[wingkey1]

Carburetor vs. FI – a perspective lived

Those who early on took to the competitive opportunities and fun provided by the auto, early in both the automobiles lifetime/line and the motorheads’ lifetime, were “mechanics”. After all, the auto was a marvel born of/from the mechanical/industrial period in our history. It was cams and bearings and gears and levers, shafts and tubes and arms, lobes, valves, venturis’, eccentrics, etc., etc. It was the stuff that a generation or more became adept at using, depending upon, understanding, implementing, fixing, modifying, and competing with. It became in many respects our identity and an item of pride.

In the way back, those who took fully to competing tolerated the invisible magics of the spark (electricity), vaporization, and vacuum primarily because our mechanical marvel needed them. But we confined them to distribution and management through mechanical methods.

With and over time electricity became electronics, and increasingly elements previously addressed solely via mechanical solutions were migrated. Gauges, distributor internals, etc. The initial intrusions did not feel to us to be a full attack/threat to the fundamental mechanics of our powerplant, its heritage, and our time developed comfort zone and area of expertise.

Enter fuel injection. Voodoo for sure. Maybe even borne of/from foreign soil. Surely experimental and not mainstream/stock. Element threatened – the carburetor, one of our true (for the motorhead of old) marvels, holy grails, etc. We long praised the governing body that responded with a firm “no” to the further encroachment into the mechanics of our beloved competitive machines. After all, it was voodoo, shifted control of our powerplant away from the mechanical, and if that wasn’t bad enough – we did not understand it.

Did we hang on to “what was” for too long? Oh, with the perfection of 20/20 historical hindsight I must say/admit – could be. But while actually being there at the time – knew I/we was/were right. But that was then, and this is now.

And besides that – What do we know (that’d be the mouse and I), anyway.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

My guess, and it's really just a "WAG", is that carburetors are inherently "dirty". FI is much cleaner burning and thus, more "earth friendly". (Made your day, didn't I, Bob? .

When did NA__AR begin to think green without some sort of provocation?
My SWAG is that they are courting at least two new manufacturers and are meeting with a "Carburetors? You have to be kidding!!"

So, they are "considering" (I think it's pretty much a done deal if these new parties are even remotely close to signing) entering the 21st Century and accepting fuel injection.

It also wasn't lost on me that while "All the teams were ask for input," it was HMS that is apparently getting the nod to "work out the details." (The old saying "The Devil is in the details," immediately comes to mind)

To me the bottom line is that it's just a case of NA__AR being NA__AR.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by wingkey1

Carburetor vs. FI – a perspective lived

Those who early on took to the competitive opportunities and fun provided by the auto, early in both the automobiles lifetime/line and the motorheads’ lifetime, were “mechanics”. After all, the auto was a marvel born of/from the mechanical/industrial period in our history. It was cams and bearings and gears and levers, shafts and tubes and arms, lobes, valves, venturis’, eccentrics, etc., etc. It was the stuff that a generation or more became adept at using, depending upon, understanding, implementing, fixing, modifying, and competing with. It became in many respects our identity and an item of pride.

In the way back, those who took fully to competing tolerated the invisible magics of the spark (electricity), vaporization, and vacuum primarily because our mechanical marvel needed them. But we confined them to distribution and management through mechanical methods.

With and over time electricity became electronics, and increasingly elements previously addressed solely via mechanical solutions were migrated. Gauges, distributor internals, etc. The initial intrusions did not feel to us to be a full attack/threat to the fundamental mechanics of our powerplant, its heritage, and our time developed comfort zone and area of expertise.

Enter fuel injection. Voodoo for sure. Maybe even borne of/from foreign soil. Surely experimental and not mainstream/stock. Element threatened – the carburetor, one of our true (for the motorhead of old) marvels, holy grails, etc. We long praised the governing body that responded with a firm “no” to the further encroachment into the mechanics of our beloved competitive machines. After all, it was voodoo, shifted control of our powerplant away from the mechanical, and if that wasn’t bad enough – we did not understand it.

Did we hang on to “what was” for too long? Oh, with the perfection of 20/20 historical hindsight I must say/admit – could be. But while actually being there at the time – knew I/we was/were right. But that was then, and this is now.

And besides that – What do we know (that’d be the mouse and I), anyway.

Actually it was the germans who first used fuel injection on airplanes engines.
Mercedes Benz and Auto Union then first experimented DI on their prototype GP cars in the late 30s/early 40s.
DI became stock car technology with the Goliath, Gutbroad and MB 300 SL (adapted from their F1 and Le Mans racecars) in the in 1950s. All thanks to Bosch.

GM/Corvette then followed.







There you have it, strictly stock cars with DI.

[DOF_power]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

When did NA__AR begin to think green without some sort of provocation?
My SWAG is that they are courting at least two new manufacturers and are meeting with a "Carburetors? You have to be kidding!!"

So, they are "considering" (I think it's pretty much a done deal if these new parties are even remotely close to signing) entering the 21st Century and accepting fuel injection.

It also wasn't lost on me that while "All the teams were ask for input," it was HMS that is apparently getting the nod to "work out the details." (The old saying "The Devil is in the details," immediately comes to mind)

To me the bottom line is that it's just a case of NA__AR being NA__AR.

I think it has to do with the fact that HMS are the de facto manufacturers, of the newly designed NA__AR COT. We're talking factories here not shop that tweaked/modified manufacturer production cars.
Something tell me whatever they'll ban and/or un-ban, HMS is gonna come out with an advantage.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

(1)I think it has to do with the fact that HMS are the de facto manufacturers, of the newly designed NA__AR COT. We're talking factories here not shop that tweaked/modified manufacturer production cars.

(2)Something tell me whatever they'll ban and/or un-ban, HMS is gonna come out with an advantage.

First paragraph: I think you've pretty much hit it. I think calling Hendrick and Roush "race shops," is kind of like calling Unilever "A company." Massive understatement. Which puts us into another of those theoretical discussions; Is Hendrick too big to fail? If, for some reason Hendrick would go Tango Uniform, what would the affect be on NA__AR? But, that's stuff for another thread.

Paragraph 2: To use a old American reply to the obvious, "Well duh! Ya think?!"

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by DOF_power

Actually it was the germans who first used fuel injection on airplanes engines.
DI became stock car technology with the Goliath, Gutbroad and MB 300 SL (adapted from their F1 and Le Mans racecars) in the in 1950s. All thanks to Bosch.

GM/Corvette then followed.

There you have it, strictly stock cars with DI.

So, you're saying that, at one time auto racing had a lot of relevance with the manufacturers? (Rhetorical question, of course.)

[Racer Duck]

still does, but it's more of a billboard for the brand, than advertising any sort of relationship between the cars on the track and the cars on the street.

[Racer Duck]

of course, I'm sure there are a certain amount of "sunburned neck individuals" who believe there is a connection.

[nascaraddict]

I was watching a tape of a race the other day... imagine that one. And I was noticeing something again. The "greenhouse" that the driver is in, has the support around the helmet where the driver sits. And right now; for the life of me I can't remember what that thing is called.

But that thing is so blame restrictive for the line of sight, you know that between that and the HANS device, there is hardly any way for the driver to see to the left or right. So he is almost totally dependant on the spotter and mirrors.

I know why they put those things in there. To keep the drivers head steady. But darn it all. They could at least made the things not as big.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by nascaraddict

I was watching a tape of a race the other day... imagine that one. And I was noticeing something again. The "greenhouse" that the driver is in, has the support around the helmet where the driver sits. And right now; for the life of me I can't remember what that thing is called.

But that thing is so blame restrictive for the line of sight, you know that between that and the HANS device, there is hardly any way for the driver to see to the left or right. So he is almost totally dependant on the spotter and mirrors.

I know why they put those things in there. To keep the drivers head steady. But darn it all. They could at least made the things not as big.

don't know the "official" name for them .. and it may vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. most people call them "wings" or "helmet supports".

and, yes, they do limit side vision considerably .. even without the HANS device.

but that's the way all premier racing series are going.

it used to be that drivers were less concerned about their personal safety than gathering all the available information about what was around them. (and I'm sure there are many that still feel that way.) but I suspect there's a lot of parents, spouses, children, siblings and significant others who have "forced" the change of attitude. so the new guys and gals are learing a new style of driving .. one in which the head doesn't swivel .. in return for not breaking a neck or turning their brains into mush.

personally, it seems like a good trade to me, but then what do I know?

[MikeRaceDayTek]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

don't know the "official" name for them .. and it may vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. most people call them "wings" or "helmet supports".

and, yes, they do limit side vision considerably .. even without the HANS device.

but that's the way all premier racing series are going.

it used to be that drivers were less concerned about their personal safety than gathering all the available information about what was around them. (and I'm sure there are many that still feel that way.) but I suspect there's a lot of parents, spouses, children, siblings and significant others who have "forced" the change of attitude. so the new guys and gals are learing a new style of driving .. one in which the head doesn't swivel .. in return for not breaking a neck or turning their brains into mush.

personally, it seems like a good trade to me, but then what do I know?

As far as I know, most teams call it the halo.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by MikeRaceDayTek

As far as I know, most teams call it the halo.

High Altitude Low Opening? <g>

Seriously, I agree with Duck. In the name of safety it seems like a good trade off EXCEPT I believe that some engineer could be able to come up with something which serves the same purpose but restricts the sight lines much less. But, being no engineer I admit that to be only supposition

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by MikeRaceDayTek

As far as I know, most teams call it the halo.

the "halo" is the part of the cage that encircles area over the driver's head (some people refer to it as the "roof" of the cage.) most series rules require a steel plate to be welded to the halo directly over the driver's head .. some series require the entire halo to be "plated" (which puts a lot of weight up high and most racers don't like this version of the steel plate rule.)

[nascaraddict]

Whatever it is, you'd better have a top notch spotter, or side mirrors, or both. Because if you don't you are in for a heck of a bad day. Because the driver has zero side vision with the current set-up.

[Bob Tanner]

Charlie, how much positive camber is NA__AR allowing the Cup cars to use these days? I've noticed lately that when the cars are on the straight, both left tires look as though the top of the tire is almost outside the body shell?

We used to use a lot (I thought) of + LF camber on our car but I don't remember anything like I see on today's Cup cars? I thought NA__AR stopped the radical rear end camber 8-9 years ago?