Front wheel drive roadster anyone?

[nitro-nige]

Found this on the net.
Might add some fuel to the "how to stop a roadster spinning" debate.

[ROSS BROWN]

Im in for a debate "NITRO"
Modified Roadster :: Fuel -Gas Roadster
The rule states:
Headrest and Parachute pack fairings are allowed,as long as they are no larger than the headrest or parachute pack and do not extend past the rear of the body shell.

so why not this :

[img][img]http://i855.photobucket.com/albums/ab115/SOLTOP10/ROAD2.jpg[/img][/img]

[DLRA 112]

More information please. What is the motor ? What has the front end been taken from ? Looks interesting.

[Greg Watters]

4wd the outlawed class at scta events ??

[DLRA 112]

4wd the outlawed class at scta events ??

I have to ask the question - Is it Four Wheel Drive, All Wheel Drive or Front Wheel drive ?

[nitro-nige]

4wd the outlawed class at scta events ??

I have to ask the question - Is it Four Wheel Drive, All Wheel Drive or Front Wheel drive ?

It looks to be front wheel drive, with a modified winters (or similar) quick-change.
Isn't there a lakester being built in the US with a frontwheel drive quick-change using the housing ends from a 4wd pick-up?
I found these pictures from some event coverage from Loring 2009.

[nitro-nige]

This is the one I was thinking of.

[nitro-nige]

[DLRA 112]

It looks to be front wheel drive, with a modified winters (or similar) quick-change.
Isn't there a lakester being built in the US with a frontwheel drive quick-change using the housing ends from a 4wd pick-up?
I found these pictures from some event coverage from Loring 2009.

Looking at the wheels I would think front wheel drive only and with that Winter Diff it would have taken a lot of work to build. You would have to say thumbs up to the owner / builder.

This is the one I was thinking of.

Again you have to admire all that work on the front end.

[Lynchy]

and his shed...

diner in the background. Projector and surround sound set up...

[Reverend Hedgash]

Nice work Ross on the Mod, but it extends beyond the body at the rear.

My guess is that it would it would improve stability by pushing the centre of pressure back but would increase the wetted area and hence drag whilst not improving the chaotic airflow around the rollcage...

rH+

[ROSS BROWN]

Inspector Headgash.
Thought I,d get picked for that
Here's my 2.02 cents worth (gst included )
I believe that as much as anybody could, it would be very hard BUT NOT IMPOSSIBLE to make a worse rear top panel for a land speed car than what a roadster has (a curved flat planel with lift written all over it)
Did somewhat of a search on the 2114 car and found very little. The car is very well built and he has used the lower panel on the grill to create a depression behind it which would last about half the length of the car before it began to reattach.
The car picture 2 ( which we look at every day ) which I'd like to have a better look at has directional fins underneath it ,an excellent aid but once again adding to the wetted area.
Myself I would prefer the stability of directional fins than the loss wetted aera .

QUESTION : For what reason were the 4WD cars banned.

[img][img]http://i855.photobucket.com/albums/ab115/SOLTOP10/ROADSTER2.jpg[/img][/img]

[Greg Watters]

they could go faster

[penny]

i love the exhaust on the saltosaurus car. it looks like they built a whole car and forgot to tell the exhaust guy the motor was in backwards, or they are race boat pipes and they didnt like the look and swaped them side to side or ran out of time and had to load up and get to the salt. but maybe they just want to make a statement. maybe it runs the other way . the front runners are at the right of the photo ??

[David Leikvold]

Ross, Greg's answer "they could go faster" is probably the real one but your question is very valid. There's no speed limit on the salt. When salt racing has literally dozens of car, ute, truck and bike classes and just as many engine classes and any number of other variations on a theme it really doesn't make much sense to have a prohibition on 4x4 in anything that isn't Special Construction. It's just another class, it's not a big deal. We have more classes than cars and probably will have for many years to come. Last time I looked at an old SCTA rule book there were still a few vacant classes there after 50 years of Bonneville.

But I'm not trying to promote acceptance of 4x4, I'm just asking why not have separate 4x4 classes. If someone decided to build a Competition Coupe with a Nissan GTR (for example) it wouldn't have class eligibility and couldn't run. I can't think of any valid reason for that. For that matter there's no good reason why thrust powered special construction cars couldn't be allowed either. Just in case anyone was wondering, I don't have a jet engine under the house or a GTR either

Cheers
Dave