Rob Woods

[Rob Woobs]

Just wanted to say congrats to Rob's team, I gave him so good ball busting earlier in the year about his briggs engine and no dif. Look likes Rob's bold ideas help earn his RIT team a top 40 finish this year. Kudos to Rob and his entire team.....

Was hoping to get some insight on how the Baja chassis and engine package worked out?

Rod Woobs

[Rob Woobs]

Just wanted to say congrats to Rob's team, I gave him so good ball busting earlier in the year about his briggs engine and no dif. Look likes Rob's bold ideas help earn his RIT team a top 40 finish this year. Kudos to Rob and his entire team.....

Was hoping to get some insight on how the Baja chassis and engine package worked out?

Rod Woobs

[RiNaZ]

I dont think Rob Woods is from RIT. I think he's in Univ of Buffalo NY. I was wondering if he was even at MPG this year.

[rjwoods77]

Hey everyone,

The team didnt make it this year even though we busted ass to get there. Kinda hard to do it on 4500 bucks, 5 people who actually did anything and numerous problems in between. I am sure it is the same story others have but in our case it didnt happen. Four of our guys went down to learn though which was a hell of a learning experience for them. I couldnt due to money problems which was my own fault for using my personal funds to purchase parts because of an ever fading timeline and lack of action by our school and our team. I am almost fully reimburst but that is the reason why i wasnt there. Sucks but that is life. I got my life a bunch more straightend out but I dont know if I will be back next year. Too many personal life issues to deal with this stress anymore. At least I busted above a 3.0 both semesters this year. I guess I am finally learning.

On a brighter note i would like to congratulate Dearborn and RMIT as being shinning examples of bucking the norm and doing well which I have always held in high regard. I still owe Jeff Pearson and a number of you other folks out there that get who I am and what I say a tee shirt. I havent forgotten you guys. Lightweight and simple seems to really starting to pay off for teams that have their act together. Dearborn(30th) once again shows that this competition really doesnt have shit to do with power and I hope that they get the engine package finally working the way it should and get them into the top 20 where their "Baja/Formula" car should be. If anyone hasnt noticed the Dearborn car is a rechassised old version University of Michigan Baja car which was super successful in mini baja much to Dearborns notice.

"Was hoping to get some insight on how the Baja chassis and engine package worked out?"

I obviously cant tell you but Dearborn sure could.

[drivetrainUW-Platt]

what the hell, who is Rob Woobs and why is so close to Rob Woods....I'm so confused!!!!
anyhew...we were talking to the guys next door in the hotel (Alabama...yeehaw) and there school started an all girls baja team...and they were failing miserably
so the formula guys build a a bomula car(formula baja) but apparently they built it like a formula car with .035 wall a arms and the likes... great story and an awsome bunch of guys, thanks for the rain tires!

[RiNaZ]

mike, rob woods is the guy that everybody loves to hate and i guess someone got so irritated that a guy came up with a nickname of rob woobs in being sarcastic to rob woods.

i heard about the bomula car. My school's all girls team werent too happy when one of the judges refer the auburn team as all girl's team at the banquet. I dont blame them though, the girls in my school worked so hard in building their baja car w/out the help of the guys in the shop. Not that we didnt wanna help, but they just wouldnt let us http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Garlic]

Backstory on Rob-

- Comes on here telling everyone how his ideas are better than everyone else's, and that we're all silly for building cars like most do

- Talks about how badass his car is, but gives little to no details 'it's a secret!' for example, "Stick yourself to the same monkey see, monkey do formula that most people use then you will have problems like this. Engineering is suppose to be creative within tight confines of resources. You'll see it when we show up.
"

- Proceeds to miss registration for 2005 competition! But says they are going to show thier secret stuff off in England at Formula Student

- Apparently missed that, but hey, should have an extra year to get the car done, and perfect his special secret blend.

- Fast forward to over a year later, still no car, just excuses, and probably still the holier-than-thou attitude

[ach1]

This was the 2nd year for the U of M Dearborn V-Twin Briggs formula car. It worked well, but still needs work. We had a blown head gasket during the enduro, which actually sealed up half way through the race. We were turning low 70sec laps when it was running right, but the first ~6 laps were terrible.

I'm estimating we lost 140 points on this based on the results, which would have been 18th Overall (and 6th in endurance because of our excellent fuel economy/low HP). But racing happens and there is always next year, and there's a lot of other good teams with "what ifs" this year too.

Our formula car design is very similar our baja cars, in fact there are a lot of carry over parts (front knucles, front and rear hubs, differential, halfshafts, CVT clutches) We have taken a very reliable baja design (which is unique in itself) and made an FSAE car out of it. Our theory is Simple, Reliable and Cheap. Nothing fancy required.

You could build our car from scratch for $10,000 and be very competitive with it in any parking lot SCCA race. 15th in Skid Pad, 30th Acceleration, 3rd Cost, 2nd Fuel Economy, and CVT trans=really fun and affordable car.

It's not designed to be a 1st place car, just a top 20 out of 140. Hopefully we can keep head gaskets in it and prove it next year. I was really looking forward to seeing the SUNY car this year. In fact, any pictures to show us?

[Mike Cook]

I doubt that car would be competitive in a SCCA race. Not to bash you, but hell our car wouldn't really be competitive in an scca race, at least not with all those pesky wing cars flying around. But then SAE's idea of an autocross track hardly aligns itself with SCCA's idea of an autocross.

[ach1]

I'd say it is highly competitive in SCCA Solo parking lot races as I'm sure your car is too...
Our car lacks top end speed, we have low end torque, which matches perfectly for racing in a parking lot with lots of turns/ relatively low speed.

[SpdRcr]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mike Cook:
But then SAE's idea of an autocross track hardly aligns itself with SCCA's idea of an autocross. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mike,
Where on earth do you get the justification to make that statement?

..Aside from the fact that 'our' autoX track is narrower, simply because all of our cars are narrower than the street cars run on the typical autoX course.

[Erich Ohlde]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SpdRcr:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mike Cook:
But then SAE's idea of an autocross track hardly aligns itself with SCCA's idea of an autocross. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mike,
Where on earth do you get the justification to make that statement?

..Aside from the fact that 'our' autoX track is narrower, simply because all of our cars are narrower than the street cars run on the typical autoX course. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that you answered your own question. The intent of this competition is to build an AutoX car and last I check SCCA was the largest sanctioning body for AutoX. Imagine if SCCA had to setup two courses at each event, one for street cars one for FSAE cars. Would this not be pointless and logistically improbable? Yes, SAE should have a course that meets SCCA rules however since many drivers that come to competition have little or no experience, this poses a safety concern and a catch-22.

[Mike Cook]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SpdRcr:
Mike,
Where on earth do you get the justification to make that statement?

..Aside from the fact that 'our' autoX track is narrower, simply because all of our cars are narrower than the street cars run on the typical autoX course. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um...let me think. The endurance track at competition had a 30 ft slalom. Scca's minimum slalom distance is 45 ft and I have rarely ever seen that in a course. Most the time it is bigger. Another point, our local tracks (and the national event I have been to) generally run in about the high 49 seconds range per lap. These tracks are much larger than SAE's, usually about a mile long. Consequently the average speed is much higher. Other than the one sweeper in the autocross and the one sweeper in endurance there was NO high speed turns. Even these turns weren't over 40mph. In the endurance run almost every turn expect for maybe two we're first gear turns. At our local region the only thing I ever use first gear for is launching. Maybe your not familiar with SCCA tracks. I invite you to view erik kohlers videos on UTA's website. Then come back and tell me I'm crazy.

I feel bad for the winged cars...

[Sam Zimmerman]

That's another thread completely. I believe this one was started to make fun of Rob.

j/k

http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Sooner_Electrical]

I second Sam Zimmerman's post, although that I agree that SCCA's Autocross courses are much faster it has nothing to do with Rob. :-)

[SpdRcr]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mike Cook:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SpdRcr:
Mike,
Where on earth do you get the justification to make that statement?

..Aside from the fact that 'our' autoX track is narrower, simply because all of our cars are narrower than the street cars run on the typical autoX course. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um...let me think. The endurance track at competition had a 30 ft slalom. Scca's minimum slalom distance is 45 ft and I have rarely ever seen that in a course. Most the time it is bigger. Another point, our local tracks (and the national event I have been to) generally run in about the high 49 seconds range per lap. These tracks are much larger than SAE's, usually about a mile long. Consequently the average speed is much higher. Other than the one sweeper in the autocross and the one sweeper in endurance there was NO high speed turns. Even these turns weren't over 40mph. In the endurance run almost every turn expect for maybe two we're first gear turns. At our local region the only thing I ever use first gear for is launching. Maybe your not familiar with SCCA tracks. I invite you to view erik kohlers videos on UTA's website. Then come back and tell me I'm crazy.

I feel bad for the winged cars... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Mike, looks like AutoX events vary from region to region. I have competed at events that ranged from low 40 seconds to mid-high 50 second range. Keep in mind each region does not have the same locations to race in; some regions have small skid pads, some have an entire back straightof a road course. Speed will directly related to where the event is held. You are right about the slalom, our SAE ones are babies compared to traditional AutoX slaloms.

And I guess I did answer my own question in my post. I am assuming you race Solo II. What class?

[SpdRcr]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sam Zimmerman:
That's another thread completely. I believe this one was started to make fun of Rob.

j/k

http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Sam, you are right. Lets get back on track.

[drivetrainUW-Platt]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SpdRcr:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mike Cook:
But then SAE's idea of an autocross track hardly aligns itself with SCCA's idea of an autocross. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mike,
Where on earth do you get the justification to make that statement?

..Aside from the fact that 'our' autoX track is narrower, simply because all of our cars are narrower than the street cars run on the typical autoX course. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't hit any cones...our car fit fine except for the last corner of endurance where our antipower steering put massive fatigue on the drivers.....

[Eshu]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ach1:
It's not designed to be a 1st place car, just a top 20 out of 140. Hopefully we can keep head gaskets in it and prove it next year. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Building a car and finishing enduro is an accomplishment, but what the hell? Not shooting for the top of the podium is self limiting.

I sat next to some U of M Dearborn supporters during the enduro in '05. They were speculating that the Dearborn car must be in a different class because its lower power and how great it was that it was giving the bigger class cars some competition. INSANITY. It is like saying "Jimmy is doing really well in the chess tournament considering his self-inflicted partial labotamy" or "Suzy's time is great considering she ran the marathon without shoes"

Dearborn, I wish you well. I hope you snag a top 20 finish next year, but I still don't get it.

Now how about some Rob Woods bashing? Anyone want to share their favorite Rob Woods' silly ass comment? Here, let me start. Remember Robbie-boy calling carbon fiber masturbation?. I think he spelled masturbation wrong too. Good times. Good times.

Out

[Dan G]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Eshu:
Building a car and finishing enduro is an accomplishment, but what the hell? Not shooting for the top of the podium is self limiting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Its not that we were shooting for 20th, thats just where we expected to finish.

I'd find it hard to believe that any car over 600lbs will ever win the competition in its current direction. Does that mean that FSAE should just institute a 600lb weight limit and that anyone who's over that should be disqualified? The reality of this competition is that only one team will win and that only maybe 15-20 are capable of it. So until you can build a car that is amoung that very small group, you're fooling yourself to think you're shooting for the podium.

We started with a fresh team last year, almost entirely FSAE rookies (although a *bit* of succes in the Baja world). Last year's quasi-rookie team finished 39th. This year, even with the headgasket trouble that nearly DQ-d us from endurance, we managed to squeak out a 30th place finish, and were at the same pace as the teams finishing in the high teens when the engine was running at full power.

We will be shooting for a top ten finish in 2007. We will no longer be "self-limiting" the car with wimpy horsepower levels. We will have a mostly 3-year experienced team working on the 3rd design iteration of our chassis. We should be able to drop a decent amount of weight, hopefully enough to sneak under the 400lb barrier while retaining the full steel spaceframe.

So I guess thank you for the well wishes. We're pretty proud of what the team has accomplished thus far, and we're very excited about what lays ahead.

[ach1]

Dan, there was no Rob Woods quote in that reply, but I'll let it slide and make it up for you.

Yes, I know it is hard for some to comprehend that someone would enter a competition with the expectation of NOT winning. But our 30th place says that there are 110 other teams that failed their goals completely worse than us if they were going for 1st place. As Dan said, I think only 15-20 teams are even capable of a 1st place finish. So why should the others even show up? We showed up and for the most part we met our design objectives for the car. Don't set unrealistic goals. Our goal is to keep improving, making a more advanced/competitive car while maintaining reliability. Next year we are going to be shooting for a top 10 now that we have some experienced team members. With a little luck and a lot of work, hopefully we will get there.

If you made a pile of a car and expected to be 1st, that is insanity. (BTW, A lot of Kenyans run faster without shoes. I'd hate to be a police officer in Kenya, "ah crap he's running" Which actually brings up a perfect example. Why do people enter marathons knowing what their best time is and that they aren't going to win? It's about setting goals and achieving them.)

Ok now for a Rob Woods quote. Via phone, last year, just before competition. "Can I stay at your house, and I can't sleep on the floor, I'll need a comfortable bed because I have a bad back". At the time I really didn't know who he was other than they were building a Briggs car as well and wanted to share ideas. Common sense prevailed as I thought it was odd for a stranger to want to stay at my house and then kick me out of my bed...

[Eshu]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dan G:
The reality of this competition is that only one team will win and that only maybe 15-20 are capable of it. So until you can build a car that is amoung that very small group, you're fooling yourself to think you're shooting for the podium.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, sounds very rational. How did these 15-20 teams get where they are? How do you get to the elite group that has a legitmate shot of winning? Where's Waldo? Where's the Woods bashing? So many questions.

One more, how do you think you might do with a thumper wedged in that car of yours?

Out

[ach1]

Thumper? as in a single cylinder engine?
It seemed to work pretty good for RMIT this year.

[Eshu]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ach1:
Thumper? as in a single cylinder engine?
It seemed to work pretty good for RMIT this year. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, Thumper, single cylinder, not a cute bunny. It has worked for RMIT for several years now. A Formula Student win, an FSAE win and several strong finishes at FSAE-A. It seems to fit your overall concept. You might want to read this too: Managing Student Projects (http://students.sae.org/competitions/managingprojects.pdf)

Out

[ach1]

That managing student project article is very good! The only thing I think he left out is about not over designing and the benefits of simplicity.

RMIT and UM-D have unconvential drivetrains, but thats about the extent of similarities/design objectives. They probably have more team members than we have drill bits. We are a long ways out from carbon fiber/graphite a-arms and the such.

[Big Bird]

First of all, I like Rob Woods. He is the topic of this thread after all. For all the ridicule he has copped on these forums, he is capable of seeing outside the square - which I think is a valuable quality in an engineer.

I'll also add that I really liked Dearborn's approach to the comp. Once again originality - and what seems to be a good understanding and application of the resources available to them. We all start off with the same set of rules, and they completed the project scoring better than 110 other teams (some of which were highly fancied for a good finish). What's more they did this with a car that was probably a hell of a lot cheaper to build and took a lot less time to build as well. Kudos to UMD.

As for our team having more members than you have drill bits, I dunno how you can run a workshop with less than a dozen decent drill bits. Of course we have more drill bits than that, but as with any good drill set some get left in the box and you just don't find a use for them. Some are sharp. Some are blunt. Some look really promising when they are all shiny and new, but as soon as you subject them to any sort of hard work they go all blue around the edges and eventually snap. Some we lend out to other teams, but never the good ones. And for some strange reason, most of our good drill bits are all the same size. Oh, except for Grant. He's a bit skinnier than the rest of us, really good for drilling pilot holes and stuff.

Sorry, where was this thread going again? Oh yeah, Rob. Good guy. Come back mate, all is forgiven.

Cheers all,

[jsmooz]

Eshu - I really like the idea of the 450, however, I'm not sure that we have the manpower to get it running properly. WE had a lot of trouble getting the Briggs to run on EFI (finishing it 3 days before competition, and not great at that). That's not an excuse, it's just not trying to get us stuck in a hole we can't get out of.


Geoff - Nice analogy w/ the drill bits. That is exactly the way it goes.


Back to the topic.....I would have really liked to see 2 Briggs cars at competition. It would have been fun to see what someone else brings using the same engine. As I've seen CAD drawings the two cars would be totally different. So are you guys going to make it next year Rob? If you said some teammates were at competition did they stop by at talk to us? I don't remember any one saying they were from Buffalo.