2006 AUS Formula Ford

[Frank]

We came across this "prototype" Borland 2006 Aus Formula Ford at the "Speed on Tweed" event a while ago

what do you guys think about it?

http://www.uq.edu.au/fsae/2006_formula_ford/index.htm

[Frank]

We came across this "prototype" Borland 2006 Aus Formula Ford at the "Speed on Tweed" event a while ago

what do you guys think about it?

http://www.uq.edu.au/fsae/2006_formula_ford/index.htm

[Andycostin]

Looks great, nicely executed suspension and whole package, but I guess you'd expect that. Aerofoil section looks trick, we tried it in 2004, but had a small prob with buckling..... Linear pots are set up well, and the ARB is neat too.

[RickyRacer]

It looks an awful lot like the 2003-2005 Van Dieman Chassis that we race here in Formula 2000 and F2000 Pacific. Everything from the suspension link design, uprights, pedals, body, Hewland 4 speed box, it looks very similar.
Ricky
Cal State Long Beach

[Frank]

the hight of the rear roll centre is worrying me

im surprised the ARB's are not driver adjustable blade units (or at least the rear)

the rear ARB mounts look a bit suspect (depends on how much the ARB is doing though)

i don't like that the front ARB links are mounted in shear at the rockers

rod ends seem giant, and there seems to be non-heat-treated rod ends on the ARB links?

too much scrub and not enough castor angle, castor trail looks ok

at least there's not bags of kingpin http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

no way near enough toe stiffness at the front, and the rear looks suspect also

not enough Ackerman (considering the rack placement)

A lack of camber on this beast

too much rising rate front and rear

i don't like the front rocker mounting

phosphate, cadmium, or electrodeless nickel coatings on billet parts would be better than black oxide

the front upright assembly is beastly

are the uprights heat treated 4130 fabrications?, or just mild steel?

disks are too thick

the front pads are obviously overhanging the disks

what positive locking mechanism is used on the front callipers?

i like the brake lines

why the k-nut fascination? AN364/AN316 or DIN985/DIN980V are adequate

wheel studs should not be welded to hubs

front live spindle retaining bolt is gigantic

why the psudo-top-hat design to mount the front disks?

i hate the steering joint and it's arrangement (the slop was unbelievable)

the whole arrangement of mounting the steering mechanism is dodgy, and IMO it would struggle to pass tech in FSAE

i hope those drive shafts are heat treated!!!

tiewire on the driveshaft fasteners would be better (ahhhh the search for H3 fasteners, or the trouble of making your own)

i'd be fascinated to twist one of these from hub to hub

im not sure about how much stiffness the front engine mounts will allow either

i know nothing of aero, i wont comment, but i'd like to see the Monash boys' opinions

WTF is the go with the seat?

not sure about the safety belt mounting either

is the master isolation switch accessible to a marshal?

fire extinguisher under the drivers legs?

pedals are cramped

the throttle body must be an "emergency" job

what is that inlet manifold made out of? and the exhaust headers?

i don't like dodgy hose clamps

overall, it looks good, simple, but a bit chunky

[jimi racer]

Frank,

As someone who has driven a variety of different formula fords over the years I would have to question some of your remarks.

Roll Centre Height - Any F/ford with some form of speed has a rear roll centre at about 40 - 55 mm above the ground and some from where from 0 to 10 below the ground at the front. That is what works. Testing has proved this.


Discs - Considering a set of discs only lasts 2 to 3 rounds and a couple of tests days, and considering you do 8 rounds and 10+ test days a year... well they wear out pretty quick unless you have the bucks to blow on AP's which are a fair bit heavier as well.



Fire Extinguisher - It is a bomb activated by a button or pull cable with nozzles in the cockpit in the engine bay. I'm tippin the driver ain't gonna try and grab the thing out from under his legs when his rig is on fire...

Pedals – Ain't much room down there, are compared with some other cars the room in this jigga is good. Some cars you can barely fit your foot on the throttle without hitting the break.

Master Switch - The car i drove last year it was under my legs.

Apart from that, a spectrum is a pretty dodgy piece of kit compared with a Mygale (French) or a VD (English). I ain't a fan of it, but thought I should just points some things out which are pretty much common practice in F/Ford world wide.

[Frank]

I didn't realise that was a "bomb", oops http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

the disks get chewed out?, OMG, are they mild steel disks VS really abrasive pads?

I superimposed a sketch over that rear view photo, and i reccon the rear roll centre height on that thing must be 125-150mm

if it's 40-60mm, and i got it wrong, then yeah no problems. but i doubt it's 40-60mm

thanks for the corrections, i'm simply working from what i see in the pics

James, have you ever twisted one of these cars (hub to hub)?

[jimi racer]

They run a control pad now, basically the same pad everyone has been running for years, its just a Ferodo DS2500. Last year we needed a new set of pads every meeting, then finished them off in testing, and I think we went through about 4 sets of discs, or got the f@#ked ones machined. You just start getting a massive shudder through the pedal when they get down. The discs were made by DBA, I think the material is just no good. Previously I drove a Mygale which had AP discs, they have been run on the car for 3 years and have been ground once. So you get what you pay for more or less.

The Roll Centre is really that high??? Scary if that is right..!

We twisted one years ago and I can't remember a thing..! All I know is that we made more mounting points for the engine to bolt up to. Thats when we were running the Kent Engine tho.

Hopefully that helps..!

[Storbeck]

"too much scrub and not enough castor angle, castor trail looks ok"

How much scrub and castor angle do you think it should have?

"at least there's not bags of kingpin"

Typically you have a tradeoff between low scrub and low kingpin inclination, should the car have less scrub and more kimgpin in your opinion? How much do you think is okay?

"no way near enough toe stiffness at the front, and the rear looks suspect also"

I suppose the more the merrier, but what makes you say not nearly enough?

"not enough Ackerman (considering the rack placement)"

How much ackerman do you think it should have?

"A lack of camber on this beast"

Do you mean static camber? seems like that would be easily adjustable.

"too much rising rate front and rear"

What sort of motion ratio curve do you favor, and wow that's impressive if you can tell this by looking

"i don't like the front rocker mounting"
Why?

"phosphate, cadmium, or electrodeless nickel coatings on billet parts would be better than black oxide"

Yeah, but $$

"why the psudo-top-hat design to mount the front disks?"

I agree seems half assed

"i hate the steering joint and it's arrangement (the slop was unbelievable)"

Yeah, why are they useing a HUGE u joint for that, can't they get an apex joint on this thing, they used one on the shifter.

[kwancho]

Anyone know what shocks those are?

[Lukin]

Some interesting comments by Frank. I started on a RF94 and love most FFords. I really only spent a few months on it properly and was learning at the time so never got to the indepth (kinematic) analysis, so what I might be saying may be utter crap.

Why would you of had a rear ARB adjuster if you only had one? We predominantly tuned off the front bar. Given the geometry of each bar, of course we get more return for a small change on the rear than we did on the front. We really only changed the rear if we had oversteer or if we wanted to increase/decrease the overall stiffness. Though that might of been a nasty habit.

What's the motion ratio on the rear? We had a compeltely stupid one (2.15) which meant bugger all damper travel. Good thing about that I guess is damper settings will never be too far off, bad bit is fine tuning is very difficult. I didn't get the time to try a new bellcrank arrangement.

I agree about your ackerman. Ours was much worse than that and refabbing a new steering bracket gave amazing results. Sort of follows, no playing with elastic weight transfer in the first part of turn in unless there is a lateral load. Anyway, more ackerman is good for those cars I think, at least on the newer ones. The older ones (RF91 and below) did seem to have slight issues with turn in oversteer. However the 94 was planted in comparison.

[Lukin]

The fronts are Penske's. Look like 8100's. The rears look like the 8760 (given the rigid cannister mountings).

It looks like there is a fair amount of preload on the front. How much droop limiting?

[andrewd]

i believe that stupid questions deserve stupid answers

[Frank]

people who don't have details in their public profile are simply ignored, bignuts

[andrewd]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Frank:
people who don't have details in their public profile are simply ignored, bignuts </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ignored? was that supposed to be an insult? what a lame come back

[Higgi]

Ah yes, the Spectrum 010 with the new Ford Fiesta engine. I can tell you from personal experience that these cars have a very good CD and will draft right past you on a good straight! A lot of work has gone into the body shape and reducing the cross-sectional area of the main roll hoop bulkhead. You can see from the pics that the chassis has been designed around the body at the front bulkhead as it is not rectangular as is the case with most Ford chassis's.

If I remember right when they were first debuted in the New Zealand championship in 2003 they were rather fragile with uprights breaking as well as rear suspension pick-up points on the gearbox. Put it this way, I wouldn't like to be in one in a big crash as the Van Diemen's such as my RF94 "Stealth"� and the new 2001'-04' cars seem much more solidly built. I would like to know also what sort of figures are found from a hub to hub chassis test.

Oh and yes the rear roll centre does look a little high from that photo which seems to be a weird perspective and maybe be uneven ground. The RF94 cars and older have a higher rear roll centre than the Spectrum and the new Van Diemen's and although they are much more than the 40-50mm Frank suggested, the photo seems a little high.

I would attach some pics but i havent a clue how! Any ideas?

[Frank]

Bignuts:
thats not realy an insult, just a statement of what i think goes on in here.

most people have a public profile

its usually the people without a profile who cause trouble and want to be anonymous, or offer little to anyone

Higgi:

you will need to put pictures on your own server/ftp space, you then can then paste a html URL (which will display a link), or an image url (which will display the photo)