World East Series. There he won his first race at Thompson International Speedway.

So, the progression was from karts, to Allison 3/4-scale stock cars, to the East Series, to Nationwide Series, to Cup cars. And, in only his second start in the top series, he won the most coveted race, one that Dale Sr. took many years and tears to win.

The minimum age for racing in the very fast Allison cars is 12. In my opinion, if a driver of any age has eight years of racing under his driving suit, and 300 wins, I would suggest he/she is ready to take on the stock cars—and a series like the one the Allisons started is ideal.

We feel that the rate of progression and the type of racing youngsters are involved in are important in both proper development and in the area of safety. A person under 12 isn’t developed enough in his/her bone structure and muscles to survive high impacts without injury, so say most experts. That’s a physiological fact that none of us can get around, like it or not.

We intend to present a series on how to bring up, or raise would be a better word, a race driver from a young age through several forms of motorsports and into larger stock cars. Trevor definitely was on a very good track and I applaud his parents for making him take his time. After experiencing so many wins in his career, he was both surprised and comfortable taking the checkered flag at Daytona.

There is a right way and somewhat of a wrong way to do the progression into racing stock cars. Maybe if we can make some suggestions and offer an outline that can be used as a guideline to help racing families chart the best course for their child, it may well enhance the experience while helping to keep our youngsters safer.

Smokey’s Chevelle and Open Road Racing
Great article on Smokey’s ’66 Chevelle in the Oct. ’10 issue. Of course, it’s a ’66 not a ’67 as the article title states. But it does state further in the article that it’s a ’66. I still have a ’66 Malibu that I bought new in 1966. It currently has a 383 and a Tremec five-speed. I think it’s time for a suspension and brake upgrade.

Although I’m not a circle track racer, Circle Track magazine is among the many automotive magazines that I receive because of the great tech content. There’s always something new to learn.

I’m involved in Open Road Racing (ORR). My ride is a ’65 Corvair (yes, Corvair) that I have “slightly modified.” I have made some aero improvements (chopped top, laid back windshield, air dam, rear spoiler, add-on front sheetmetal) to help the top end. I’ve used a Porsche 930 transaxle and the front and rear suspension, brakes, and steering parts are from a ’94 Vette.

The engine is a mid-mounted, all aluminum 404ci small-block Chevy. It also has a Dart block, Brodix heads, an Eagle forged rotating assembly, 12:1 compression, a Comp solid roller, an 850 Holley, a Victor Jr. manifold, fabricated headers from a Hedman kit, and an MSD ignition using a crank trigger.

The car has all of the required safety improvements for the ORR Unlimited class: a full ‘cage, a Kirkey seat, a Simpson five-point harness and a head-and-neck restraint, a Fuel Safe fuel cell, a fire suppression system, Michelin Pilot Sport PS2 tires, and so on. The car weighs 2,700 pounds and is pretty fast. I top out at more than 200 mph on the straights.

– Unsigned

I think our reference in the title was more to the year he raced the car rather than the year of the car itself. Most of the cars of that day were aged as to the year the frame was built as much as the body parts, but substitutions did take place. Anyway, if you noticed he didn’t run a stock frame, he built a special Smokey 1967 frame.

I have some knowledge of Open Road Racing and I think you guys are insane! For those of you who don’t know, it’s the sport of legally racing (as opposed to street racing) on public roads that have been closed for the event. These races are run over a measured course where in some classes, the speeds reach as fast as the car will go.

Most of the classes will try to hit a preset average speed over a measured course so that going too fast or too slow will not meet the goal. The winner is the one whose average speed matches the set goal for the class which could be from as low as 80 up to 150 mph.

In the upper classes, purpose-built race cars are used, and with a few modifications, a circle track car built and/or set up for road racing would do well. Most of these races are held in the Southwest portion of the country and involve curved roads with steep drop-offs. It’s not for the faint of heart, or those with a wife and kids maybe. It can get quite crazy going down a two-lane county road at 200-plus mph.

Discussion About Class Structure
In response to Bob Bolles’ editorial in the Apr. ’11 issue, I would challenge the theory of moving from the four-cylinder junkyard car into the multi-thousand-dollar Late Model. This would leave a chasm that low-dollar operations would never attempt to span. Many of those who try will fail and never return to racing.

The metric “Sportsman” platform has provided a bridge to allow teams to learn how to move up while they build their teams. It often ends up as a home for many.

The metric platform properly policed with a conservative set of rules is excellent for preparing a driver for the Late Model. Without dispute, the metric car is a handful to drive. Those who have crossed back and forth between higher end metric and Late Model racing will tell you, metric racing tutors driver talent by driving a race car that inherently doesn’t like to turn. This learned talent enhances their skills in the better handling Late Model.

The spec, clone, metric fab frame could keep this transition class of cars on the racetrack for years to come. Spec the DCA or Johnson frame and with everything else being the same, it won’t obsolete the current OEM metric cars.

If frame specs are metric clone and suspension component costs kept at the Sportsman level, this option is far more economical than the Late Model route. Compare “crash” parts costs between the two classes and the metric Sportsman looks good. Then compare restubbing the OEM metric to the fab metric and the season starts looking even better.

Tracks and series that allow the spec fab frame effectively enable teams upgrading to a new car to “recycle” their OEM frame car back into the system at a more affordable cost to others coming up. Sounds like a winner to me. Thanks for listening.

– Doug Strasburg
President/Owner Mid-American Stock Car Series celebrating 19 years

Doug,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I agree with you. I don’t think having a large cost gap in class structure is a good thing. My concern is that the cost of spec fab frame replacement parts will be equal to the cost of Late Model parts. I frankly don’t see how they could be much different.

If I were to fab build a lower control arm out of tubular steel, I would spend as much time on a Late Model lower arm as I’d spend on a metric fab frame lower control arm. So, the cost to the racer would necessarily be the same. This is true for spindles, and so on.

It’s the same comparison for the front clips. My hope is that there will be a difference with the metric fab parts being less expensive, but, only time will tell. For sure the engine and drivetrain for the metric fab cars are much more affordable than the Late Model, so overall the cost to race this class is more attractive to a race team with less cash flow.

Track Width Question
I’ve enjoyed your articles for years, and have read and re-read your chassis book many times. It always gets me thinking. In your book, the only reference I see to track width is a suggestion to have your right-side tires in line with each other. Does this also apply to a road race car?

In other words, are you recommending equal track widths front and rear? In some GT cars, slightly wider tires are run on the rear. Again, should track widths remain equal? In one of Carrol Smiths’ books, Tune To Win, he seems to recommend a wider front track, for less understeer.

My car was built many years ago with a rear track that’s about 2 inches wider than the front. I suspect it was done because the builder used a junkyard 9-inch Ford rearend with disc brakes from a Lincoln (about 65 inches rotor to rotor). The builder has passed so I can’t ask him!

I use this car on road courses and once in a while in a hill climb. The only easy way to widen the front track would be with wheel spacers or offsetting the wheels. I don’t think this is a good idea because the scrub radius is more than 2 inches now, due to the splindles he used. The car has never been very stable under heavy braking.

In your opinion, would I have a car that turned better if I ran a rear track width equal to or less than the front? If you’ve covered this in the magazine let me know and I’ll look for a back issue. Hope to hear from you soon.

– George Harrelson

George,
Track width differences do make some difference, although not as much as you might think. In the rear of a straight axle car, or one with the solid rear axle, the car rides on the top of the springs and doesn’t know how wide the track is.

There is a slight amount of unsprung component load transfer change due to the wider track in the rear, but not enough to really affect the handling. Because on circle tracks most of the load ends up on the right-side tires in the turns, it’s important for those tires to track inline. It’s less important where the left-side tires end up as far as alignment goes. So, track width is less important for circle track racing.

If you take that thinking to road racing, if the track widths are different, then for every turn, right or left, the outside tracks are not inline with the rear tire and end up either inside or outside the front tire. So, for that type of racing you might want equal track widths.

I would try to shorten the axle tubes if that’s possible rather than use different offset wheels at the front for the exact reason you stated, the center of the wheel ends up too far outside the scrub line. That does affect the driver’s feel when braking while the car is turning or driving over bumps such as curbs at the apex of the turns.

If your problem is a tight car that won’t turn well, try looking at the front moment center design. I’ve worked with a few road racing cars and we always design the front geometry first. If that’s not right, the car won’t turn well.

SBBS Comments
I really enjoyed the small bar big spring article. And I got the gist of it. But you guys left out what general range of shock valvings you were using with this setup. Thanks for the great magazine and articles.

– Jeff Partington

Jeff,
For shocks, we basically had what used to be referred to as 6s on the front and 4s on the rear. If you run adjustable shocks, you can tune from there. We usually run less rebound on the left rear to help entry. For hard entry tracks you might run a slightly stiffer shock on the right front or a 5 left front and 6 right front.

If you have comments or questions about this or anything racing related, send them to my email address: Bob.Bolles@sorc.com, or mail can be sent to Circle Track, Senior Tech Editor, 9036 Brittany Way, Tampa, FL 33619.

The post Young Driver Development – Track Tech Q&A appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Racing Suspension Setup – Complete Setup Guide, Part One

$
0
0

At this time of year I like to do a setup guide and that idea, combined with a number of requests and communications I have had with racers recently, formed this series. Much, if not all of the following, has been covered before, but, maybe not in the way that could be fully understood by everyone. This is my best effort to date to help everyone understand the parts of setup and the combining of these parts into a winning car.

It’s very easy for any expert on any subject to assume that those they speak to will understand certain building blocks of knowledge contained in a technical subject. So, we tend to skip over or not fully explain the “obvious,” when in fact it’s not so obvious to beginners just as it wasn’t obvious to us way back when we all started.

Have you ever had a computer guru explain how to work a particular software program? If so, you’ll understand what I’m talking about. He talks too fast, moves the computer keys too quickly for us to follow, and ends up at the end of the explanation with us saying, “Can you go over that one more time, this time slower?” The trouble with printed communication is that I can’t go over it again until next time, which might be a year or more coming.

That is precisely why I’m writing this series. I’ll do my best to slow things down, explain every detail, so that in the end, you might have a better understanding of the various parts associated with setup and a good idea of the proper way of combining of those parts.

Frontend Geometry and Chassis Roll
The frontend is where we start and the front moment center is the foundation of all setups because it influences the dynamics in such a significant way. Here’s how.

When a car, any car, varies from straight ahead, it’s referred to as turning. If it has a suspension, it will roll toward the outside of the turn. The force that causes this roll and also pulls things, like us, toward the outside of the turns is called centrifugal force.

The tires resist this force so that we don’t slide away from where we are trying to go. The force at the tire contact patch is called centripetal force, or a force that resists the outward force. We’ll only deal with the centrifugal force because that’s what acts on the center of gravity and causes the roll in the car.

Every car that experiences centrifugal force wants to roll, even if it has no suspension. A racing kart has a solid suspension, but it does roll to a degree because of the tire spring rate. The outside tires compress and the inside tires decompress. And even if the tires were solid, it would still want to roll. If the force became great enough and the tires held to the track without sliding, then the kart would roll over. It’s this desire to roll that will form the essence of our chassis design.

In a race car, we’re almost always on a suspension that has a spring rate, even if the car is running on spring rubbers. Those rubbers represent a very high spring rate, but a rate nonetheless. The amount of roll, measured in degrees relative to the surface we’re driving or racing on, is directly dependent on, 1) the magnitude of the lateral g-force, 2) the height of the center of gravity of the portion of the car that is sprung, 3) the spring rates of the overall suspension, and 4) the location of the front and rear moment centers.

I’ll explain each of those four items:

1. The g-force represents the force that is acting on the CG and is measured in pounds. It’s referred to as the g-force and that number is related to the weight of the parts of the car that are basically on top of the springs.

Any part of the car that moves vertically when you jump on it has a role in making up the sprung weight. If we calculate the lateral force in pounds and divide that by the sprung weight, we get g-forces. So, if we have 4,000 pounds of lateral force and the sprung weight is 2,000 pounds, then our g-force would be 2.0.

2. The center of gravity of the sprung parts of the car is a point where there is equal weight all around that point. If the car’s sprung portion was suspended by that point, it would remain motionless and not move in any direction. We’re most interested in the height and width of that point in designing our setup. More about that later on.

3. Our front and rear suspensions have a spring rate. In a double A-arm suspension, the installed spring has a rate measured in pounds of resistance per inch of movement. If we compress the spring 2 inches and it will hold up exactly 400 pounds at that height, then the rate is 200 lb/in. That rate is translated through the suspension to the wheel through a motion ratio to what we call a wheel rate.

For a solid axle suspension such as we see in stock cars at the rear and some Modified cars and Sprint Cars at the front, our sprung part of the car will ride on the two springs. The width of these springs represents the spring base. The wheels and axle are separate and apart from the suspension and any attempt to create a wheel rate for a solid axle suspension is not valid for determining criteria for designing our setup.

4. The locations of the moment center front and rear determine the stiffness of the suspension they are a part of. Here’s a better explanation.

Moment Center Influence
So now we have some understanding about chassis roll in our car. When we talked about how the center of gravity was acted on by the g-force when we go through the turns, we can now tell you that there’s a resisting point other than the tires in our suspension that also resists lateral movement. This point is called the roll center or what we like to term, the moment center, or MC.

The line between the CG and the MC is called the moment arm, a common term that has been used for a long time. It’s the length of this arm that helps determine the amount of force the suspension will have exerted on it, and then how much roll angle we will have in our chassis.

I have, in the past, referred to this line as a sort of prybar. The longer the bar, the more work we can do creating more torque. Torque is a good word because it represents a rotational force and our moment arm is trying to rotate our car and make it roll.

Because of the effect of the geometric layout related to the location of the MC, its lateral and height locations determine the effective length of the moment arm in a double A-arm suspension. And, its location laterally is most important and has the most effect on the length of the moment arm and therefore the roll angle amount. So, when you hear or read about measuring only the height of the MC, you’re not getting the most important aspect of MC location.

The Special Case of the Solid Axle
If you have followed me so far as to the double A-arm suspension geometry, let’s now get into the solid axle. The part of our car supported by the solid axle suspension is sitting on top of two springs. These springs can be mounted in various ways, by coilover shocks attached to birdcages or solid clamps to the rear axle, or maybe onto the trailing arms themselves to create a motion ratio as the chassis moves vertically.

No matter what the mounting design is, the end result is that the sprung portion of the car over the straight axle suspension is riding on two springs. The roll angle amount for this suspension is determined by 1) the magnitude of the g-force, 2) the height of the CG, 3) the combined spring rates, 4) the height of the rear moment center, 5) the width of the spring base, 6) the difference in spring rates, if different.

I’ll explain each:

1. Same as in AA suspension.

2. Same as in AA suspension.

3. We use the installed spring rate corrected for spring angle and in the case of a spring mounted on a trailing arm, factoring in the motion ratio.

4. The height of the rear MC is usually the average height of the ends of the Panhard/J-bar, in some cases the height of the metric four-link MC, or the height of the Watt’s link MC. Width of the MC has no effect on roll angle, but does have some effect on weight jacking as does bar angle, but we won’t get into that here.

5. The spring base is the width of the top mounting points of the springs. In a leaf-spring car, it’s the width measured to the center of the two leaves.

6. Spring split has a significant effect. If we install different rate springs in a solid axle suspension, our roll angle will be influenced quite a bit. If the outside spring is softer, the roll angle will increase. If the inside spring were softer, the roll angle will decrease over that of a system with equal spring rates.

Roll Angle Comparison
Once we grasp the influences of the different suspension systems and how each part plays a role in creating and determining the amount of chassis roll, we can now proceed on to looking at the entire car and how all of that affects our setup.

Each axle, or to better explain it, each pair of tires, front and rear, are the points ultimately that resists the centrifugal force that tries to take the car to the outside of the turns. As such, for proper analysis, the suspensions at each end and the sprung weights at each end, should be combined into two separate systems or vehicles unto themselves.

Imagine that the race car were cut in half, sideways down the middle in a line through the CG perpendicular to the centerline. And imagine that we could create a swivel where the ends of the car would rotate so that the front and rear could roll free of influence from the other end.

The truth of the matter is that when we install springs and control arms and J-bars, we’re creating a system that will ultimately want to roll to a certain angle. What we create, or have for a front suspension and spring rates will result in its very own roll angle while going through the turns at our local track.

What we have for a rear suspension and corresponding spring rates will determine our rear roll angle in this imaginary cut up car. If we could visualize this car going around the racetrack, we might see where the car looks normal through the turns with no apparent distortion and this we can now call a balanced setup. Both suspension ends are rolling to the same angle, the two halves are inline just like when the car is parked and everything is working well.

In another scenario, what if when we visualize this car, the ends are not inline, but rolling different angles? What does that mean? It means the overall race car setup is not balanced and the result is obvious, because the two ends don’t line up and the overall look is much different than before the car was cut in half.

It’s this equality or difference in the front and rear roll angles that constitutes modern chassis setup analysis. We now design our setups based on trying to achieve a balance in roll angles, and in doing so, a dynamic balance in the setup of the car.

Why Is Balance Important?
When the two ends of the car are in sync, meaning desiring to roll to the same angle our load transfer is predictable, all four tires are working to their maximum meaning that they have the most load possible on each tire. The two tires at each end are more equally loaded and therefore produce more grip resulting in faster speeds through the turns.

When the two ends aren’t in sync and not rolling to the same angle, an imbalance exists that will cause less than optimum load transfer. The sets of tires become more unequally loaded resulting in less overall traction and less resistance to lateral force. The car must go slower through the turns than if it were balanced because the tires have less grip.

It’s Not So Complicated
OK, you might have to re-read the preceding parts of this discussion a few times, but getting a grasp on the above is necessary in understanding how our race car works and what our goals are in setting it up.

To help know what influences the chassis roll angle in our cars, I have created the following list in order of importance, the most significant at the top. The understanding of this principle will influence your decisions when making changes to your car.

1. Moment center location, front and rear. Moving the front MC left or right will have a significant effect on the stiffness of that suspension and moving the rear MC up or down will have the same effect.

2. Spring split on a straight axle system. More than spring rate stiffness changes, a difference in rates left to right has a significant effect on the amount of roll angle, especially on higher banked tracks.

3. Spring stiffness and sway bar stiffness.

4. Center of gravity height. The height of the CG helps determine the amount of roll angle, the higher the CG the more roll angle.

5. Lateral g-force. The more grip and faster we go through the turns, the more lateral force, or g-force we develop. And, therefore, the greater roll angle we see.

6. The track banking angle has an effect on the amount of roll angle. The higher the banking, the greater the g-force, but the less roll angle.

Other Geometry Influences
There are other geometry factors that affect our race car. Once we have worked out our balanced setup, we need to worry about any influences that might have a negative effect on the balance we have created with the spring rates and the MC locations. In our next installment we’ll learn about camber change, toe, Ackermann, alignment, and bumpsteer.

If you have a race car with an AA-arm front suspension and don’t know where the moment center is located, both static and dynamically, then when you set up the car, it’s just like not knowing your spring rates and just throwing any old spring in each corner.

That sounds dramatic, but it’s very true. The difference in front moment center location from 10 inches left of centerline to 10 inches right of centerline is equal to a spring rate difference of 300 pounds per side in a coilover car and 700 pounds per side in a big spring, or stock clip car.

So, not knowing the location of the MC means you don’t really know the “spring rate” of your front end. How can we expect to properly setup our cars unless we know the exact spring rates and other factors such as MC location?

Even with manufacturers who have determined the MC location for their cars, each track is different in speed and banking angle, teams may run different ride heights and setups, spindles get replaced with new ones that might not have the same dimensions for heights of the ball joints meaning different MC locations, and all of these have an effect on the MC design.

The only true way of knowing where your MC is located is to measure it yourself. Think about it like your engine timing or valve lash or stagger. The only way to know your timing is to measure it, just like your stagger. It takes a bit of time to measure the MC, but it’s essential to have that information.

The post Racing Suspension Setup – Complete Setup Guide, Part One appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

The AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour

$
0
0

The first two races on our 2011 AMSOIL Great American CT Tour were dirt tracks and I can say we enjoyed both of them a lot. Now we have two asphalt tracks to visit that are within an hour or so of each other in and around Columbus, Ohio. Kil-Kare Speedway, located in Xenia, Ohio, is a Friday night track and Columbus Speedway runs its show on Saturday night. Both were interesting and provided some insight into subjects of interest on this Tour. And, they are both different in construction than most other tracks we see.

This year had very strange spring weather across the Midwest and into Ohio and Pennsylvania where we saw late snow and lots of rain with high winds. It was definitely not racing weather by any means.

So, each week we would study the weather for the area around the tracks where we would visit next. Most of the time it showed rain, but as the days grew closer, the patterns changed and miraculously it cleared just in time to allow the tracks to open, most of the time. We had already been forced to cancel our visit to Hagerstown Speedway because of rain.

For this weekend, Kil-Kare looked OK, but Columbus on Saturday night looked not so good. One funny thing that happened on the way to the race on Friday was when we stopped to get the bus washed. We pulled in to the Professional Truck Wash located off I-270 on the west side of Columbus to get rid of the mud and dirt we had accumulated and spent the next two and a half hours there. We were fourth in line behind three semi tractors, no trailers.

The team who hand-washed these trucks and our bus took almost 45 minutes on each tractor and nearly the same on our bus. That is a long time. I’ve never seen such attention to detail, going to excess at times, as we saw them brush the exhaust pipes three and four times. It was unbelievable. But we had set aside some time, luckily, and we came away with a very clean motorhome.

Kil-Kare Speedway
This track is a 1⁄3-mile asphalt NASCAR Whelen All-American Series racetrack that is a bit odd shaped. Looking at it from above, we see a configuration that doesn’t resemble an oval, but rather a shape that takes some getting used to by the drivers.

Coming here for the first time must feel very different. And, there is a Figure 8 track inside the “oval.” We saw very good action with two- and three-wide racing, but the number of cars as well as the fan attendance was low. Some of this was due to the cold temperatures that were still hanging around.

Teams that reside in and around Columbus, about 60 miles away, can’t get here in time coming from work to race on a Friday night. So, this promoter loses the opportunity to draw from that large populated area.

The event was well organized and ran very smoothly. The classes run here are the Late Models (NASCAR rules), IMCA-type Modifieds, Sport Stocks, and Compacts. It’s nice to be able to run for national points under the NASCAR home tracks umbrella, but in places like this, with low car counts, which in itself provide points toward the national rankings, it’s hard to compete.

The facility was clean and well maintained and could be a money maker when the weather warms up, but in this economy, drawing better numbers of teams will be hard. One idea might be to offer the longer practice sessions needed when running on asphalt on Thursday night, allow teams to park the rigs at the track overnight, and then all the teams would need to do for Friday night is drive to the track in a transporter and be ready to run qualifiers and main events that night. That may attract more teams from Columbus and elsewhere.

Columbus Motor Speedway
We arrived at Columbus Motor Speedway and were greeted by the promoter, Jeff Nuckles. I had consulted for several teams who raced here over the past 10 years, but were gone by now. For that reason, I had always wanted to see this track and had heard so much about it. This too is sanctioned by NASCAR under its Whelen All-American Series banner.

It’s one where you must be completely on your game to succeed and that means the car has to be handling very well and stay that way. There is opportunity for faster cars to pass their way to the front if situations find them back in the pack. And I had the opportunity to witness that. This comes from a combination of little or no banking and short to non-existent straightaways.

When we arrived it was raining and looked like it was there to stay. But Jeff never backed off running the show and by 5:00 that evening the skies were breaking and the drops stopped falling. It’s a testament to the management that they stuck it out. The teams had already made the trip to the track and waiting a few more minutes or hours was worth it to try to get the show in.

The facility was typical of an older track, but well run and had features we liked and didn’t like. There was a police presence and we always like that. Lack of security can be a problem sometimes and it only takes one incident to keep fans and teams away forever.

There was an on-track incident where a Late Model driver was turned into the backstretch wall head-on hard. He had to be cut from the car and taken by ambulance to the hospital for observation. He survived with only bruising and a sore neck, but he didn’t have either of his head-and-neck restraints on at the time of the crash.

His son was very upset that Dad had left both at home. Jeff told me later on that the head-and-neck restraints weren’t required, but they were highly recommended. I asked why they couldn’t require them and it had to do with cost to the lower classes. I offered this information that I would like to present to all promoters across the country.

The stock class cars are just that, stock. Detroit and elsewhere, car manufacturers have had to meet crash safety standards for some time now. A stock car will crush and absorb energy in a frontal impact by mandate of the Federal government. So, there is less opportunity for neck injuries in those cars.

An example is NASCAR racing at Daytona in the ’70s and early ’80s. Those cars were, by all accounts, stock production cars and were running upwards of 200 mph. There were plenty of frontal impacts with the walls and we never heard of a death like Earnhardt’s in those days. It wasn’t until the teams started building fabricated front clips that the injuries began to happen.

In contrast to stock division cars, fabricated race cars are purposely built to be stiff to resist torsional twisting to help the setup of the car. It’s that stiffness that gets us into trouble when the car makes contact with the concrete wall. There is less deflection of the chassis during high g-force impacts in those cars.

As the head moves forward more quickly in a crash with the fabricated race car, something has to give and it’s usually the upper spine, neck, and associated tendons and blood vessels. This is referred to as a Basal skull injury and it’s the process of ripping the head off of the rest of the body. Get the point?

The H&N restraint devices offered to racers today deal with this specific type of injury and help prevent it. No device is perfect or works to save you in all instances, but it has been proven to reduce injury significantly. No driver wants to burn up in a race car as evidenced by the numbers of fire suits worn. But why would you want to break your neck and possibly die? It makes no sense to me.

I see drivers in lower divisions like the Mini cars, where they wouldn’t climb in the car without their H&N products on. It’s past time for sanctions like NASCAR, ASA, and other short track sanctions to take the lead and start requiring H&N restraint systems to be worn for fabricated race car racing. And that includes Mini car-types as well.

In this crash at Columbus, it could have been worse and the driver was most likely on the brink of not surviving this impact. Had he been wearing the device he owned, he might have walked away instead of being carried away. Now he has a hospital bill to take care of, a race car with a cut-off roof, and a pissed-off family. I would be willing to bet he has one on the next time he climbs into the car.

Aside from that, we loved the racing at Columbus and despite the weather delays and usual racing incidents, we were very entertained and witnessed some heated battles on a very competitive racetrack.

Conclusion
When we visit these racetracks across America, we keep an eye out for anything that will relate to our readership in the way of promotion, performance, and safety with the intent of improving our sport. If that includes comments that seem negative toward anyone, I can assure you that our intent is to improve through observation. What we see and experience is what anyone would see and some of those are often times unseen by the persons who run the speedways and/or sanction the races.

I’m open for discussion any time with anyone on the topics outlined above and what we can do to promote rules and requirements that can help reduce injuries. We’ve always been that way and won’t stop any time soon.

Next week we’ll make our way into the beautiful state of Pennsylvania, where I was born, for our next series of races. We’ll eventually end up in Maine next September. For now, our next race report is on Motordrome Speedway in Smithton, Pennsylvania, and then (after a rainout at Sharon Speedway), on to Lernerville Speedway in Sarver, Pennsylvania.

The post The AMSOIL Great American Circle Track Tour appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Racing Suspension Setup – Complete Setup Guide—The Final Chapter

$
0
0

Now that we have covered the goals and methodology of setups in Part 1, and caster, camber, and bumpsteer in Part 2, we now need to finalize our setup guide by examining the final phase of setting up our race cars, and that involves alignment.

This subject includes simple toe settings, Ackermann—which is toe change from steering geometry—rear alignment, and rear steer due to chassis movement. We can refine and perfect those items included in Parts 1 and 2, but if we don’t finish out with these last items, all of our hard work will be for naught. We’ll end up chasing our bad handling car like so many racers do week in and week out.

So, let’s move on to alignment and as in past discussions, we’ll do this in a practical order so that later routines don’t interfere with our previous work. For instance, if we square the rearend perfectly and then adjust our right-side alignment, we then mess up our rear square. And, if we set toe and then adjust our Ackermann, the toe will change and we’ll have to do it all over again. Here goes:

The Ackermann Effect
This effect is important because it can ruin an otherwise great setup. In this day and age, for both the dirt racers and the asphalt teams, modern setups dictate a closer look at many areas of chassis geometry and alignment. If we prioritize the various areas of concern, Ackermann would rank right up there near the top. More importantly now, modern setup trends in both dirt and asphalt racing dictate that we need to take a closer look at our Ackermann situation.

Years ago it was fairly common to see a dirt car with the left front tire up off the track in the turns or see tire temperatures on an asphalt car’s left front tire that were the coolest of the four. These were the result of unbalanced setups where the rear suspension desired to roll much more than the front suspension. In those days, greater amounts of Ackermann could be desirable, or at least less harmful to our handling. If the LF tire is off the racing surface it can do no harm.

Ackermann effect is a mechanical phenomenon that is associated with an automobile’s steering system. A steering design that incorporates Ackermann causes the inside wheel (closest to the radius of the turn) to turn a greater amount than the outside wheel. We do need a slight difference in steering angle between the front tires because the inside wheel runs on a smaller circle or arc than the outside wheel. The key word here is “slight.”

Modern Day Trends in Setup
In today’s racing world, the dirt cars are more balanced in their setups and the LF tire does much more work. This trend has made the dirt cars more consistent and faster under most conditions. With the asphalt teams, we see a move toward larger sway bars, softer springs and stiffer RR springs. This arrangement causes the LF tire to be much more in contact with the racing surface, carry more loading, and to work harder than ever before. If the front tires don’t track exactly where they should, there will be problems getting the car to turn.

The truth is, we need very little Ackermann effect in most situations when racing on an oval track, be it dirt or asphalt racing. Even on very tight quarter-mile tracks, the LF wheel will only need an additional 1⁄16-inch of toe over the RF wheel to correctly follow its smaller radius arc. That is 0.112 degrees or a little more than 1⁄10 of a degree.

How to Check For Ackermann Effect
There are a few ways to check for excess Ackermann in our race cars. The best way is to use a laser alignment system to measure how much each front wheel turns and compare the two. The laser system can also be used for rearend alignment, right-side tire alignment, and bumpsteer.

A less expensive, but adequately accurate method is to use strings to measure your Ackermann. I have used this method and, if done carefully, it will yield the results we’re looking for. Almost everyone has used strings to align a race car. A string pulled tight is always straight, we can count on that. So, if we pull a tight string across the outside of each front tire sidewall and extend the string to the front 10 feet, we can take the measurements necessary to see how much Ackermann we have.

The procedure is as follows: 1) Put the front wheels straight ahead. 2) Pull a string across the outside of each front tire (avoid the lettering portions of the sidewall) and place a mark on the floor (on a piece of masking tape) where straight ahead is. 3) Turn the steering wheel approximately the same amount the driver would in the turns where you race. 4) Again, make a mark on the floor at 10 feet where the string extends from the outside of each front tire. 5) Measure the distance between each set of marks for each wheel and compare the left wheel with the right wheel.

The Ackermann Toe Chart shows how much toe gain relates to differences in the left and right wheel measurements for different size tires. We can average the left and right tire sizes and look at that number when finding our Ackermann on the chart. Remember that if the left wheel moves farther than the right wheel, then we have Ackermann, or toe gain. If the right wheel moves more than the left wheel then you have Reverse Ackermann or loss of toe.

Solving the Excess Ackermann Problem
If your car gains or loses toe, there are a couple of ways to correct the situation. You can adjust the length of one or both of your steering arms to compensate for Ackermann effect. This works best for a car where the steering wheel is always turned to the left as opposed to a dirt car that sometimes has the wheels turned to the right too.

Lengthening the left steering arm, and/or shortening the right steering arm will reduce the Ackermann effect. We can also change the position of our drag link to move the inner ends of the tire rods forward to reduce Ackermann or rearward to increase it.

For a rack-and-pinion steering system, moving the rack forward in relation to the outer tie-rod ends will reduce Ackermann. Most Dirt Late Model cars use the rack systems, so we don’t have the convenience of only having to improve our Ackermann effect in one direction, it must be correct for left or right turning of the wheels.

Asphalt Late Model cars are also designed with rack systems. Instead of changing the length of the steering arms, it might be best to move the rack and keep equal length steering arms when working to reduce excess Ackermann.

Make sure you know how much each of your tires are steering and reduce the Ackermann effect if needed. Then, when you balance your setup, both front tires will be working in perfect alignment to steer your car. A good steering race car is one that will have more turning power and is therefore more capable of running up front and winning races.

Adjusting Rear Steer
Before we align the entire car, we need to address the issue of rear steer. Making adjustments for rear steer will affect our alignment, so we do those first before we align the car.

How we design and place our rear trailing links has a lot to do with how our car will handle. As the car moves vertically and rolls, the rearend will most likely steer to a certain degree depending on the design. Rear steer design goals are very different between dirt cars and asphalt cars.

On asphalt, we can only tolerate a very small amount of rear steer and most of the time we are better off with close to zero rear steer. On dirt, some teams incorporate lots of rear steer to the right into the suspension. The degree of steer is directly proportional to the amount and direction of vertical movement associated with the right and left rear suspension systems.

We can simulate the degree and direction of rear steer in our race cars by duplicating the movement of the rear suspension. If we take visual reference to the position of the wheels in the wheelwells during cornering, we can get sufficiently close to replicating the suspension attitude of the car in the shop.

We could then support the chassis at levels similar to the way the car looks on the racetrack and then measure how far each rear wheel moved and in what direction. It may surprise many how far the rearend steers under some conditions.

If more or less steer is desired, changes can be made to trailing arm angles, and so on as you’re simulating the rear steer and the results can be measured. This is an excellent way to learn how arm angle changes relate to rear steer magnitude.

Aligning the Car
Now that we have checked and adjusted our car for Ackermann and rear steer, the final step is to align the car. This includes the front toe settings and rear wheel alignment, which involves rear squaring and right-side tire contact patch alignment.

There used to be only one reliable way to align a race car and that was by using a string and either measuring to the tires at hub height or at the floor by creating right triangles on the floor to measure from. That is still a viable way to do it and necessary for the lower budget race teams.

A quicker and more accurate way to align the car in all areas is by the use of a laser system. The key to maintaining accuracy in a laser system is to be able to check the tool to make sure the beam is truly tracking at right angles or parallel to the mounting device. This must be done each and every time we use the tool to check alignment. The following are the steps we use to align the car:

Step 1, Wheel Runout Check
Check both the front wheels and the rear wheels for runout. This means that as the wheel rotates, the outer edge of the tire may wobble slightly. We must compensate for this slight distortion by finding the extreme high spot at a point equal in height to the hub height.

We can simply use a jackstand to hold the measuring tape steady and then rotate the tire noting the distance from the stand. Once we locate the high point (seen as the least distance to the offset), we mark it with an arrow and then rotate the tire (be it front or rear) so the arrow is at the top, pointing straight up.

Now, check the toe at the rearend. Use toe plates or toe bars for the “analog” method and the laser systems for a more accurate assessment. Even small amounts of toe-in or toe-out are not acceptable. Be careful how each person holds the toe plates so that the measurements are consistent. Do the measurement several times to ensure accuracy and repeatability.

When using the laser systems that attach to the hubs, remember to thoroughly clean the surface of the hub and make sure there are no protruding threads from the bolt holes. It’s recommended that you go over the hub surface with a flat file to eliminate any bulges or protruding edges of metal that would cause the laser to not be aligned properly.

Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations for setting up the laser systems. Remember that the accuracy of the measurements is directly related to how closely you follow the directions and how carefully you read the system. There’s a logical progression to alignment and each company has put a lot of thought into the methods. The end results, if properly applied, will be the same.

Step 2, System to Frame Setup
Once the rear wheels have been toed straight ahead, square the laser system to the frame. Most car builders will align at least one framerail parallel to the intended centerline of the chassis. It may be located on the right side or as the weight box on the left side next to the driver. You can also align the laser system to the centers between the front and rear clip rails closest to the main framerails.

For the analog method, this setup can also be done using strings. We will set up a “box” with strings on each side and at the front and rear. We use plumb bobs to make marks on the floor off the outsides of the framerails or the front and rear clip rails. For perimeter cars, or ones with no offset in the chassis, we can split the measurement between the front and rear clip rails closest to the center section to find the centerline of the chassis.

For offset chassis, we’ll be able to use a straight rail, or we could again split the clip rails. Measuring between the marks, we can split the distance in half and place a mark at the halfway point, or at the centerline of the car.

Step 3, Center the Steering Box/Rack
Center the front steering rack. This is done by turning the steering wheel lock to lock and back half the number of turns from full lock in either direction. Once mid-rack (or mid-box with drag link steering) is found, lock the steering shaft with two Vise-Grip–type pliers against the frame.

We want to make sure the steering is centered and the wheels are pointed straight ahead. Once the steering box has been set to center, adjust each tie rod length so that the right and left wheels are pointing straight ahead. With the laser systems, this is done quickly and accurately.

With the string method, run a string down each side of the car at hub height and parallel to the centerline you have established. Then, simply measure to the side walls or wheel rim of each front tire with the tape measure and make both front and rear measurements equal by adjusting the tie rod lengths. We can set our race toe later on after we have aligned the car.

Step 4, Right-Side Tire Contact Patch Alignment
Once the front wheels have been adjusted to point straight ahead and parallel to the centerline, we need to align the right-side tire contact patches. We do this by using our laser systems as described in the user manuals for each system.

Adjust the Panhard or J-bar length so that the right-side tire contact patches are inline, or if your desire is to offset these, set the desired amount. This means that we’ll either have both right-side tires lined up or at least know what our offset is. For stock classes using rear suspensions that are not adjustable, you’ll need to run different offset wheels to achieve right-side tire alignment.

When using the string method, we need to compensate for the camber of the wheels which moves the tire contact patches out. At the hub height, if we line up the tire sidewalls, the RF tire contact patch will be outside that line due to the negative camber present in the RF wheel. The rear wheel may also have camber due to a cambered rearend or just the stagger. Look at the chart to estimate how much to compensate for the cambers. Subtract the compensation amount from the offset read at the rear wheel, or add that number to the front measurement, to find how far from the string the wheels need to be in order to line up the right-side tire contact patches.

As we adjust the rearend side to side, there’s a possibility that the rearend alignment will change as the rearend moves laterally. That’s why we do the right-side alignment first. We’ll now need to check to make sure the rearend is perpendicular to the chassis centerline and if not, adjust it.

Step 5, Rearend Alignment
Once the right-side tire contact patch alignment has been done, we can then square the rearend. The rearend should always be set perpendicular to the centerline of the car. We do this with the strings by creating a line that is perpendicular to the centerline we have already established. Using a simple 3-4-5 right triangle with the lengths doubled, we can measure off the centerline to establish our line to measure to the rearend.

When using the laser systems, follow the manufacturer’s guidelines for doing that. The lasers will accurately measure the alignment referencing the chassis centerline.

Step 6, Setting Front Toe
The last step in the alignment process is to set the static toe at the front wheels. We can use toe plates to do this or the laser systems. Remember to be careful and accurate and do the measurements several times to be sure of the numbers. Adjusting the left side tie rod only to set your toe is a method I personally like. You can also split the toe between the left and right wheel.

Roll the car forward and back about 5 feet and recheck the toe setting. As the car settles, the overall measurements may change, but the differences should remain the same. Remember that for toe-out, the front measurement will always be more than the rear measurement on the toe plates. If you’re using a string or laser to check your toe-out, the opposite is true. The front measurement from the laser/string would be less than the rear measurement. I know one crew chief/car owner who got this backwards too many times.

Conclusion
If you follow these simple but effective steps in setting up your race car, you’ll be well on your way to success. Remember that it’s the team and driver who must take this the rest of the way. Work on maintenance to reduce parts failures, driver training to be able to turn the fastest laps possible and endurance to make sure you finish each race.

The post Racing Suspension Setup – Complete Setup Guide—The Final Chapter appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

How to Win in Racing – Track Tech Q&A

$
0
0

Mark Martin is still winning races at a very advanced age for upper-tier drivers because he knows how to, and instinctually does, drive each lap as fast as the car will allow

Winning in racing means you traveled a defined distance in less time than all of the other competitors, period. Less time means you went faster for longer. In all of the discussion about setups and fast race cars, we sometimes loose the truth that a driver has to take that car and produce the win. It won’t do it by itself.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been asked to make up for lack of talent or drive in a driver by making changes to the race car. Granted, the car did need a few things, or many, to make it capable of winning, but my job stops when the green flag drops.

I’ve been “forced” numerous times, through monetary considerations, to work with teams where on closer examination, realized they didn’t believe they could win. And that’s an important thing to think about if you’re part of a team, be it crew, driver, or owner.

Winning starts in your head. Mohammad Ali never once believed he could lose. Richard Petty started every race firmly believing he was going to be the winner, even the last race he won at Daytona, his 200th, against the very best super speedway driver of the day, Cale Yarborough, when he hadn’t won in some time and most thought would never win again.

I once designed and set up a car for the owner’s kid and we went testing. The driver, a girl who could drive well, was passed by a multi-time champion of the series she raced in and she picked up the pace and stayed with him for a few laps.

Then she dropped off that pace and he pulled away. In the garage after the practice was over, I told her that if she expected to win in this very competitive series, she would have to learn to drive that fast the entire race. That’s because that’s what winners do.

Mark Martin is still winning races at a very advanced age for upper-tier drivers because he knows how to, and instinctually does, drive each lap as fast as the car will allow. If that’s faster than all of the others over the course of the race, he gets the checkered flag first.

Why do Kyle Bush or Jimmie Johnson win so many Cup races? It’s because they drive the wheels off the car each and every lap. A great driver can’t stand to have anyone in front of him. He races for 10th just like it’s for the win. As more cars get picked off, sooner or later, there are no more cars to pass, just distance to put on the field.

So, you might not be there yet, but knowing what it takes to do anything helps you to train yourself. And for racing, you can work on becoming the right kind of driver to be able to win. If you’re not winning from lack of desire or stamina, you darn well know it.

The other thing is the progression for winning. I have said this before in past discussions, but it’s true. For young and new drivers, winning is a learned experience. Start out learning to finish a race. Then try for a Top 15, then Top 10, then Top 5, and so on. One of the hardest steps is learning to lead a race. There’s no one to follow and you must finally set the pace for the field yourself. It’ll surprise you how weird that feels.

Progress in your racing in measured and calculated steps. Some of you will be able to move up faster than others, but only you’ll know what speed of progression is right for your comfort level. And some tracks/classes/series will be harder to advance in than others. Take that into consideration and don’t get frustrated. A Top 5 in the touring Super Late Model divisions is harder than a Top 5 at a local track.

Treat each progression as a win. In that way, you can enjoy success, at least in your own mind and in the thoughts of the entire team if they can take the same approach. When that first race win comes, you’ll already have won many times before.

Beach Ridge Young Racers
I’ve been reading your comments and readers’ feedback on young drivers. I agree with the safety concerns, but we can’t protect children from any and all dangers. All we can do is try to make their environment safe and teach them how to be as safe as possible. In my opinion, allowing a minor to drive a 3,000-pound vehicle with 300 horsepower, unsupervised, is insane, even on a racetrack.

Beach Ridge Speedway in Scarborough, Maine, has a division called Whiz Kids for drivers between the ages of 8 and 15. I think it has a program that has a good balance between safety, driver training, cost, and fun.

There are no points, no purse, no trophies, and currently the policy is the driver and one parent get in free. The race vehicles are four-cylinder compact cars with rollcages, racing seats, fuel cells, and carburetor restrictors that limit their speed to 50 mph.

The race director of this division monitors the speed at the end of the back stretch during practice with a radar gun. If a car exceeds 50 mph it’s given a smaller restrictor for its carburetor and if their speed is slower they’re given a larger restrictor.

Practice day is Monday. When a car and driver show up for the first time, the car is checked for safety. There’s a driver orientation, then the driver is allowed on the track, without any other cars, and with the adult as a passenger who helps the driver with any questions he or she might have. When the officials are satisfied with the progress of the driver, a few cars are allowed on the track and finally they can practice and race with all the cars.

These kids learn safety, track rules, etiquette, sportsmanship, and have fun in a relatively safe environment.

I’m a retired engineer and I’ve been involved with racing for more than 35 years. When I hear someone on the team say, “We’ve never done it that way before.” I use your technical explanations as justifications for making the change. I buy CT mostly for the technical articles. Keep writing those gems of information.

Don Horne

Don,
The important thing is that the track is actively working on a plan for young racers. This will build the numbers of racers in that area. What that program does is teach youngsters the mindset of racing in a slower and safer way.

I believe that kart racing and other forms of small race car events such as the Bandoleros and Mini-Cups do the same thing. They all teach the young race car driver the discipline needed to be able to race with other drivers, and that’s very important to learn before climbing into a high-horsepower, larger car.

I’m all for young drivers coming into our sport and I do believe in a progression of learning. A kid at 13 or 14 who has raced for 10 years has most likely learned the discipline and if not, shouldn’t continue racing.

Moment Center Question
I’ve read all your tech articles for a few years in the magazine and read everything I can online.

That being said, I’m still confused on a few things but will only ask one thing at a time. In all of the moment center articles it’s stated that a lower moment center will produce more chassis roll as well as a more left of center MC will do the same. My question is how is this possible?

If the MC resists force or, in other words, roll, how can the longer moment arm of the low and/or left MC cause more roll when it has more leverage acting on it to resist chassis roll? Please help.

Name withheld

The leverage is between the center of gravity and the moment center, much like a pry bar. The longer the bar is, the more force that will be generated. It’s the lateral force acting on the CG (being the top of the moment arm) that tries to roll the car.

So, for a given force on the CG, the longer the moment arm, the more roll we’ll see. To help you understand this further, imagine the CG being in the same place as the MC, there would be no moment arm at all. Then we would see no roll at all.

I recreated that scenario when I was first studying moment arms and roll angles. I built a model and when the CG was above the MC, there was roll in the direction of the force. When the CG was at the MC, there was no roll and the model locked up. When the CG was below the MC, the model rolled opposite of the direction of the force.

From Across The Pond
Good to read of your interest in our racing over this side of the “pond;” and I noted your comments about how our cars are built so rigid.

Going back to the early ’50s when stock racing started in the UK, most tracks were based on our speedway (bike racing) dirt tracks, which are small and tight ovals with very little, if any, banking. Initially, our cars were real heavy-duty. It changed somewhat when a team of racers came over from the USA and introduced us to your lighter weight specials.

Basically, your guys drove around our heavy weights and left us in the dirt. At one time there was the possibility of our racing having a permanent connection with NASCAR but the decision over here was to keep our racing full contact, and that’s the way it has stayed.

We now have some purpose-built cars racing tarmac (asphalt) ovals but these were built to similar size and specs as the dirt speedway tracks. So, due to the size and nature of our tracks plus control on tires, maximum speeds are way down on your “big” tracks, and to us, 360 yards is a big track!

So, with tight, flat bends, our average speed is a fraction of what you get on your tracks, more like an average of 45 mph with max of 75 mph. Our rules require head-and-neck restraints in the new car I have been building. I’ve also included a full containment seat and we have substantial plated rollcages.

We can also run an open engine spec just restricted by CI block, two valves/cylinder, carbs only, and using pump fuel (max 101-octane) because there’s no point in going too far with power as there’s a limit of what the tracks and tires will take. We use a reliable 600- to 650-bhp without having to go to high revs and lightweight or exotic engine parts.

Because of the restricted speeds, our chassis are built to take the hits but bumper bracings are designed to give before damaging the chassis and can be adjusted to suit the driver. In our racing, drivers are graded on a monthly basis and a reverse grid system is used with the higher point scorers starting at the back which makes for entertaining racing. So, we don’t have to devise ways to restrict engine power, we just race on small, tight tracks.

I too wait for my copy of Circle Track to arrive to keep up with things and pick out the sections that will assist in our racing. Keep up the good work.

Yours in sport,

Alan

Alan,
Thanks for the information. It’s always good to hear from racers in other parts of the world. When it all comes down to it, we’re all racers at heart and can relate to each other on that basis. It’s good to hear that the head-and-neck restraints are mandatory. You’re well ahead of us in that department.

As is evident in racing we see on the smaller tracks here, speed is relative. Seventy-five mph on a quarter-mile track is just as fast as 120 on a half-mile track, relatively speaking. And, because of gearing for smaller tracks, getting to the top speed happens so much faster.

I’ve seen video of some of your racing and it definitely creates excitement and action. Just as it is here, setup is paramount and the ones who are setup right usually are around at the end of the race to take the checkered flag.

Wissota Street Stock
I’m currently in the process of getting a WISSOTA Street Stock ready for competition. This will be my first year driving these cars but I have been around them for more than five years now and have helped win three track championships.

I’m always looking for a step ahead and like to try different things and have been looking for a different setup than we’ve been running. I came across the Feb. ’09 article “Fine Tuning a Hobby Stock” and am very surprised at the spring rates being used. They are far lighter than we have been using. My question is what kind of numbers did you see on the scales?

The springs we use are LF 950, RF 1,100, LR 325, and RR 200. We usually run 250 pounds heavy on LR and about 52 percent rear and 53 percent cross. Is that wrong? We’ve been noticing that if you get the car too tight the motor won’t turn any rpms. Do you want it heavy on LR, or more balance across rear?

Thanks,

Cody Daly

Cody,
The front spring rate stiffness is all dependent on the type of track you’ll be running. A heavy track with ruts will require much heavier front spring rates. But that’s not the primary concern for your setup.

The rear spring rates and the spring splits are very important. The spring split you show, 125 pounds, is, in my opinion, high. This would make the car tight and won’t allow it to turn well. A car that doesn’t turn will bog down in the turns and not come off the corners well. You could probably get by with a 250 or 275 LR spring rate.

If the “250 pounds heavy on the LR” means weight, you’re in the high range for crossweight. The car will have a tendency to drive off the LR and that could make it tight also. You would need to drop down to less than 50 percent cross to go to the lower range of crossweight.

Run the car and see how it works. If you find you need to throw it into the turns to get it to turn, you’ll need to loosen it up. Think about what I said above and make changes to free the car up. The high rear spring split works against the balanced setup we always refer to.

Asphalt Modified With Dirt Setup
I have a ’97 Ellis IMCA Modified. I can get the car very fast and I’ve been the fastest qualifier, but the problem I’ve been having is my car falls off very fast by 5 to 10 laps. I can’t seem to find a balanced setup that stays consistent for 30-50 laps. I usually qualify at a 15.06 and at the end of the race I’m typically running a 15.50. I race a 3⁄8-mile asphalt track, with about 8 degrees of banking. I run Goodyear Eagle Short Track Special tires.

My spring rates are: LF 500, RF 550, LR 175, RR 125. I’ve tried a lot of different rear springs, as much as 200 LR and as light as 100 (and the same on the right).

I run Pro Shocks and my shock rates are: LF 735, RF 75, LR 93, RR 94.

Panhard bar: left axle 14, right 15¾, roll center 3.0 inches high and 2.0 inches to the left of center, and with dive and roll moves to 0.7-inch high and 4.8 inches to the left.

My scale weights are: LF 685, RF 545, LR 815, RR 508, for a total of 2,552. This makes left 58.7 percent, cross 53.2 percent (with bar), 51.9 (without bar), sway bar (175 pounds) is preloaded seven turns from neutral, and rear is 51.8 percent.

Name Withheld

The problem you have is that you’re running a dirt setup on asphalt track. This will never work because it’s badly out of balance. For starters, your spring rates, Panhard bar height, and crossweight are all wrong.

The rear spring should be matched and I would go with a pair of 175s. Lower your Panhard bar to around 12 left side and 13 right side. The crossweight is low for your higher rear percent and should be more like 56 percent.

Never preload a sway bar that much. One to three turns is plenty, even for a small thread adjuster. I wouldn’t go more than two turns and usually snug it up and that’s it. Adjust your crossweight with the sway bar preload in. That way you know you have the correct cross.

Look closely at your left-side tire temperatures. When the car gets balanced, they should be nearly even. Your LF should have been cool compared to the LR. The suggestions I have given are for a generic Modified and may not perfectly match your car. So, to fine-tune the setup, move the Panhard bar up or down to adjust for left-side tire temperatures and at the same time, adjust the crossweight for handling balance.

Email me and let me know what’s happening and how the changes worked. I’m always curious as to the outcome of these changes. Remember that there are other considerations beyond setup that influence the car, such as front and rear wheel alignment and Ackermann.

If you have comments or questions about this or anything racing related, send them to my email address: Bob.Bolles@sorc.com, or mail can be sent to Circle Track, Senior Tech Editor, 9036 Brittany Way, Tampa, FL 33619.

The post How to Win in Racing – Track Tech Q&A appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Reader-Submitted Questions – Track Tech Q&A

$
0
0

Race car drivers compete head to head and the race could be compared to an organized fight, as opposed to a street fight. Note that I’m not encouraging fighting on the track or in the pits. On the contrary, I’m going to explain how this comparison could be good for the mentality of the drivers and the future of the sport.

There are, in my observations, two scenarios for the attitudes of the participants of racing and fighting. One is where each has a certain amount of disdain for each other, sees the other as the “enemy” and would never associate with the opponent. I call this group the Boxer group.

The second group can be compared to mixed martial arts (MMA) fighters. They are trained to respect and honor the skills of their opponents and even associate and train with them off the mat. This group I’ll call the Grapplers.

With the first group of Boxers, we see dirty racing, lack of respect, on- and off-track incidents, fighting, and a general tension at the races. Each team in this group stays to itself, never speaks to its opponents, and would never think of respecting anything about the other teams.

This way of going racing is very lonely, creates animosity, and promotes a clan or gang existence for each of the teams. I see this way of living and racing as not only immature, but displaying a negative image to the youth who are observers of the racing between these teams. We should be providing a positive example to the youngsters.

The second team of Grapplers is one whom we can all learn from. I’m always impressed when watching the MMA fights on TV where the combatants bow to each other before the contest, beat the crap out of each other for 15 minutes, and then hug and congratulate each other no matter the winner. That’s called respect and it takes a very mature and confident person to live that way.

Why do they do that? Because they feel comfortable in their own skin; they’re confident people who train hard, become very good at what they do, appreciate their sport, and are happy to compete and even happier to win. The primary driving force is respect for the other “team,” and in racing that would be the entire team they are competing against.

The winners in racing and MMA are the ones who put a lot of effort into their games. They’re more disciplined, better equipped, and more focused than the other teams. So, as in any sport, you’ve got to appreciate those qualities and hope for the same to come to your team. Meanwhile, why not be big and appreciate when others have finally achieved their hard earned success? It takes nothing away from your effort.

If your team exhibits the traits of the Boxer team, why not take the lead and reach out to the competitors? I always believed that all racetracks and sanctions for touring events should have a podium ceremony where the top three teams are recognized. That way, the drivers are brought together to share the success of all, much like Grand Am racing and Formula 1.

Bringing the teams closer together strengthens the sport; while keeping them isolated is bad for the sport. When was the last time anyone on your team congratulated the winner in your division after the race? It takes a real man/woman to put your own ego aside and recognize the accomplishments of another team. Start this week. It’ll make you feel good and will bring much needed brotherhood to short track racing. It’ll never be seen as negative, trust me.

If you have comments or questions about this or anything racing related, send them to my email address: Bob.Bolles@sorc.com, or mail can be sent to Circle Track, Senior Tech Editor, 9036 Brittany Way, Tampa, FL 33619.

Learning From Smokey
You didn’t learn a thing from Smokey, did you? Racing has evolved so the young racer who can’t build an engine or run a bead can go out and buy a race car and run heads up with 30 year vets!

We teach them that they can do anything and do not need to pay their dues. Why do you think NASCAR is so boring? All the same cars, too many rules. On the other hand, why are the Outlaw dirt guys so much fun?

There are so many ridiculous rules. Heaven forbid some guy or gal has creativity and still wants to enjoy trying something new! All you rule-ridden, brain dead old farts, as Smokey called them, are the ones ruining short track racing. Not the cheaters.

The better term would be the real racer. IMCA, NASCAR, and the Street Stock class with a big-block on the hood (what a dumbass-looking car) are all designed to slow folks down!

All the research and development just to put a leash on cars is ass-backwards to begin with! At my track, dirt guys get to race and we leave the crate engine-type rules for the tracks that have a bunch of candy asses racing there, and mommy wipes her son’s nose after each race!

P.S.—feel free to call me and I can train (at a small fee) promoters to run a successful racetrack.

Mark Baldwin
Head Flagman/El Paso County Speedway

Mark,

Thanks for your commentary. I have long argued for fewer rules. All in all, I think we mostly agree. I mentioned restrictive rules as one reason for the decline in racing, and if the rules were less restrictive, then racers could be more creative without incurring any penalty.

Smokey felt that racing should be a creative venture where the racer invented technology that spilled over to the automotive engineers. When racing got too restrictive, Smokey quit. It just wasn’t fun anymore. And we’re now seeing others take that course.

As far as cheating goes, remove the rules and there will be less cheating because with fewer rules, the racer will become inventive again and start to enjoy the experience. It has been shown that more restrictive rules and sealed motors promote cheating, not the other way around.

Your type of racing, dirt, has historically been a place where innovation is respected and allowed. Other forms of racing could learn something from the success of dirt tracks in this day and age.

More of Why Racing Is In Decline
I’m glad to see someone finally figured it out. We race in a small community where there are a lot of other things to do for fun. No one wants to pay to watch the same person win by a mile. However, people will cheer for that very person when he or she is coming down the finish line three wide.

I blame the promoter for this—he/she should be aware of what is going on with his/her people. If you’re going to bend the rules for one then why have any rules at all? At the same time, the promoter must stand by the decision his/her techs make when someone is caught cheating.

We have fines for drivers who cheat, why not for techs and promoters who look the other way? Have the people who sanction that track make unannounced visits to see how things are done. There are all kinds of cheaters in our world today. I don’t know about other tracks but ours seems a little too hometown, and that keeps drivers from surrounding areas from wanting to come and play.

Promoters need to understand local boys can’t support a track by themselves. This is what is killing racing, I feel. Even in the depression era people had money for recreation, look at horse racing in that era.

Thanks.

Mark

Mark,

Well said. There is a wide line between hard work and innovation causing winning and cheating. We all appreciate a winner who honestly defeats his/her opponents. We have no respect for those who cheat to get there. If we’re sure a winning team is legal, we can all cheer for it each week, no matter the margin of the win.

And Then There’s This One
In my opinion, cheaters and big money guys who buy results are the reason why the car counts are so low. Where we live, the oil fields are the economy, and they’re booming. The car counts are good here and the fans pack the stands.

We have been a racing family for going on four generations. My grandfather raced, my dad raced, I raced when I was a kid. I raced when my kids were small and then again when my son reached high school. We raced as a family. From the beginning, the track here was lax in how it inspected and in who was inspected. The obvious cheats were mostly up front and on the tech pad, but they didn’t get disqualified if the track considered them the favorites. This was one of the reasons that we quit the first time.

The track was sold just before my son and I started back into racing. I thought it would be better and they swore that it would be fair. No matter what, the tech would be the same for all. When my son and I started out we were out in the garage every night and weekends building our own car—no help, no sponsors, just for fun. For the first year we were on the tech pad most every weekend (in the Top 4), and the rules were being followed because they were being enforced for the most part. It didn’t last long. They effectively changed the rules, not by the book but by what guys were allowed to get away with.

One of our greatest joys was being on that tech pad most weekends and knowing that we were completely legal. We wanted to teach and prove to our son that it could be done without cheating. We left the track and racing because we were no longer competitive. We couldn’t keep up with what the track was allowing the others to do and we didn’t want to be cheaters just to win.

We’re rejoicing that there are others out there who feel and think the same way we do about the sport. We love everything about racing, just not those who cheat at it.

James and Angela Perry
Bakersfield, CA

James and Angela,

I sure hope our readers take this letter to heart and show it to the management at their local tracks. This scenario could be playing out across the country, and in some cases, is.

If you cater to only five teams out of 20, in a few years you’ll only have five teams racing. If you make it fair and tech the way it should be done, then in a few years you might see 25 teams. That’s how it works.

This family won’t be back to racing. Sadly, more and more teams and families will be making the same choice. It’s not necessarily the economy or spending restrictions that hurt racing, it’s the non-enforcement of rules and the generation of excessive rules that are hurting our sport.

Dirt Setup Contradictions
From your article on chassis setup fixes (“The Evolution of Stock Car Setups,” March ’11), I quote, “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.”

For mid-corner tuning this seems to be the opposite to what popular chassis builders post on their websites. Shaw, GRT, and Warrior say that more RF and/or LR spring loosens the car entry, but not to tune with springs for the middle. Add stagger and/or raise the J/Panhard bar, and more.

Why is this so? It seems that if the car was good in the middle but tight on entry, for example, then changing springs in the direction they suggest to loosen entry would tighten the middle by your formula. Can you explain? As I would expect, looser entry would be looser middle. Cheers.

Trevor

Trevor,

If you look at what Warrior has to say, it’s correct in that the changes for exit coincide with what we say to tighten and loosen the car—i.e., to tighten the car, decrease the RR spring rate. Yes, these changes will affect the middle, but most dirt tracks don’t offer much in the way of a middle portion as we traditionally know it.

The car is either entering or exiting the turns. It’s only on the longer and faster tracks where the car spends any significant time in the middle at what we refer to as steady state conditions.

The dynamics of entry are far different for dirt cars than what we see on asphalt, and in some ways similar. Hard entry on asphalt is never good and ruins the rest of the turn. Hard entry on dirt is common and many of our problems stem from rapid changes in camber in the front tires.

It’s the control of camber change that concerns most manufacturers and top racers. If the car is tight on entry, it may be caused by the RF diving too quickly and the camber changing too quickly and giving up much of the contact patch. This is opposite to what we would do to correct a tight car, and we need to consider the effect of changes we make on other portions of the turns.

A stiffer spring in the RF will slow the travel down and cause less movement overall, reducing the camber change and allowing more contact patch loss. More and more dirt racers are utilizing antidive at the RF to slow the movement. Excessive antidive can serve to lock up the frontend and that’s why most builders don’t openly recommend that. In moderation, it helps.

Crate Motors in Street Stock Racing = Bad Idea
After reading your article in the June issue (“Track Tech Q&A”) and after thinking for a week or so I decided to send my comment. I’ve been a grassroots dirt track competitor and fan since the mid ’60s—20 years at West Memphis—and I have seen many changes.

From the beginning, I appreciated the fact that I met the rules and as a mechanic I could do all the work on my car. I know that on many occasions I was able to race because I could work on my own engine. But now we find crate engines in the Street Stock class without carb or vacuum restrictions and with a weight break.

Of course, we can continue to build our own engines, but if the crate motor is allowed into the grassroots class with obvious advantages we can expect to see a continued loss of cars. Just think about it. Everyone would like to win, but consider how disheartening it is to start out at a disadvantage. Thanks.

Glen Brown
Okolona, MS

Glen,

This division is just the place for those who like to tinker and create, and building your own engine is a prime example of that. We see your point where taking that away, or making it less attractive and competitive, is damaging to the sport.

We continually speak out in defense of those who want to do their own work on the car, be it chassis design or engine building. Those who the tracks are trying to please with these new rules would do well to be more innovative and creative.

Racing as a family endeavor fits right in with building your own engine. I can see a great father/son or daughter time spent in the garage building the race motor up from teardown to firing it up the first time. I still remember the thrill of hearing a motor that I personally helped build run for the first time.

The post Reader-Submitted Questions – Track Tech Q&A appeared first on Hot Rod Network.

Viewing all 114 articles
Browse latest View live