Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Posted 28 July 2011 - 05:41 AM
Why not build a titanium frame for the Chillibowl. Has anybody did it? I will bet my life life nobody in this world has ever built a beryllium frame for any motorsports in racing, except the late great Howard Hughes in some of his "special" airplane racers. Beryllium is by far the strongest material known to man for it weight.
It bothers me that Sammy says someday we will figure out what he does at the Chillibowl to make him a winner.
I will bet my life one of the so called "stock fuel tanks" is lighter than any fuel and bladder system on the market.
So, if you don't need it, why run a bladder at the Chillibowl? Sammy is always one of the guys that have experimented with materials that almost killed him. So running titanium rear end and gear assemblies has got to be a must?? A few years back, everybody coyld have one. Cost was exhorbarant and longenivty was short, but they are available for those that have the bucks.
We have all the light bodies, carbon fiber and hoses. And I'm sure their are special titanium crankshafts for those who have the money and a mfg to custom machine one. Most everything else can be bought easily like titanium rods.
Magnesium is lighter than than aluminum and I guess you could build titanium wheels for those who wanted them.
And even a titanium block to me is not out of the question. And I don't think cubic inches are restricted at the Chillibowl. Sammy by far had the quickest car at the Chillibowl, but it handled very poorly, at least from my perspective. I thought Sammy's car handles terrible, but it could blow the doors off any car at the Chillibowl in acceleration. I don't think cubic inch wise Sammy's car met USAC rules, cubic inch wise.
I don't know how much it would cost but I feel you could have a real light car at the Chillibowl and the rules ares such you could have more cubic inches than almost anybody at the Chillibowl if you wanted it. I bet Sammy has a big motor....lol!
Just some thoughts,
Larry "O" and Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year and see you at the Chillibowl....lol!
Posted 28 July 2011 - 09:59 AM
which we don't need. Guy's are running titanium kingpins + other hardware on the car. Driving
many driver's out of the sport.
Posted 28 July 2011 - 08:49 PM
Posted 29 July 2011 - 12:19 AM
815 494 6002
jasondull.com (For all the Racing News)
Posted 02 August 2011 - 03:29 PM
Posted 21 October 2011 - 03:11 PM
Posted 24 October 2011 - 10:38 AM
Posted 24 October 2011 - 10:39 AM
Posted 25 October 2011 - 11:03 AM
Mike Minarik of Denver, CO has a Titanium midget frame, Mike only runs the Chili Bowl and has PJ Jones, and Chad Boat in his cars in the past. I'm not sure he has run the Titanium car yet, I have not talked to him in a year or so, and he was still working on it at the time. He told me he had a bicycle shop in Boulder, CO bend and weld the frame under his direction (seems the bike guys are experts at Titanium welding). Again, I have not talked with Mike in awhile, so I'm not sure of the status of his all Titanium midget.
Posted 25 October 2011 - 02:28 PM
Titanium is by nature very brittle and prone to breaking under flexing loads. A few years ago Swindell was running a titanium drive shaft coupler, and supposedly they knew it was only good for three races or so and were planning on changing it out before the A. That was the year Sammy had to run the alphabet, and they never got a chance to change it. It broke in the main. TI saves weight, but at high cost and it requires frequent replacement...another stupid expense for fractions of seconds. Don't even get me started on titanium valve springs!
Titanium is not so much brittle as it does not tolerate cyclic stress well. That is why it is not suitable for many uses. Ti connecting rods work well, but must be replaced regularly based on engine hours. I would not even consider Ti valve springs, they just do not make sense. Valve retainers do, though. The Ti torsion bars that the Dowker/Soltow roadster used were fabulous. They were very progressive in their rate and produced a car that was easy over bumps but had great roll stiffness. Again, these had to be replaced on a regular maintenance cycle.
All of this stuff is insanely expensive.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users