CVTs

[Schwanger]

I'm looking for a few pictures of cars that have run CVTs on four cylinder engines.

[Schwanger]

I'm looking for a few pictures of cars that have run CVTs on four cylinder engines.

[rjwoods77]

ETS had one a couple years ago(very fast). Bradley and Dearborn had one last year(very slow). We are running one this year and I hope more people will try them out. I love them.

[Dan G]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rob Woods:
Bradley and Dearborn had one last year(very slow). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Our 'very slow' CVT powered car was a hellavulot faster than yours at the '05 competition Rob! I agree though, I don't think any of the 38 teams that beat us were slower.

We'll see how things stack up in '06 with a tad more than 16hp at the wheels.

Schwanger- here's the shots of Bradley's car from this past year..

<A HREF="http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/FSAE05" TARGET=_blank>http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/albums/FSAE05/IMG_1510.sized.jpg
http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/albums/FSAE05/IMG_1512.sized.jpg
http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/albums/FSAE05/IMG_1513.sized.jpg
http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/albums/FSAE05/IMG_1514.sized.jpg
http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/albums/FSAE05/IMG_1513.sized.jpg </A>

[rjwoods77]

Dan,

I knew of your plight. Wasnt knocking. Just saying. We both know if the tuning is just slightly off the whole dog gets f***ed. I think they are excellent for this event. Kinda a black art if you arent from mini baja so I think that turns away most.

[Schwanger]

Oh, thinking about packaging that stuff makes my head hurt. The pictures are great, keep them coming.

[rjwoods77]

Dont use a 4 cylinder.

[drivetrainUW-Platt]

few things, why doesnt anyone make a manual snowmobile yet, they have been doing it with atvs for years and there a blast to drive.

Second, the mean briggs was cool, but your drivetrain lookd really beafy/stretched out, the rear axle was so far away from the engine, if you cut down the lengths you prob coulda saved 5lbs in rotating mass.

Why would you want to cut a perfectly fine 6 speed gearbox off a cycle engine and put a jerry rigged cvt on it, with a jackshaft and more bearings and crap? I could see if you used an atv engine that already had one? cvts are cool because they are tunable and really driver friendly but if it didnt come with one why bother?

[rjwoods77]

Snowmobiles had manuals when they first came out. Problem was that they would easily stall if you didnt downshift fast enough and no one could be that quick.

Dearborns drivetrain is almost exactly what Mich. Tech ran on their baja car for years. One of the guys on the team was from that team. Very simple though. Simple got them 39th on 16hp. Some of these teams should be really embarassed being outperformed(cost report or not) by what amounts to farm equipment.

[James Waltman]

RWTH Aachen (Germany) had a CVT in 2004. Three cylinders and not four though.
http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/HostedPics/Junk/Dscn7849_klein.jpg

My buddy Rob really liked that one (http://fsae.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/125607348/m/6736033494/r/39510965611#39510965611).

My guess at the manual transmission snowmobile:
1. Until recently they were all two stroke engines. They rev high and need gear reduction to get the sled moving in the snow. A dirt bike with a two stroke has large wheels to help the gear reduction. Snowmobiles have small diameter '˜wheels' (http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/HostedPics/Junk/bogiewheels.jpg)'. They need to have enough power to keep you moving in powder and still do 110mph top speed. That would take a lot of gears.

2. If you are in deep powder and loose momentum during a shift you will bog down and may get stuck.

3. Who can shift all day long with a foot lever if you are wearing your bunny boots (http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/HostedPics/Junk/bunnyboots.jpg) ?

[Storbeck]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rob Woods:

Mich. Tech ran on their baja car for years. One of the guys on the team was from that team. QUOTE]

Are you saying one of the dearborn fsae team is from the tech baja team, or are you refering to a former tech baja/fsae member who might have been involved with deerborn baja at midwest?

[jsmooz]

Let me chime in since I was one of the lead designers on the UM-Dearborn team.

Mike - The reason the rear was so far away was to allow different clutches and them to be removed without removing the engine from the car.

Storbeck - Yes, our other team captain graduted Tech in 1999. He was on the baja team for 4 or 5 years. He started our baja team in 2001 (I was also a part of that team and every team since) and we decide to build a formula car since all our knowledge graduated and didn't pass on the knowledge.

Also I believe, according to the dyno at competition, we were making 18.25 hp at the rear wheels. I'm not sure how acurate that is because chassis dynos don't necessarily like CVTs.

I also agree with Rob on not using a 4 cylinder. Since you have to gut the tranny the weight savings isn't as great. There are plenty of engines out there that don't have a tranny attached that can be used.

[rjwoods77]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James Waltman:
RWTH Aachen (Germany) had a CVT in 2004. Three cylinders and not four though.
http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/HostedPics/Junk/Dscn7849_klein.jpg

My buddy Rob really liked that one (http://fsae.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/125607348/m/6736033494/r/39510965611#39510965611).

My guess at the manual transmission snowmobile:
1. Until recently they were all two stroke engines. They rev high and need gear reduction to get the sled moving in the snow. A dirt bike with a two stroke has large wheels to help the gear reduction. Snowmobiles have small diameter '˜wheels' (http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/HostedPics/Junk/bogiewheels.jpg)'. They need to have enough power to keep you moving in powder and still do 110mph top speed. That would take a lot of gears.

2. If you are in deep powder and loose momentum during a shift you will bog down and may get stuck.

3. Who can shift all day long with a foot lever if you are wearing your bunny boots (http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/HostedPics/Junk/bunnyboots.jpg) ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



Yeah James. Dont even get me started on that thing. Bunny boots and with the electric hand warmers these guys dont want to move their hands. Besides, those who have ridden a powerful snowmobile know it is a "hang on for dear life" prospect so the cvt is almost needed so you can hold on to the things. Here in upstate NY, during the summer, guy drag their sleds on grass and sometimes put on a shaved track and race on a 1/4 mile. I think the fastest ashpalt drag sled did a 1/4 is 8.9 if memory serves me correctly.

[Kwheels]

Rob, Could you give ma a call @ keizer Racing wheels Please. I got something interesting you may want to give me a call on.

Wade Huisman
Keizer Racing Wheels Inc.

[Kwheels]

I am looking for detailed pics or Drawings of how the teams incorporated our Splined wheels into the drive system. If any teams could help me out we would be very grateful. I know of a company looking to produce $100,000 race cars looking for Ideas. We may be able to sell yours. Thanks Wade Huisman
Keizer Racing Wheels.

[Dan G]

Jsmooz said it all.

Those extra 2.25 horses are a 14% increase in power! I updated my signature accordingly.

We received a lot of criticism on our complex/heavy/inefficient drivetrain layout last year. We are working on some design improvements, but I'm 99% sure that extra beef in the drivetrain isn't what was keeping our car from tearing up the performance competitions.

And you may not know it, but we were running CF driveshafts with integral steel keyways. Very blingtastic...

http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/albums/FSAE05/IMG_1770.sized.jpg (http://evilallianceracing.com/ipw-web/gallery/FSAE05/IMG_1770?full=1)

[jsmooz]

To get back on topic what I'd really like to see someone do is take the Yamaha RX-1 snowmoblie setup and up it in a FSAE car. From what I understand the engine is a tweaked 1996ish R1 engine. If someone could sleeve in down to 610cc everything would be work nicely after a few clutch tweaks. Tho the arguement can be made that the engine would be too heavy, but get 2 engines and leave one stock.....after competition racing would be insane.

[terra_dactile]

hi rob,
was wondering when you saw ETS with a CVT, are you confusing it with the variable length runners we ran in 2004, because i am not aware of our Formula SAE team using a cvt, i know that our mini baja team has used them for years and is really fast, they just won the east, west and midwest competitions this year with a cvt hooked up to a custom hi-low reverse transfer case,
anyways just wondered how long ago you had seen the cvt on an ETS car.

jude berthault
Ets Formula Sae
Steering and brakes Director
2004/2005/2006

[rjwoods77]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by terra_dactile:
hi rob,
was wondering when you saw ETS with a CVT, are you confusing it with the variable length runners we ran in 2004, because i am not aware of our Formula SAE team using a cvt, i know that our mini baja team has used them for years and is really fast, they just won the east, west and midwest competitions this year with a cvt hooked up to a custom hi-low reverse transfer case,
anyways just wondered how long ago you had seen the cvt on an ETS car.

jude berthault
Ets Formula Sae
Steering and brakes Director
2004/2005/2006 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yep. You are right. I meant to say sherbrooke ran it. French Canada. You all look alike. Just kidding http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The picture was on Denny's website a while ago but i think he took it off. Sorry about that. I remember someone posting that they finished 4th in accel I think as well. Does anyone from RMIT have a pic of the one they ran years ago. I would be intersted in seeing that.

[drivetrainUW-Platt]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dan G:
Jsmooz said it all.

Those extra 2.25 horses are a 14% increase in power! I updated my signature accordingly.

And you may not know it, but we were running CF driveshafts with integral steel keyways. Very blingtastic...

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the guy I asked about the carbon fiber said it was a decal someone picked up from Autozone and slapped on the driveshaft....got some looks thou! what kind of crank hp is that engine making? I know a lot of the garden tractor pulling guys are making 60-70hp outa the old 16hp kohler blocks, granted thats only for a minute at a time running.

[Faterooski]

The Yamaha RX-1 snowmobile engine w/ CVT is too good not to look into. Obviously it would have to be taken down to FSAE legal 610cc's. Anyone know if that's possible with these engines? Also, after 5 minutes of quick searching, I didn't find any places that had any salvage "car-kit" RX-1 engines. Anyone know where a guy could come up with a used one in decent shape? Thanks for the help.

[rjwoods77]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Faterooski:
The Yamaha RX-1 snowmobile engine w/ CVT is too good not to look into. Obviously it would have to be taken down to FSAE legal 610cc's. Anyone know if that's possible with these engines? Also, after 5 minutes of quick searching, I didn't find any places that had any salvage "car-kit" RX-1 engines. Anyone know where a guy could come up with a used one in decent shape? Thanks for the help. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are on crack if you think you can destroke or sleeve a rx-1 engine to legal capacity.

[CMURacing - Prometheus]

i was gonna say something to the same effect. the rx-1 is a 998cc engine. using an engine that big (and sleeving it even further down) will probably put you 40lb over a 600/4, not to mention the added CVT weight.

[John Bucknell]

Why sleeve it? Just yank two pistons out...

[rjwoods77]

Or just use a twin. Honda silverwing was used by our formula team in the past. Better yet get a suzuki bergman and get it to fit capacity. It has an electronically controlled cvt. Pretty cool. Pretty fast for a scooter. They call it "halfabusa" (half a hyabusa). Basically if you want to run a cvt look in other places than a four cylinder. Gotta get off the four cylinder nipple at some point. . 4 stroke snowmobiles,etc.

[CMURacing - Prometheus]

john --

if i were to yank two pistons out of a large(r) displacement engine, it'd probably be a (sleeved) hayabusa, so we could use a stock 'busa in the off season.

[Faterooski]

Rob Woods: I see now that it would be rediculous to sleeve or de-stroke an engine to less that 2/3 its original displacement, but you don't need to belittle someone for asking a question, even if the answer is obvious. My first question ever on this forum, though not the most intelligent one, was answered with "You'd have to be on crack if...." I'm used to saying stupid stuff and getting crap for it, but someone else might not be and get turned off this great source of information pretty quick. Anyway, no hard feelings.
So not feasible to take an RX-1 down to &lt;610cc unless you yank pistons. Not the ideal situation to yank pistons out of an oversize motor that's way heavier than necessary. BUT, just how much of a benefit would the CVT be on the thing? If the thing let me stay in my optimal RPM range all over the course, I didn't have to shift it, and it wowed the design judges, I'll take 40 pounds anyday.
I've never seen these RX-1's or a picture of them. I take it the CVT is integrated in with the block just like the normal bike motors' transmissions are? No way to transplant one onto a 600cc motor? Again, maybe a dumb question, but that's why I'm on here.

[jack]

if i was going to change the displacement on something like that, i would just de-stroke it as much as possible to get a really low compression ratio. then you could boost the crap out of it http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[rjwoods77]

They are always crank mounted seperate units. At least the dual pully rubber belt types. If you are really intersted buy the Clutch Tuning Handbook by Olav Aaen. I like them because you cant screw up a shift(loose time,break stuff, generally look like an idiot) have a very wide gear range that can shift rediculously quick(backshift) if tuned right, less crap in the cockpit (no shifter,clutch pedal or lever,etc.), less driver overload(concentrate on driving when in corners) and because everyone thinks they suck. If you want to do it and dont know much.... Get a polaris 500 with a p-85 clutch with it. Call Aaen and get all the performance parts for the engine and clutch. I'll tell you right now though. If the clutch is a little off it will rape you hard. If you are gunna do it, stick with the basics for your first time.

[jsmooz]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> If the thing let me stay in my optimal RPM range all over the course, I didn't have to shift it, and it wowed the design judges, I'll take 40 pounds anyday. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's why we built the car we did last year and will again this year.....minus the weight. THe only problem is the design judges don't really see it as we did. They're pretty much old school, learn to shift properly guys. However if more teams start using CVT's and argueing their design better, maybe they'll see our side of things.

Also the Aaen book is awesome for tuning. However final gearing effects the shifting of the CVT so you really need to test and tune to find the best performance. Just like engine's CVT's have an aggressive range. If you can combine the power band of the engine and the CVT it'll be fast.

DrivetrainUM-Platt

Yea, it's just a sticker.....but it's so funny to see people walk up, take a picture, then walk away. Simple things amuse simple minds I guess. THe motor is supposed to be outputing ~40hp and the crank. We've done testing on our new dyno last year but were never able to see more than 24hp on 2 different "built" engines. We weren't sure if that was opperator error or not and ran out of time to find out the true number. We're working on that this year...again.



Jim
UM-D SAE
"Yea, it's got a Briggs"

[Faterooski]

In my opinion, the design part of the competition is pretty unfair. The design competition shouldn't start until after half the cars have broken in endurance, but that's another post, another day. The goal of the competition is to build a prototype racecar built for autocrossing. I agree that if you are a sure-nuff racer, yeah, learn to shift and drive your car. If you are going for a simple autocross car, like the competition is designed to create, the CVT is ideal and the judges SHOULD reward you for that.
By the way, I was amazed at you all's car. A 16 HP car that beats more than a few 4 cyl cars on autocross is doing something right! Can't wait to see the new and improved 20-horse version for next year.

[markocosic]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If you are going for a simple autocross car, like the competition is designed to create, the CVT is ideal and the judges SHOULD reward you for that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The judges will reward whatever you "sell" them? If the hard-sell is backed up by lots of shiny components, glossy brochures and analysis that can't instantly be refuted by a mental/fag-packet calculation then they'll reward you... (or that's how it appeared as an FS2005 spectator)

[Faterooski]

You're right. But you shouldn't have to "sell" your car in the design part, you should do that in the marketing presentation. That's how it is supposed to be anyway. It seems that the design judges have a pre-concieved notion of what they want/expect to see, and if they don't see it, you are going to get hammered for it. For instance, we were one of the few teams (with UM-Dearborn) that had full outboard shocks. The judges said that we were penalized for not having push/pull rods and bellcranks. Even after our simplicity/weight/ease of manufacture argument, they still simply said "no bellcranks, I don't like it." They expected inboard suspension, and when they didn't see it, they didn't like our car. They had plenty of other reasons to not like our car, believe me, but there was nothing wrong with our suspension. Anyway, back to CVT's.....they might be snubbed by the judges some just because they are not the typical setup. The competition encourages innovation and out-of-the box thinking, but sometimes it isn't always rewarded.

[Storbeck]

Strange, because we also had outboard shocks, and even though our design event session was a complete cluster f$%^ (we had absolutely no preperation, no posters or anything, and for most of it, didn't even have the car) At least two of our judges said they liked our outboard shocks. Our feedback writeup didn't mention it at all.

Everything you do in life will be questioned if it doesn't go along with conventional wisdom. If you're going against the norm, you should have a reason and shouldn't be susrprised when people question it.

Design judgeing is 15 percent of this competition, dynamic events are well over 70% of this competition. I say, when designing the car, forget about the judges, just make the best car you can. Then tell the judges why you did stuff and try to get as many "design event bonus points" as you can.

my $.02

[Faterooski]

My thoughts exactly. Like I said before, I think they shouldn't start the endurance is over and they see all the cars that broke. If it broke down, it isn't a well-designed car in my opinion. Now obviously there's more than enough bad luck to go around in endurance, but you get my point.

[John Bucknell]

I'm not personally against CVTs. I went out and found Olav Aaen at the SCCA runoffs in 1993 and pestered him about his DSR (pretty fast stroker, twin CVTs off either end of crankshaft). From that experience directly I added a CVT to my ZX-6-powered FSAE car for 1994. So sorry I didn't judge your car Dan...

[Z]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Faterooski:
Even after our simplicity/weight/ease of manufacture argument, they [the judges] still simply said "no bellcranks, I don't like it." They expected inboard suspension, and when they didn't see it, they didn't like our car. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Faterooski,

Hmmm, so what do you do when you feel that you've been shafted by the Design judges? Take it quietly? Have a little moan on this forum? Or perhaps try this...

If a judge marks you down for reasons you don't agree with, then take his name, publish it on this forum, and publically ask that judge to justify, with a rational, technical, "engineering" argument, his reasons for marking you down. If that judge can't or won't justify his reasoning then bring the case to the attention of the senior judges and/or the organisers of the event. Don't take "It is my judgement call, based on experience..." as an explanation!

If any other team with "no bellcranks" (or whatever) later on finds themselves with that particular judge then they should protest to the organisers that they are being unfairly assessed by someone who has an irrational and unjustified bias against their car. Then ask for a replacement judge.

This approach is variously called "sticking up for yourself", "keeping the bastards honest", or "gamesmanship". It is an important life skill to learn.

(Better put a few of these in http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)



Dan G,

I like your "39th with 16hp" car. Except maybe too much fresh air between the driver and rear axle - could be squashed up a bit, simplificated, lightened... With a simple aero undertray, and maybe 40hp, you might move up 38 places http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. Keep at it.



Rob Woods,

Any photos, CAD pics, website, of your car? I'm keen to see more. I don't see belt CVT's as the best drivetrain possible, but I agree that they're better than a gearbox.


Z

[rjwoods77]

Z,

Right in the middle of changing a ton of stuff. I'll send you something when I have more to show you. Whats your e-mail?

[Faterooski]

Isn't complaining, moaning and groaning and talking about all the "what ifs?" and "woulda, coulda, shouldas" what this forum is all about?http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
We actually thought about going and asking a different judge for their opinion, but our team leader decided we'd just leave it be. We got a halfway decent design score, so I don't have THAT much room to gripe. We actually did much better than we thought we would ever do, so we didn't want to push our luck! We did protest a black flag in endurance that resulted in a 2:30 penalty instead of the minute penalty you are supposed to get and got SOME time back, but not all we really wanted. We were happy that we got any back at all. Anyway, I meant my earlier comments to be more of an example than a gripe, but it sure didn't come out looking like that. Sorry!

[murpia]

To back up John / answer the judging critics, the approach taken at FS (I can't speak for FSAE) is to assess each design solution on it's own merits, coupled with the student's understanding of their choices. So, they should be able to articluate their design objective, back it up with a presentation of calculations or other appropriate engineering analysis and then we judge whether they achieved this design objective effectively. Radical ideas in any aspect of the car (within the wider context of the competition 'norm') will attract more attention and hence need more thorough engineering analysis from the team, but will not be marked down if done right.

e.g. the team with no bellcranks which demonstrated they had achieved their desired wheel rates and rising rate (actually zero, they wanted no falling rate) and saved weight, get high marks.

e.g. the team which had a CVT _and_ a complete, functional 6-speed manual transmission got marked up for innovation and down for both an overweight design and an in-efficient installation / poor packaging.

Ian

[Dan G]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Z:

Dan G,

I like your "39th with 16hp" car. Except maybe too much fresh air between the driver and rear axle - could be squashed up a bit, simplificated, lightened... With a simple aero undertray, and maybe 40hp, you might move up 38 places http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. Keep at it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah, we definitely feel we have room to improve in '06. We were well off the pace in the dynamic events, finishing the enduro is what earned us that rank. And Jsmooz didn't do too bad wringing all those ponies out for the autox and enduro either. If we can give him double the hp (or more? gasp!) this year, I think we'll turn a few more heads.

I was corrected mid way through this thread, we were actually given then number of 18.25 hp from L&S. We're working on design solutions that get rid of some of the drivetrain roominess, but keep the easily servicable CVT goal we had with this year's design.

Aero? Last year's car had a carb and magneto ignitition! We're trying to take baby steps wherever possible. We should have the powertrain "issues" taken care of, and there's a host of other changes proposed. Our body guys learned a good deal in the last few weeks before Pontiac, so maybe they'll get ambitious and give it a shot. Unless there's other unfinished parts of the car to work on, it never hurts to try.

[jsmooz]

I can't really comment on the design judges response to the CVT as I was discussing the frame/suspension. Whoever we did decent, but it could have been much better. We didn't have all the data to show the judges because we were more concerned with the points that come with dynamics. So in the last few days we spent time tuning instead of making presentations.

John - Too bad you weren't our judge. Since you're in town like us if you ever had time to stop by our shop and give advice let me know. We'd be glad to have you.

Z - Unfortunately it's not that easy to find the judges. We are a small team (~10 people) and barely had time to know where we were going let alone find a judge and discuss the design.

Faterooski - The outboards didn't go over too well either...I think. I don't know that I made it clear to all the judges that the shocks on our car were EXACTLY the same OAL, stroke, and springs. Really the only difference was the valving. It takes a little work to get that to happen. I also agree about our post-endurance design judging. However, it kinda already happens with semi-finals and finals. I think we could have pulled out a few more points with a post driving look-see, but that might be because we designed to finish ALL events (read overdesigned things). We design the car for the novice autocrosser that wants to have preformance, but not so much that the car breaks all the time. Hell, 2 days before the competition one of our guys hopped a 5" tall curb with only a slight bend in one lower a-arm. How many people can say they did that and survived. I guess it just might be my baja experience showing through.

[markocosic]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Z:
Or perhaps try this...

If a judge marks you down for reasons you don't agree with, then take his name, publish it on this forum, and publically ask that judge to justify, with a rational, technical, "engineering" argument, his reasons for marking you down. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd ask in person/in private first because:

1) I'd be working on the principle they knew a little more than I know and would probably be able to justify their decision even if they were too busy/lazy to at the event

2) If you question their "professional judgement" in public, they'll be very keen to rescue it/defend themselves. If you question their "professional judgement" in private, they're far more likely to say "actually I think you're right mate, sorry" and nobody else need know.

Sad thing is the kind of person with an "irrational and unjustified bias" is generally the kind of person who won't back down quietly. If the judge doesn't take the quiet option then by all means feel free to bury their professional reputation/general personality in as public and humiliating a fashion as posible...



Caveat: I got this kind of response for having "dared" ask a particular judge to justify his ruling, so may not be the person to listen to...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You may rest assured that it is not the intent of any of the judges to dissuade a team from being unconventional, and we all attempt to apply the Rules even handedly and impartially.

That being said, the tone of your correspondence and the overall attitude that you convey do not bode well for the &lt;&gt; team, if and when they do make an appearance. They have not gone unnoticed by the organizers both here in the united States and at Formula Student. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Observations:

The judges and FSAE volunteers on the ground at FS2005 were great; can't fault them as far as open, friendly and productive discussions go.

Make enquiries to FSAE online and my impression is that they view email as a "broadcast" system rather than "communications" system...

[John Bucknell]

Jim,

All you have to do is ask, I'd be glad to come by. In fact, this next weekend I'm going out to Seattle to harass Mike, Travis, Denny and the rest of the UofW crew because they asked so nice. Even threatened to let me drive their car, and then they went and blew it up. I'm still bringing my helmet, darn it.

[Belo]

We had a CVT on our FSAE since the begining of Sherbrooke's team in 1995...

We use cvt's because they are much more reliable than the system used to shift the original 6 speed without a cluctch... I've seen so many teams having problems with fancy electronic pneumatic system... Just assist the dyno for an hour and you'll see what I mean...

It also makes piloting much easier... Since the goal of the competition is not having the greatest pilot and since we can't afford to train pilots like some other teams, making driving easier is important.

For those concerned about weight i'd be really curious to compare our added cvt weight and bearing support compared with your shifting system... The weight of the countershaft removed from the transmission almost compensate for the CVT.

An other important factor is that the cvt gives us the opportunity to operate the engine in the power band all over the acceleration process...

Few people probably remember our 2003 car cause we haven't done any dynamic events... We will be in Detroit in 2006 we a new design of CVT and we'll see what it gives!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v67/alexbelleau/Picture005.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v67/alexbelleau/Picture002.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v67/alexbelleau/CVTbearinghousing.jpg

Schwanger if you have any questions you can contact me alexandre.belleau@usherbrooke.ca

[rjwoods77]

What version TRA clutch was that on your car in those pictures? What are you looking at running now? If that model picture is any representation of what your new car will have then it looks like you are going to run an IBC Powerblock.

[Belo]

That TRA clutch as been reworked by IBC, It's been chopped and the weights and runners were modified to suit our needs...

This is not what we will be using this year... The clucth will be smaller since we will have a greater output speed... The drawing you see is the old bearing support for the drive pulley...

We are presently working with cvtech, we might keep a TRA clutch.

[D-Train]

Belo - Would i be right in saying that CVT looks like it's attatched to a Honda F4I? If so, what did you do with the old gearbox? Aren't they inseperable from the block?

[Belo]

Dwayne: that picture shows a F4, this year we'll be using an F4i.

Inseperable no... juste take of the oil pan and the lower part of the base and the shafts are easy to take out...