+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: Formula SAE Lincoln 2015

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Swiftus View Post
    Any idea which one it is?
    150lb

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Kaneb View Post
    Why did three of the top five and five of the top twelve teams in autocross only attempt two runs? Long line at the end?
    What happened is that everyone decided that they wanted to run in the last hour of the Autocross + there were only allowing two cars on course at a time + there was a hard 5 O'clock cut off.

    When it hit 5 PM there were still around 15 cars in line...
    Sean O'Neill
    University of Kansas
    Jayhawk Motorsports '12 -

  2. #32
    Thanks for the driver weight!

    Quote Originally Posted by RANKEDFOUR View Post
    When it hit 5 PM there were still around 15 cars in line...
    That sort of thing always sucks when you are a team in the line, but as a general competitor I will always prefer a hard cutoff which the organizers keep to religiously than letting it slide for a few teams which didn't make the cutoff. Its the only truly fair way of treating all of the teams equally.
    Jay Swift
    Combustion Powertrain
    Global Formula Racing 2013-2014

  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by Swiftus View Post
    Thanks for the driver weight!



    That sort of thing always sucks when you are a team in the line, but as a general competitor I will always prefer a hard cutoff which the organizers keep to religiously than letting it slide for a few teams which didn't make the cutoff. Its the only truly fair way of treating all of the teams equally.
    I agree with the hard cut off completely. Last year at Lincoln the fastest time in autocross was set at around the halfway point in the event. People seem to believe that running as late as possible is always going to be better, but that's making a lot of assumptions that they don't really have data for. It's surprising how little attention is actually placed on tires at times by teams. They may be able to show you processed data, but few seem to understand tires when it comes to using them during an actual racing event.
    Trent Strunk
    University of Kansas
    Jayhawk Motorsports
    2010-2014

    Now in NASCAR land. Boogity.
    Opinions Are My Own

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    467
    Who has the best picture albums/videos from this competition?

    Congrats to SJSU on an awesome performance!
    -----------------------------------
    Matt Birt
    Engine Calibration and Performance Engineer, Enovation Controls
    Former Powertrain Lead, Kettering University CSC/FSAE team
    1st place Fuel Efficiency 2013 FSAE, FSAE West, Formula North
    1st place overall 2014 Clean Snowmobile Challenge

  5. #35
    I'll try to get all my pictures into an album today. Will post back with link. Probably.

  6. #36
    Was looking at the cost results. Kettering @ $7051. Next cheapest car was Kennesaw @ $8695. The points spread was 10.38.

    Looking at the cost results from FSAE-M a couple months earlier, Kettering @ $10597. Seems quite odd that the same car could be $3500 less expensive...

    Can anyone provide a reasonable explanation?

    Btw, the least expensive car at FSAE-M in the past 5 years was ~$8300
    Last edited by dr. ill; 08-25-2015 at 01:57 PM.

  7. #37
    Dr. Ill,
    As soon as I saw the scores at Lincoln, I asked the Chief Cost Judge about that. She was the Chief at both Michigan and Lincoln, and she said Kettering took a whole bunch of content out of the car between the two competitions, I believe including a turbo, etc., and that the reduction was legit.

    Michael Royce

  8. #38
    Mr. Royce,

    To clear up some questions here:

    We are typically one of the cheapest cars at competition and archived results will reflect this. Kettering has strived to be "The Spirit of SAE" providing a car to compete that easily meets the weekend racer's budget capability while maintaining high performamce results. With that, the past few years have seen us reducing our vehicle weight by approximately 70lbs. This was done without the implementation of advanced composites nor expensive labor processes and machining time. We have also focused on part count reduction. What this means is that where we had previously costed labor of assembling 3 piece wheels, ours are now 1 piece. Where we once had ~70+ unique chassis tubes, we now have less than 40. This continues throughout the vehicle.

    We ran a turbo at Michigan and Nebraska. Having carried some base system cost reports from one year to another left some inaccuracies in the report. On top of this, there were some components and systems that we planned on running this year that were not mature enough to be implemented. These were also left in the cost report. We didn't catch it in time for Michigan but did for Lincoln. Our addendum report was almost mistaken for the cost report due to its sheer size for Lincoln. However, anyone who has glimpsed our cost report could tell that we require a 4" binder at minimum.

    I hope this clears up some speculation as we've been targeting less and less costly ways to get out and racing. The past few years we've targeted $8 - 9000 cars, substituting in better items once we dip below our target market pricing, but with us having an unstable and not thoroughly tested platform, we ended up cutting features and the cost went with it.
    .
    Last edited by MCoach; 08-26-2015 at 10:04 AM.
    Kettering University Vehicle Dynamics
    Formula SAE 2010 - 2015
    Clean Snowmobile Powertrain 2012 - 2015

    Boogityland 2015 - Present

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts