How smart is AWD looking right now....

[Cement Legs]

Allthough we are not in Detroit this year I just had a look at the weather and Im wondering how many AWD opponents will be eating there words......

[rjwoods77]

I never thought it was a good idea to start with. Is coming in at 567lbs a wise engineering decision to have 4wd. I really dont think so. But then again lots of people design what they want and not what they need.

[Dan G]

Weather was gorgeous all weekend until about noon today, when the banquet was starting anyway.

Look at the sky/sunlight in all the shots I took...

http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/FSAE05

[Cement Legs]

Ahhh.... I had only checked one weather report and it said it was POURING and i figured the endurance event was still to come...

[TA]

Rumour has it some overzealous tech inspector spiked Guelph's 4wd car from endurance for a single drop of oil from the front diff -- after the car had been waiting in the hot sun for two hours to start...

IMHO, there ought to be a threshold on this sort of thing -- this would _NEVER_ happen at a "real" motorsport event.

Cheers, Ted

[Ben Beacock]

Rob: keep your lame opinions to yourself until you show with a car that weighs less than 500lbs (our weight without AWD)

The rumours are somewhat true. The center coupling was leaking a bit and the bottom side was damp with oil. After the 3 min driver change plus another 3 mins of checking it over, they rolled the car ahead and there was a 3/4" dia spot on the ground. It wasn't some overzealous tech, it was Micheal Royce himself that finally called it.

I'm still very sour about all the the static events and that damn innovation award, so I will wait before I post about that.

[Cement Legs]

Its funny how people become experts on "what we need". I myselft may have a different desired outcome from my experience with formula SAE that then next guy. Maybe I want to learn more about developing ... hmm .... say... AWD. Then it would seem a good place to start. Anyway, Ben I've always enjoyed following your team's progress and checking out the pics of your car. The only thing that stops us from having the "FUN" of building AWD is $$$. Hope you guys have better results next year, when maybe be all get our registration in on time http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[rjwoods77]

Ill be there next year ben. Our car is looking like we we will hit our 325 lbs goal after all. I had some doubts but the solid modelling is almost complete and thats what it looks like with an overestimate of "extra" shit that shouldnt end up on the car but does. Tee shirts for sale.

[Sam Zimmerman]

I never thought it was a good idea to start with.

This is similar to the, "How smart was it for WWU to build their own V8?" argument. I would never want to build my own engine if my only goal was to win the competition, but that wasn't their only goal. Pushing the envelope and having a desire to learn as much as possible is something to be admired, not ridiculed. Criticizing other's design decisions is petty.

[Rod Woobs]

Rob,

You're car is going to be under 325? With your ego on board that should weight things down a smidge? With-out a diff? Solid rear axle? W/ a briggs motor? Pushing what 40 HP, maybe 40 lb-ft of torque? People go with what they know I guess, sprint cars and baja cars......

How much acceleration/powertrain and VD modeling have you done that you think your format is going to be so hot?

You're an idiot.....

Rod

[Z]

Rob,

325lbs? Just a suggestion, but look closely at the "Why didn't you finish endurance?" thread. Rod-ends and wheel-bearings are critical items. Don't work them too hard. If doubling the size of all rod-ends, and using slightly bigger wheel bearings, pushes you up to 333lbs, I would do it.

Any "Rob Woods for Prez" T-shirts available??? http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Z

PS. I reckon a 100kg (220lb) car is feasible. Also very easy to build and cheap...

[rjwoods77]

Z,

Its just a small car. But I heed yours and most peoples warnings. I read all the posts and check were mistakes were made and make sure I dont do the same. I just think people are over motoring, over sizing and over complicating things when it doesnt seem necessary. Its not that I dislike the technology and developed ideas. I just think they overshoot the purpose of this competition. For the prices that some of these teams are making these cars you could make a nice eg honda(i dont like hondas) that kicks ass on the track and then you could actually ride it as a daily driver. Tons of people autocross here in upstate NY and it is mostly on a shoestring budget. I just think some people are missing the point of the competiton which is for the consumer. I guess I think of what the consumer would want and afford when designing these cars. I guess I get shit for saying what I say because some think it is otherwise, or me just being the abrasive person that I am. Its cool though. Its funny to see nerds get all upset and take things personal. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I am sure that right now someone is doing something that is even lighter than what we are doing. I hope that continues to be the trend too. Lighter and smaller is better as long as it works. I know that there were lots of breakages and bad luck and such, which is normal for everyear, but look at what dearborn did. 38th and probably the most basic car out there that was designed for the intent of the competition and it finished where it did with nearly zero development on it. Little clutch tuning, fuel injection and less weight and they will have something that will probably suprise a bunch of people next year.

[Z]

Rob,

I agree with your philosophy, and I've got a similar response... But, hey, I've been doing it for so long that I'm used to it http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

KISS really does work. The hardest part is figuring out what NOT to do...

"A good engineer is someone who can do with one dollar what ANY FOOL can do with ten."

Good luck!

Z

PS. I've just been looking at the "Why did you fail endurance?" thread again. Don't want to upset anyone there (they are hurting enough), so I'll say it here.

If it ain't there, it can't break!

And it costs nothing and weighs nothing. It is the perfect part!!!

[rjwoods77]

something like " make one part do two things"

- colin chapman

[Sam Zimmerman]

I am definitely not arguing whether AWD is better or worse than RWD. Different designs go with different goals and design philosophies. My only point is that if you disagree with what others are building, build something different and then beat them on the track.

Debating different designs is great, that's why most of us like to contribute to the forum. Knocking other people's design ideas because you think you know everything about everything makes you look rather small. Of all the people I have met in FSAE, the ones who know the most seem to do the least amount of criticizing, instead enjoying the debate of ideas and helping others learn through these forums. Take a quick search of Denny and Charlie's posts and I am sure you will see what I mean.

[LCheung]

Just because one car that was AWD weighed in at 567 lbs, does not mean that every AWD car will weigh in heavy. Look at the variation in weight just in the 4 cylinder steel spaceframe category. Almost the lightest car (Penn State - 369 lbs) and the heaviest car (Binghamton - 722 lbs) at competition were 4 cylinder steel space frame. There was also Lehigh with a single cylinder, semi monocoque, and a rear solid swing axle weighing in at 356 lbs.

Rob, If you think that the goal of the competition is to give consumers a street car for the track then you need to go buy yourself a street car and start modding it. People buy all kinds of trailered full race cars. They provide an experience on an entirely different level compared to a street/track car. The target market does not care about being able to street drive these cars, I think that was obvious from the beginning.

-Leon

[Dan G]

Penn State's frame was 100% Titanium. As was their arms, bell cranks, pushrods... yeah. They told me how much it weighed but I forgot.

Our team approached the competition with a different focus than most. Our idea was that an FSAE car should be able to start right up out of the trailer, driven hard all friggin weekend without a single tweak, then be put away wet. I think this is exactly what most weekend racers would like. A car that performs really well, but does not require ANY close attention. I think this year's car accomplished at least the second half of that equation. Now we need to work on adding in reliable power and more "lightness" and everything will be closer to the top dogs for next year.

[Jeff The Pyro]

Are you sure penn state had an all titanium frame? someone on their team told me it was steel... but then again they told me a lot of other stuff that sounded sketchy as hell for a team that made design finals... maybe they were just bullshitting me.

[LCheung]

I'm pretty sure PSU was steel frame with Ti everything else. They would have left that awesome Ti finish on the frame instead of painting it black I'm sure, just to show it off.

As far as stuff sounding sketchy from any team, I think it all depends on who you talked to from the team. Not everyone is going to be on the "same page." But you definitely gotta turn the BS filter on.

-Leon

[Denny Trimble]

Well, they had to have a steel roll hoop to pass tech...

[Matt N]

Penn's website says the frame is steel with a ti rear subframe.

Matthew

[Denny Trimble]

Edit - Matt and I decided to take it off the forum.

Penn State's car kicked ass, I was very impressed.

[Dan G]

I could be wrong about penn state's frame, I got the notion from some small talk with one of the guys. I wanted to follow up with them about their car anyway, so I'll find out for sure, one way or the other.

The program says they used a 4130 CroMo frame w/ Ti arms and other bits.

So sounds like I just heard it wrong.

[Big Bird]

A guarded reply to some comments made on the last page, re the comp being about learning. On the whole I agree with this, but I'm very wary of those who push this argument to justify the team undertaking risky projects.

When it all boils down to it, we all have obligations to our team-mates to undertake projects that we can complete. As much as some team members might benefit from building an engine from scratch, how much consolation is this to the rest of the team if they don't see their parts on a finished, working car? I can't imagine the suspension team or the chassis designers or the pedal tray designer feeling to pleased about their hard work coming to nothing.

To be a complete smartarse about it all, I want to learn Japanese cookery, but I'd be hard pressed to convince the team the car needed a teppanyaki grill http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Sorry if this seems abrasive, not meant to be. Ben, I have full respect for what your team has done, more power to you for doing it. I just wish to offer caution, having seen some overly ambitious projects that ended in misery.

Cheers all,

[Pico2]

I wouldn't say that our team is anywhere near "ending in misery". We still managed 61st this year, and last year we were 17th. So I'd say we've done well, and with the kinks worked out over time, we can do even better.

[Moke]

Geoff

If you learn teppanyaki, we will install a grill in our trailer to compliment our deep frier. At the comp we could run a Japanese take-aways from our trailer to pay for the trip.

We also need somebody to brew real beer for the afterparty, any takers?