Acura/HPD's future plans - Page 50

Hugewally · 29 Jan 2009, 19:44 (Ref:2382273)

They did keep the headlights though...

**skycafe** · 30 Jan 2009, 01:22 (Ref:2382421)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

They did keep the headlights though...

The economy makes it tough on everyone...'look, you are just going to have to live with last year's headlight bulb design'

**skycafe** · 30 Jan 2009, 01:27 (Ref:2382422)

Ok, so, big tires on the front, needs forward weight bias.

Rule set allows restrictor breaks for production based engines, and torquey engines are a big plus.

I keep thinking that this situation is made for a Panoz revival with a thumping Elan, big tires, agressive aero..............

prototype · 30 Jan 2009, 13:24 (Ref:2382657)

I think the restrictor break for production based engines has gone away.

Hugewally · 30 Jan 2009, 14:21 (Ref:2382687)

Quote:

Originally Posted by skycafe

Ok, so, big tires on the front, allows forward weight bias.

Fixed that for ya...

peter_elleray · 30 Jan 2009, 19:00 (Ref:2382795)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTD

Dont know why i didn't noticed this before, but just came to think of it!
The Acura Lmp1 reminds a lot of the Embassy from last year!

and here's me thinking i must be imagining it...

you guys might be interested to know that the wf01 ran tyres of almost the same width front to rear aswell (although not the same overall diameter).

and spent the whole season chasing rear end grip,

peter

peter_elleray · 30 Jan 2009, 19:02 (Ref:2382797)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTD

Dont know why i didn't noticed this before, but just came to think of it!
The Acura Lmp1 reminds a lot of the Embassy from last year!

and here's me thinking i must be imagining it...

you guys might be interested to know that the wf01 ran tyres of almost the same width front to rear aswell (although not the same overall diameter).

and spent the whole season chasing rear end grip,

peter

HORNDAWG · 30 Jan 2009, 19:39 (Ref:2382815)

So Peter, are you saying that you think this is the wrong path? Myself not being overly informed on aero, it looks that the ARX-02a with its 0 keel and splitter angle etc.. treats the air different than the WF01, in that it brings it more midship before applying it as downforce. (?) and using the wider tires for more mechanical grip with the loss of aero from the front to mid and overall rule mandated loss. ????

Thats what it does to me anyways!!

L.P.

**skycafe** · 30 Jan 2009, 20:16 (Ref:2382840)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

Fixed that for ya...

In my mind it was the same meaning, but even I don't really like to go into my mind

Hugewally · 30 Jan 2009, 21:28 (Ref:2382877)

Let it out to wander for a bit and it never came back...

deggis · 30 Jan 2009, 23:01 (Ref:2382920)

New pics, including some official press photos.

http://www.speedtv.com/gallery/view/...=750&width=844

CTD · 30 Jan 2009, 23:35 (Ref:2382936)

Some really nice Photos!
But i would really like to see some more shots of the end of the front wheel cover, and the air intakes for the cooling Area, it looks very interesting!.
But some of the comparisons there is in the pictures, the P1, becomes more like an large evolution of the P2, than a brand new car, (to me), many aspects of the car looks very similar to each other.

**skycafe** · 31 Jan 2009, 00:22 (Ref:2382960)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

Let it out to wander for a bit and it never came back...

It wasn't housebroken so clean up easier.

Hugewally · 31 Jan 2009, 01:10 (Ref:2382972)

Yes, they can be like that...

peter_elleray · 31 Jan 2009, 01:13 (Ref:2382976)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HORNDAWG

So Peter, are you saying that you think this is the wrong path? Myself not being overly informed on aero, it looks that the ARX-02a with its 0 keel and splitter angle etc.. treats the air different than the WF01, in that it brings it more midship before applying it as downforce. (?) and using the wider tires for more mechanical grip with the loss of aero from the front to mid and overall rule mandated loss. ????

Thats what it does to me anyways!!

L.P.

no , not saying this is the wrong path - it all makes some sense but only if the tyre supplier will cater for the requirements of the car, instead of the other way around... but in general, more front aero requires more front weight, not the otherway around as you speculate. i dont really follow your ideas about the airflow tbh...

a works team, so the tyre situation should be a lot more focused and favourable than for a privateer who has to use the standard issue rubber.

btw wf01 also had a 'zero keel' monocque with machined brackets acting as stub keels in the outer front corners of the monocque, and relatively high lower wishbones..

peter

isynge · 31 Jan 2009, 02:07 (Ref:2382991)

Again, a simultaneously depressing and inspiring story of the small independent with the good idea being thwarted through finance and then the big iron manufacturer realising the promise.

Makes me feel even more privileged and happy to have seen the Embassy guys close up last year at Le Mans.

It does however show that there is real complexity in finding the 'unfair advantage' and the dependencies that exist on suppliers like Michelin; which does does make me wonder to what extent they'll want to develop a front tyre of that spec in the absence of competition in the ALMS - or if this is something that argues in favour of Duncan Dayton's comment (rapidly recovered from and not redacted) on Midweek Motorsport that Acura is 'hopeful' of doing Le Mans this year.

And yes, I know that last sentence is probably nine parts aspiration to zero parts reality, but what else is silly season for?

Hugewally · 31 Jan 2009, 02:20 (Ref:2382993)

Acura has stated that they're not ready for Le Mans this year.

HORNDAWG · 31 Jan 2009, 03:01 (Ref:2383004)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

Acura has stated that they're not ready for Le Mans this year.

Well Duncan is, if they'd let him! http://audio.mpix.org.uk/alms09/2009_wwt_dayton.mp3 or http://www.radiolemans.com/ ALMS page

L.P.

deggis · 31 Jan 2009, 03:37 (Ref:2383010)

Doesn't he say "I'm not saying we would NOT go this year"? That's odd way to say... well, at least there's some difference to the usual PR "we have a desire/goal/aspiration" that everyone from Berkman to drivers have kept repeating.

Hugewally · 31 Jan 2009, 03:55 (Ref:2383012)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugewally

Acura has stated that they're not ready for Le Mans this year.

Erik Berkman said as such on Monday night in Sebring.

Ted bennett · 31 Jan 2009, 04:29 (Ref:2383017)

Mike has posted a gallery of the new Acura via Facebook, nice shot of that savage looking drive shaft angle.

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...8&id=703872327

The Badger · 31 Jan 2009, 10:38 (Ref:2383104)

I still dont understand the theory behind the rear wing mount , anyone ?

Cheers for the pics Mike . Any luck on the job front yet mate ?

CTD · 31 Jan 2009, 11:00 (Ref:2383117)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Badger

I still dont understand the theory behind the rear wing mount , anyone ?

Cheers for the pics Mike . Any luck on the job front yet mate ?

I really dont have anything to back it up, but im thinking something about, how high/low or forward/backward they can mount the wing it self. ex. if we say regulations states that the Rear wing supports much be 75cm high and support the wing, the normal mount would put the wing in a hight of 75cm, but the Acura mount would put it in an ex. 50cm. But this it's only a guess, and i don't know why Acura would do it if it's the case!.

Another theory i have, but it's probably more unlikely to the previous, is that the mount which goes forward the wing itself, could "clean" or stabilizes the air going over the wing, kinda like Renaults F1 extended Air intake/roll over hoop, which had that effect.

Japanese Samurai · 31 Jan 2009, 11:54 (Ref:2383148)

Rear wing of Acura might aim at the same purpose as the installation of the airplane of neither the engine nor the fuel tank on the wing.

MulsanneMike · 31 Jan 2009, 13:09 (Ref:2383173)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Badger

I still dont understand the theory behind the rear wing mount , anyone ?

Cheers for the pics Mike . Any luck on the job front yet mate ?

Rear wing mount is very, very simple, less disruption on the low pressure side by having the mounting on the less sensitive/important high pressure side.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
NASCAR Car of the Future Plans	kingfloopy	NASCAR & Stock Car Racing	24	18 Jan 2006 10:31
PI Future plans revealed	inpitlane	Australasian Touring Cars.	14	26 Nov 2005 06:54
TC's plans for the future...	retro	Australasian Touring Cars.	17	17 Aug 2004 03:33
PG's Plans for Future of OWRS ?!?!	zerO	ChampCar World Series	19	9 Jan 2004 16:30
Future Plans	racer69	Australasian Touring Cars.	9	12 Jun 2001 17:35