non symmetrical cars

Smokey 6 litre · 18 Mar 2003, 13:58 (Ref:540124)

If this has already been asked the please forgive me.

I have always been rather in the dark as to why the open top Le Mans cars dont have symmetrical bodywork, the cockpits are normally situated to the right (looking from front) side of the car.

I cant understand this as i have always thought that a car should be symmetrical to keep the balance even.

I would be very grateful if someone could explain why this is done.

Lee Janotta · 18 Mar 2003, 14:02 (Ref:540125)

Obstensibly, all of these cars, including the prototypes, are supposed to be derived from road going cars, or at least concepts of road-going cars. Therefore, room for at least two seats in the cockpit.

krt917 · 18 Mar 2003, 14:03 (Ref:540126)

I'm not sure, but I think it might be in the rules. The idea is that a 'Sportscar' should be able to seat at least two - hence the 'provision' for a passenger seat even if it is never used and is in fact merely cosmetic.

bigh · 18 Mar 2003, 14:32 (Ref:540151)

The Bentley Boys have to have somewhere to put their picnic hamper!
H

Smokey 6 litre · 18 Mar 2003, 15:23 (Ref:540223)

i see, though couldn't they claim that it is a set-up like a Mclaren F1 and say that the seats are postitioned behind. that might make the car too wide though.

pirenzo · 18 Mar 2003, 16:28 (Ref:540265)

The cockpit is made up (in the rules sense) of two equal volumes, one for the driver, the other for the hypothetical driver. The two must be the same size, and also completely symetrical. When the rules talk about dimensions of footboxes etc, they refer to the size of these volumes. So if it says for instance the footbox must be 300x330mm that mean the internal cross-section of the footbox must measure 300x330 (NOTE:330 is the width that applies to each volume, so the overall internal width is 660mm)
Therefore the outside width of the foot boxes are around 340x700mm

Smokey 6 litre · 19 Mar 2003, 09:38 (Ref:540991)

thank you, i understand a lot better now, that always puzzled me.
then isn't this another area where closed cars have a advantage, being more symmetrical and therefore more evenly balanced.

Tim Northcutt · 19 Mar 2003, 13:55 (Ref:541170)

It is interesting to note, that in the "other seat" area, the rules (at least the 2002 rules did) make a provision for putting, as an example, batteries or components in the bottom of that compartments, but they must be covered by a solid piece of hard material...

If a team were to build an LMP with a Hybrid-Electric powered system (like the Panoz Q9 tried a few years ago with the V-8 adn the Zytek Generator), the battery system could theoretically go in the bottom of that compartment, but not fill it up.

gttouring · 19 Mar 2003, 14:54 (Ref:541217)

i'd love to see a Q9 again, the potential and the Greenies would be so happy racing with real controversy to the unintiated-beautiful.

Tim Northcutt · 19 Mar 2003, 16:19 (Ref:541262)

The concept makes a lot of sense, provided the bugs can get worked out of it...

From what i remember, the individual elements of the electric side worked well, but somehow the computer management unit had too many problems...

The $$$ to build, test and refine such a system would make in within reach of only the big budget "factory" teams....

Maybe one of the Japanese makers (who are already jumping on this technology and selling it in passenger cars) will take this approach for endurance racing...

bigh · 19 Mar 2003, 16:39 (Ref:541296)

Did the Panoz work on a rechargeable battery system? For some reason I have it in my head that it stored the kinetic energy in a flywheel, now that would be some energy sink, I'm not sure I'd like to be sitting on it....
H

pirenzo · 19 Mar 2003, 16:43 (Ref:541304)

I'm sure that would give the closed cars an advantage. I have a feeling that the new roll hoop regs would seriously muck up the airflow to the rear wing as well

danhx · 19 Mar 2003, 16:57 (Ref:541319)

One of the other problems with the Q9 was the sheer mass of the thing. From what i understand it was incredibly overweight due to the electrical components. If that technology is to make its way into racing then they'll certainly have to slim 'er down. The best "green technology" going in racing right now (best being most competitive) is the Nasamax team with their alternatively feueled, Cosworth powered Reynard 2KQ-LM. If they can work some of the bugs out of the system the car might be halfway decent. Heat is a viscious foe of this car(it lost a ton of power at Sebring when the temperatures climbed), so it's good that Le Mans doesn't have a particularly sweltering climate.

pirenzo · 19 Mar 2003, 17:02 (Ref:541324)

Altenatively fueled eh?
I think Tim will have somethoing to say about that...

Tim Northcutt · 19 Mar 2003, 21:00 (Ref:541533)

The system, with bateries, added 242 lbs. and the generator weighed about 50 of that.

The energy was stored in a specially-created battery pack created by Varta...they were nickel & cadmium (spelling?) batteries that could recharge fairly quickly...the volume and size of the battery pack was probably an issue, because I have not been able to verify how big it was, but it sat in the passenger seat area of the Panoz GT chassis...the system was a 280-volt system...

battery technology has advanced greatly since that time...they are now building Lithium polymer bateries that are much smaller, lighter, more powerful and recharge quicker than the system that the Panoz Q-9 used...

By using a lighter weight of composite (like Zylon) to build the chassis, virtually all of that 242 lbs. of weight can be saved...

NOTE: Zylon is 15% lighter than carbon fiber composites and twice as strong as carbon fiber or Kevlar...the company that makes it admits that race teams are experimenting with making cars out of it, but for confidentiality reasons, won't say who is doing it.

The system also saves weight by replacing the alternator and the starter....

Its real advantage is with the regenerative braking it provides for the car to save on brake wear, and the fuel mileage without losing speed and horsepower....

It is estimated that this system would save about 25-minutes in pit stops in a 24 hr. race...7-8 more laps you could run at Le Mans that would otherwise be spent in the pits....

Sounds like a pretty sizable advantage to me....

Why no one does it now????

I'm sure that Panoz had lots of bugs, glitches, etc. to sort out with it...plus the cost to develop it wouldn't be cheap...especially since it was on a front-engined car and not a mid-engine or rear-engined power train....

I'm no tree-hugger...just a guy who would be looking for any advantage I could get over my competition....this option (if I win the lottery jackpot and start a race team) would be high on my list in endurance racing...

ZXKawboy · 20 Mar 2003, 00:12 (Ref:541727)

If the Japanese makers *do* jump on a project such as this, it might prove interesting indeed.

Though...the idea of a car making its way down the Mulsanne Straight without the sound that typically accompany's such speeds might me eerie. Just wind and tire noise? Maybe the whirring of an electric motor?

And refueling? Would that (eventually) consist of dropping new batteries in place of pumping gallons and gallons of fuel into a tank?

Drivetrains will change..fatigue factors on the drivers, as well...no more engine noise to either keep one awake, hypnotize him into a somnolescence....

Lots of changes to contemplate....

But for now...lets see how the Nasamax team does. Interesting concept there, if they can get the re-starting issues worked out.

Tim Northcutt · 20 Mar 2003, 01:42 (Ref:541771)

A Hybrid-Electric runs on fuel for its combustion engine, just like any other car....

The Panoz Q9 had a Ford 6 liter v-* with the Zytek Generator adding an assist...supposedly the generater really helped it off the corners....

The generator gives it a power assist (about 100-120 extra hp) thus making the combustion engine do less work and save on fuel...the extra weight they carried kind of offset the overall top speed, but with the lighter bateries and a lighter composite for building the car, the extra horses would be of benefit for higher speed from this system.

Panoz thought that with the configuration they had, they would do it on one set of batteries....with the newer technology, they certainly could...

The most difficult part of the equation apparently was the computerized ECU that coordinated the generator with the engine...

All of the components worked well separately, but they ran into trouble when the system would have problems coordinating them together...

cybersdorf · 20 Mar 2003, 06:59 (Ref:541867)

Quote:

Originally posted by Tim Northcutt
All of the components worked well separately, but they ran into trouble when the system would have problems coordinating them together...

The Story of Racing.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
wish list of cars to be made to gt1 cars	slicktsax	Sportscar & GT Racing	24	6 Oct 2005 09:02
GP 2 cars are approximately 3 secs faster than the F3000 cars	Frank_White	National & International Single Seaters	18	5 Nov 2004 23:06
IMSA GTP cars should have been 2,000+ horsepower cars	Green Monster	North American Racing	29	17 Jun 2004 01:20
F1 Safety Cars / Medical Cars	Mark Stevens	Formula One	8	21 May 2004 18:10
2003 Touring cars - what predictions for teams and cars (and colours!!)	adamp_uk	Touring Car Racing	16	17 Oct 2002 20:12