Belly tank help

Moderator: DLRA

Rob
Posts: 1092
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Richmond, NSW. DLRA #888

Post by Rob » Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:43 pm

Dave,

I'd seen another but it was much smaller, not that I pretend to know all there is to know about them. As you say, the change in volume for 12" length would hardly be worthwhile.

Anyhow, enough thread hijacking by me, 'twas just a passing observation.

Cheers,
Rob
I owe, I owe, so off to work I go.

nitro-nige
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:38 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by nitro-nige » Sun Dec 06, 2009 10:03 pm

scooner car wrote:With the diff does it need to have full floating hubs???like a truck diff


It's my understanding that you can have "non retaining" axles (ala GM 12 bolt). The have to be semi floating (ala Ford 9 inch) or full floating.
So to answer your question no I don't think so. Get an official answer on that though.

As for making your shell. If you're going to the trouble of drawing a B52 tank why not scale it down until the cross sectional area in the middle is just big enough to fit around the engine? You could even stretch or shrink the length while you're at it.

Dr Goggles
Posts: 1310
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:23 pm
Location: Right behind you Chief !

HAMB

Post by Dr Goggles » Sun Dec 06, 2009 10:17 pm

search the HAMB, there were two P38 sizes.


Alarm bells ringing here, don't make a tank, until you've built the car, and I mean finished ........it's a lot of trouble, to make one and if you do...make it to fit around a car you've built , not drawn.

Serious.
...few understand what I'm trying to do , but they vastly outnumber those who understand why..

David Leikvold
Posts: 978
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

bog, glass, bog

Post by David Leikvold » Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:50 am

Doc, you are so right about building the car and THEN making the body. And you are doubly right about the body being a lot of work. I can't believe how much time, effort and materials we've put into making the body panels for Trevor's streamliner. Of course the car is 8.5m long so that's only to be expected. We made two moulds for the bulk of the panels but they're all different in some way so the pieces we pull out of each mould are just the beginning. And plenty of other panels are done free hand so the amount of finishing they require is huge. Sand, fill, sand, fill seems to be all we've been doing for months. Last week I spent the whole night just tidying up the fit of the big NACA ducts that feed air to the radiator on one side and the intercooler on the other. I made the plug/mould for the ducts in customwood from specs that were accurate to the thou. That was fun, I got very close but I'm sure it wasn't perfect. A nice 5 axis mill would have been handy for that job! I'm enjoying the work because it is painstaking and not rushed but I won't be sorry to see the car in paint.

Scott, if you don't already have it, get yourself a copy of Street Machine Magazine's 2009 Hot Rod Annual. It has a very good 5 page spread on Al Fountain's belly tank. You'll find tons of useful info there. And when you have the tank sizes start planning the chassis and all the componentry. Try to make it fit inside the theoretical body size but if it can't, go longer rather than wider or higher. Make it easy to work on. Make all the body panels removable. If you want some inspiration for the chassis design you should look at some Formula Fords and other spaceframe open wheelers. While they're not exactly what you'll need, they are all well made commercial products with plenty of race success and no bad ideas in any of them. These two websites are a good start: www.my105.com and www.race-cars.com. And of course, our website www.slaughtermotorsport.com will be very useful. And when you do start the project find half a dozen mates to help you. Have fun.
Good, Fast, Cheap, pick any two!

Rob
Posts: 1092
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Richmond, NSW. DLRA #888

Re: HAMB

Post by Rob » Mon Dec 07, 2009 6:20 pm

[quote="Dr Goggles"]search the HAMB, there were two P38 sizes.[quote]

Doc,

Yeah but the other one was a heap smaller.

Large was variously reported as 305 or 315 US gallons, the smaller one was reported as 165 or 168 US gallon. Just to confuse things, drop tanks were also swapped between aircraft when necessary too. I have a photo of a P-47 with P-38 tanks somewhere. A quick Google search still came up with 13'1", "just over 13' ", 13' 4" for the larger P-38. Everyone agrees they were 36" diameter though :lol:

Cheers,
Rob
I owe, I owe, so off to work I go.

nitro-nige
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:38 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by nitro-nige » Tue Dec 08, 2009 12:35 pm

Stolen from the hot rod magazine website article about the GM/So cal speedshop lakester;

And now we pause for a history lesson. Southern California dry-lakes racing was thriving before WWII, and when racer Bill Burke went to war, he noticed that the underwing fuel tanks on P-51 Mustang aircraft were likely quite aerodynamic (in fact, the teardrop shape is nearly ideal), and that one could probably be used as the body for a lakes racer, later to be known as a lakester. The 165-gallon P-51 tank proved a tad small, and Burke later used a 315-gallon P-38 Lightning tank that was in fact a wing tank. Another hot-rodder who built a P-38-tank racer (made of two bottom-halves bolted together) was Dave DeLangton, who in 1951 went into partnership with Burbank, California's Alex Xydias, who had founded So-Cal Speed Shop in 1946. The tank would be known as the So-Cal Speed Shop Spl. through 1953, though other owners, drivers, and crew were involved after DeLangton left for the Korean War. The So-Cal tank set Bonneville Salt Flats records with both flathead V-8 60s and conventional, Bobby Meeks-built Edelbrock flathead Mercs, running a best of 198 mph in 1952. The last time the tank flew the So-Cal banner was 1953, and it's that event that's memorialized with this recreation.

Dr Goggles
Posts: 1310
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:23 pm
Location: Right behind you Chief !

nearly............

Post by Dr Goggles » Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:42 pm

Bill Burke's first tank was "front engined"...here it is....

Image
he welded a bike seat to the tailshaft tube but soon realised that by sitting up front he could get way lower and soon came up with the more familiar format.....

Image
I put this recently on the landracing site...

Alex Xydias paid Bill Burke $60 to build the frame for the first version of the So-Cal tank,it was a model T, Xydias and co( Baldwin, Batchelor et al) mounted the drive line and bodywork...and rudimentary "safety gear". It first ran in the spring of '48. A few years later they had Valley Custom beat the aluminium body that Batchelor had drawn and turned the bellytank into the So-Cal streamliner which became "Americas fastest Hot-Rod". Dean Batchelor had been inspired by the pre-war Auto-Union streamline GP cars and his inspiration turned into a record breaker.Batchelor was nearly killed at El Mirage when the car went sideways and flipped,they repaired it but never drove the car again handing the duties to Ray Charbonneau and Bill Dailey.

Dailey himself was nearly killed at Daytona Beach when the 'liner got the wind and flipped an estimated seven times , completely destroying the car.He spent a month in a coma and his injuries included a broken skull.

After this Xydias decided he couldn't justify the cost of building another 'liner but he still had the running gear and the old tank body so he had Dave de Langton who worked in the shop make a new chassis from 10 guage U section.

The obvious differences between the first and second versions were...
1./ the chassis.
2./ the front end, the latter car had Hartford shocks, more caster and hairpins.
3./ The latter car had the bottom of the tank chopped flat
4./ the latter car had a bubble canopy
5./ The earlier car started with the exhaust exiting via the tail tip, the second car had the exhaust cowls.

This information, was drawn from Mark Christensen's "So-Cal Speed Shop" book and Dean Batchelor's "Dry Lakes and Drag Strips".

Dr G
Last edited by 1 on Dr Goggles, edited 0 times in total.
...few understand what I'm trying to do , but they vastly outnumber those who understand why..

User avatar
Reverend Hedgash
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:19 pm
Location: Hobart, Tasmania

Post by Reverend Hedgash » Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:25 pm

If you are going to make your own tank (and hence is not a true belly tank) then why do you need the measurements of anyone elses?

Surely you would make the best shape for the purpose?

I agree with Goggles about leaving it as late as possible, but you need a plan and even a mock up to get going otherwise you'll be going around in circles for ever.

The good thing about having an original tank of fixed size (combined with the decision to not alter its length) meant that it made a lot of decisions for us was a lot easier becasue we didn't have infinite options. Size of engine, where to put things, blah, all came from what we could or could not do with what we had.

If you are building your own tank, then the world is your oyster and you can decide on all the drivetrain components you want / can afford / have already and then find the best shape tank to fit, but you have to make all the decisions...

As good as this sounds, I have really yet to see a mock bellytank look as good as a traditional one, maybe because they haven't worked as hard to get everything in the best place aesthetically.

This doesn't mean it cannot be done of course, and I think that there are a lot of opportunities of making a better design than what the belly tank gives.

For example, being a lakester, (usually) the wheels have to be external to the body work, but the axles and suspension components don't have to be. The traditional bellytank body doesn't handle these elements well and they are usually left in the wind causing unecessary drag.

Also it is a trick to get the driver's head and cage in the tank with the three options being to leave it out (eg Kelly), build it in an extension (Jarman-Stewart bellytank) or have everything inside (Fountain).

Other issues include air inlet and cooling for the engine, exhaust location and parachute location, as well as changing class option of wheel spats for streamliner class.

If I was going to the trouble of scratchbuilding a whole body, I'd take these considerations into account and create a new extreme lakester body which was original and fit for purpose, rather than go through an arduous process to copy the look of a car whose whole creation was to use a found body and therefore not be so arduous!

A part of the charm and enjoyment I get from hot rodding and LSR is the thinking in new ways and being creative, not just the replication of old ideas.

Also, if you get it right, it will be faster (the purpose of LSR) better looking (if you get it right) and more marketable!

My thoughts on it, please don't take it as criticism, just what I feel after helping make a traditional yet contemporary bellytank.

reverend H+
DLRA Member#412

Dr Goggles
Posts: 1310
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:23 pm
Location: Right behind you Chief !

faint praise

Post by Dr Goggles » Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:52 pm

Reverend Hedgash wrote:My thoughts on it, please don't take it as criticism, just what I feel after helping make a traditional yet contemporary bellytank.
reverend H+


er, this is a guy with fairly highly developed CAD draughting skills on top of a very highly developed eye for design, line and style.....

we fought over very many details on this car and the end result ,

Image

is a result of his skills, he is understating EVERYTHING in his above post....you'd do well to take heed. My part was roustabout, hassler and site manager......Fit and finish wise it ain't the best example ,it is as simple as they come( now ain't the time to open the suspension can of worms) but, I couldn't have finished it without him, he wouldn't have finished it without me, but finish it we did and we're taking it back next year for it's second year ....I can't imagine doing it by myself, it would be a mindf***.
...few understand what I'm trying to do , but they vastly outnumber those who understand why..

Dr Goggles
Posts: 1310
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:23 pm
Location: Right behind you Chief !

Batch

Post by Dr Goggles » Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:07 pm

More on Dean Batchelor here, legend of the salt , dry lakes and car design and racing for a long time......

http://www.jalopyjournal.com/?p=7075
...few understand what I'm trying to do , but they vastly outnumber those who understand why..

DON NOBLE
Posts: 742
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:37 am
Location: PAIHIA , BAY OF ISLANDS , New Zealand

Re: nearly............

Post by DON NOBLE » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:56 pm

Dr Goggles wrote: Mark Christensen's "So-Cal Speed Shop" book and Dean Batchelor's "Dry Lakes and Drag Strips".

Dr G

Ah 2 of my favorite bedtime story books , have read them over and over ......
NOW LIVE IN NEW ZEALAND
RED NISSAN WAGON 1986 # 281
2002 F/PRO 125.4 MPH RECORD
2003 F/PRO 140.2 MPH RECORD
2005 F/GC 137.9 MPH RECORD
2006 F/GC 141.1 MPH RECORD
1/4 mile ( drags ) @ Willowbank 14.15 @ 97.61 mph August 2006

grumm441
Posts: 522
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 5:43 pm
Location: Buggery, a tidy town
Contact:

Re: faint praise

Post by grumm441 » Sun Dec 13, 2009 1:24 am

Dr Goggles wrote:
Reverend Hedgash wrote:My thoughts on it, please don't take it as criticism, just what I feel after helping make a traditional yet contemporary bellytank.
reverend H+



we fought over very many details on this car and the end result ,


"Fought" past tense

right from when you guys spent two weekends in the garage designing your own steering, to asking RH if he was planning to get in the car anytime soon on the start line
I haven't fought, but I've held my head in my hands, shook my head, and rolled my eyes a lot
G
They make it
I make it work

Dr Goggles
Posts: 1310
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:23 pm
Location: Right behind you Chief !

Horny

Post by Dr Goggles » Mon Dec 14, 2009 9:16 am

grumm441 wrote: I haven't fought, but I've held my head in my hands, shook my head, and rolled my eyes a lot
G

yeah I know Colonel I've got a picture of it......

Image
...few understand what I'm trying to do , but they vastly outnumber those who understand why..

User avatar
Reverend Hedgash
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 2:19 pm
Location: Hobart, Tasmania

Re: faint praise

Post by Reverend Hedgash » Mon Dec 14, 2009 10:19 am

grumm441 wrote:
right from when you guys spent two weekends in the garage designing your own steering,
G


Are yes, the steering. We finally got it all in the mock up frame with it being a bit of a juggle for space and wanting it to protude in the right part of the bodywork and the like. Have researched the crap out of camber, ackerman and castor, all looking good.

Sat in the car and turned the steering wheel... beautiful action, the wheels turned what we thought was just the right amount... wait ! Hang on!

I turn the wheel again... to the left... and watch the wheels turn to the right...

Suddenly I feel like Michael Caine at the end of the Italian Job.

...er...

ahhh so many moments.

rH+
Last edited by 2 on Reverend Hedgash, edited 0 times in total.
DLRA Member#412

grumm441
Posts: 522
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 5:43 pm
Location: Buggery, a tidy town
Contact:

Re: very faint praise

Post by grumm441 » Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:45 pm

Reverend Hedgash wrote:
I turn the wheel again... to the left... and watch the wheels turn to the right...

rH+


No .
I'm thinking more of you designing your own steering box, for want of a better description.
G
They make it
I make it work

Post Reply