Delta Wing Discussion ONLY - Page 82

Maelochs · 5 Mar 2013, 10:29 (Ref:3214461)

What I heard was that at least part of the problem was that the accident broke a water pipe and soaked some engine-management electrics which then mismanaged the engine causing harm. Not sure of the source---could just have been one of the many voices in my head.

Dead-Eye · 5 Mar 2013, 10:37 (Ref:3214464)

I think I remember a statement from someone at Toyota saying it was unrelated, but I can't find that either.

MulsanneMike · 5 Mar 2013, 10:58 (Ref:3214474)

Quote:

Originally Posted by HJJ

And what makes you say that?

The engine has met its goals on the dyno. Feel better?

Fixed that for ya...

Pandamasque · 5 Mar 2013, 13:33 (Ref:3214541)

That was a good question about the tub, albeit ignored. Is is still the AMR tub? Is it a 'replica' manufactured by Elan (would it have to be re-homologated then?). Actually does DW even need any ACO/FIA homologation while it's running exclusively in the US, included in random classes while being outside of their rules?

MulsanneMike · 5 Mar 2013, 14:05 (Ref:3214557)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

That was a good question about the tub, albeit ignored. Is is still the AMR tub? Is it a 'replica' manufactured by Elan (would it have to be re-homologated then?). Actually does DW even need any ACO/FIA homologation while it's running exclusively in the US, included in random classes while being outside of their rules?

It's the AMR-One tub still. The effort has two of them. EMT is balls out getting the closed car designed and built; they certainly haven't had the time, money, or personnel to even layup another version (or even the same) of the open car.

**joeb** · 5 Mar 2013, 16:04 (Ref:3214607)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

It's the AMR-One tub still. The effort has two of them. EMT is balls out getting the closed car designed and built; they certainly haven't had the time, money, or personnel to even layup another version (or even the same) of the open car.

so just to confirm, the closed car is an entirely bespoke chassis that will need to be crash tested?

Fogelhund · 5 Mar 2013, 16:17 (Ref:3214611)

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

so just to confirm, the closed car is an entirely bespoke chassis that will need to be crash tested?

I think only the tub needs to be crash tested. If I recall correctly they had two AMR-1 tubs, so if this is the second tub, it won't need to be tested.

ptclaus98 · 5 Mar 2013, 16:24 (Ref:3214615)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

No doubt the thing looks cool, but my question is that given it's got open wheels and a blatant incapacity to take a passenger next to the driver, should this car be racing in a sportscar series?

Moreso than the Audis, Toyotas, and the 908?

Gingers4Justice · 5 Mar 2013, 16:43 (Ref:3214623)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

Moreso than the Audis, Toyotas, and the 908?

Good point, it's a question which could be extended to many cars around today. I don't think the regulations should allow cockpits as narrow as the Toyotas or Audis, it makes a mockery of the open cars having two headrests.

Fogelhund · 5 Mar 2013, 16:59 (Ref:3214636)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

Good point, it's a question which could be extended to many cars around today. I don't think the regulations should allow cockpits as narrow as the Toyotas or Audis, it makes a mockery of the open cars having two headrests.

We could mandate Daytona Prototype cockpits instead!!

Gingers4Justice · 5 Mar 2013, 17:04 (Ref:3214638)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

We could mandate Daytona Prototype cockpits instead!!

Ahh, no!! Please, no sir!

I mean, if I had to choose between an overly skinny and a fat girl to take on a date, you already know which I'd take. But there must be some middle ground.

Pandamasque · 5 Mar 2013, 17:15 (Ref:3214646)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

Good point, it's a question which could be extended to many cars around today. I don't think the regulations should allow cockpits as narrow as the Toyotas or Audis, it makes a mockery of the open cars having two headrests.

Agreed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

We could mandate Daytona Prototype cockpits instead!!

No, thanks. Having seating for two doesn't mean it has to look like a tank.

CyberMotor · 5 Mar 2013, 18:10 (Ref:3214667)

Why can't people build a car with a windshield and cockpit that looks like the Porsche 962? IMO, that seemed to be perfect solution compared to the too large and too skinny cockpits of today.

ptclaus98 · 5 Mar 2013, 18:30 (Ref:3214673)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyberMotor

Why can't people build a car with a windshield and cockpit that looks like the Porsche 962? IMO, that seemed to be perfect solution compared to the too large and too skinny cockpits of today.

Weren't cars wider back then? If so, it would look like a DPG2.

CyberMotor · 5 Mar 2013, 19:00 (Ref:3214691)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

Weren't cars wider back then? If so, it would look like a DPG2.

I disagree there. The 962 had a balance in proportions, a stance and swoopiness that gave it a special beauty, IMO. Haven't seen a DP obtain those qualities yet. The 962 had a wrap around windshield that seemed to be designed for excellent vision forward and sideways.

miatanut · 5 Mar 2013, 22:12 (Ref:3214782)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MitchZ06

Do those ricers race on a bumpy concrete circuit for 12 hours straight?

No.

They cross railroad tracks, go through potholes, cross curb ramps, and maybe after 20,000 miles/500 hours get something more than an oil change for mechanical attention.

MulsanneMike · 6 Mar 2013, 02:18 (Ref:3214868)

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

so just to confirm, the closed car is an entirely bespoke chassis that will need to be crash tested?

In theory it will need to, yes. But as DW only ever met something like 2 or 3 of the dimensional regulations (front/rear overhangs, overall length) and little else, who's to say what the ACO will hold it to.

gregtummer · 6 Mar 2013, 02:22 (Ref:3214870)

How much of the Sebring 12 Hours do you expect the DeltaWing to last, Mike?

FstrthnU · 6 Mar 2013, 04:07 (Ref:3214892)

Methinks one of the Audis will be blinded by the LED lights reflecting off the silver paint and crash into it.

HJJ · 6 Mar 2013, 04:16 (Ref:3214894)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

It's the AMR-One tub still. The effort has two of them. EMT is balls out getting the closed car designed and built; they certainly haven't had the time, money, or personnel to even layup another version (or even the same) of the open car.

Mike is right on this point. The closed cockpit version is all new. I've heard other things. Mike and I know the same people. He's worked with them and I know them on a personal level. I will admit I have a vested interest seeing this project being a success. I don't drink kool-aid and feel I could call a spade a spade if I didn't think it could happen.

That's my position. If I offended fugelhund in an earlier post, I apologize.

TF110 · 6 Mar 2013, 05:18 (Ref:3214902)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

To be even more fair the Toyota's retirement was due to engine failure and not damage sustained from the DW incident.

Toyota may say it was unrelated, but most suspect differently. Toyota's engine has nothing to do with the DeltaWing's, so this talk is useless.

Speaking of the delta's engine, is it related to any other Mazda engine racing?

ptclaus98 · 6 Mar 2013, 11:34 (Ref:3215015)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TF110

Toyota may say it was unrelated, but most suspect differently. Toyota's engine has nothing to do with the DeltaWing's, so this talk is useless.

Speaking of the delta's engine, is it related to any other Mazda engine racing?

If it's the MZR-R, then that's the engine that powers F2000.

**joeb** · 6 Mar 2013, 13:29 (Ref:3215057)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

In theory it will need to, yes. But as DW only ever met something like 2 or 3 of the dimensional regulations (front/rear overhangs, overall length) and little else, who's to say what the ACO will hold it to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HJJ

Mike is right on this point. The closed cockpit version is all new. I've heard other things. Mike and I know the same people. He's worked with them and I know them on a personal level. I will admit I have a vested interest seeing this project being a success. I don't drink kool-aid and feel I could call a spade a spade if I didn't think it could happen.

That's my position. If I offended fugelhund in an earlier post, I apologize.

Thanks. I asked the question about the tub crash test because I was wondering if the test had taken place.

Also, will the closed DW use most of the same components (suspension, brakes, etc) from the current DW?

MulsanneMike · 6 Mar 2013, 16:50 (Ref:3215153)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

If it's the MZR-R, then that's the engine that powers F2000.

The top end and most of the internals are MZR-R, block is Elan Power. The MZR-R block simply didn't lend itself to alignment of the crank height to gearbox input.

MulsanneMike · 6 Mar 2013, 16:51 (Ref:3215156)

Quote:

Originally Posted by joeb

Thanks. I asked the question about the tub crash test because I was wondering if the test had taken place.

Also, will the closed DW use most of the same components (suspension, brakes, etc) from the current DW?

Yes, as far as I know most of the open top car bits carry over. It's essentially just a replacement of the tub.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wide Front Wing / Narrow rear wing	browney	Formula One	30	21 Nov 2011 12:13
Delta S4's that were in Rallycross	M.Lowe	Rallying & Rallycross	23	30 Aug 2007 11:47
Delta wing , inverted delta wing	effuno	Racing Technology	3	8 Apr 2007 13:45