+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 66

Thread: Rule Stability-Time for change?

  1. #1
    A lot of people think its time that the rules erre changed to stop the same teams winning by producing a slightly more refined version of the previous years car. What do you guys and girls think?

  2. #2
    A lot of people think its time that the rules erre changed to stop the same teams winning by producing a slightly more refined version of the previous years car. What do you guys and girls think?

  3. #3
    What do you have in mind for rules changes and how would they acheive your goal?

    James Waltman
    waltmaj@cc.wwu.edu
    Formula SAE
    Vehicle Research Institute at
    Western Washington University

    http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/
    James Waltman
    VRI at WWU Alumn
    FSAE ˜01 to ˜05
    http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/

  4. #4
    I think if a team wants to keep bringing the same car every year, it's their choice. On the one hand, it does show that refining the same idea EVERY YEAR leads to a better car (look at the big auto makers etc.).
    The main thing about repeating I dislike is the learning experience. By starting a completely new design the current team then learns all the pitfalls you run into with a big project, and schools that replicate, even if they produce champion cars, are probably hurting their students.
    One rule change I would suggest though is to make the racing less important and the design judging more important. Giving bonus points for trying new things, even if they don't work, would make the event more technically interesting in my opinion (and favor V8's ;-)

    Western Washington University FSAE
    dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae
    -Mike Waggoner

    The older I get, the faster/harder working I was...

  5. #5
    Ah, I love the innocence of thought that a change in the formula will give some of the smaller teams a better chance. History in all sorts of Motorsport has shown that this is far from the case.
    Seriously, I think the developing 'sameness'of cars is something that does need looking at.
    Two solutions have been hinted at, one being the use of open differentials and the other being the making the event a wet event. This latter idea would have the benefits of improving the lot of those unlucky enough to run in the wet at a wet and dry changeable event. After all, it is easier to make a dry event into a wet event than vice versa.

    'Near enough' means you missed !
    'Near enough' means you missed !

  6. #6
    "Ah, I love the innocence of thought that a change in the formula will give some of the smaller teams a better chance."

    I love the fact that nobody said that until you did. Nobody's talking about giving smaller teams a chance, people are more talking about the lack of innovation in succesful teams from year to year.

  7. #7
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I love the fact that nobody said that until you did. Nobody's talking about giving smaller teams a chance, people are more talking about the lack of innovation in succesful teams from year to year.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Exactly. I have been thinking of two interesting potential rules changes.

    One is a minimum weight. I think it would be interesting to see how the lighter weight (most of the top contenders) teams "spent" an extra 50lbs. I don't think it should be heavy, just a bit heavier than needed for a current reliable car (480 minimum maybe?)

    Second is a displacement limit of 595cc's. Pretty easy to see the effects of that one [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif[/img]

    If I were still in school I'd be pretty pissed with either of these but as an alum viewing from a distance I would love to see the teams react to the challenge.

    A wet event is a great idea, never thought of that one! This would reduce the power dependency, open up tire choice, advance the development of racing ABS/TCS/ESP, and give the northern teams a bit less of a disadvantage when it comes to driving conditions, I like it!

    Alex

  8. #8
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by peanut1:
    A wet event is a great idea, never thought of that one! This would reduce the power dependency, open up tire choice, advance the development of racing ABS/TCS/ESP, and give the northern teams a bit less of a disadvantage when it comes to driving conditions, I like it!

    Alex<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Yep, and it'd be 90% driver skill!!

    -Charlie Ping
    Auburn University FSAE 1999-present
    -Charlie Ping

    Auburn FSAE Alum 00-04

  9. #9
    I don't think that a minimum weight is a good idea---I actually think a maximum weight would be good to assure that the teams aren't showing up with a lousy hunk o' junk.

    There is already the unwritten rule of no car under 500lbs will make it into the desing finals and I think that's extremely smart. It makes teams focus on the real objective rather than poking around with technology that won't be of any use on a heavy car.

    Personally I think that the rules are good right now and don't need much change.

    Nigel Lavers

  10. #10
    I don't like the idea of a wet event; this SHOULDN'T be about driver skill, it should be about engineering.
    As far as the ludicrious 500lb car comment, are you kidding? Sure, if you're still making a steel tubeframe car with your rock and adz then maybe you can't get it under 500 lbs, but if you look at what real race teams do in higher level racing (what's this competition named after again?) you realize that a monocoque will make your car lighter, stiffer and possibly safer than a steel tubeframe. (Look at aluminum riveted monocoques of the 70's+ and composite monocoques of today).
    So, the idea of 'showing up with a lousy hunk of junk' seems to apply to 500+ lb spaceframe cars.
    Why have sub 500lb cars not fared better? Because it's usually teams that INNOVATE with other ideas as well, and admittedly that does hurt them in the actual competition because they're trying untested ideas. It may also be the additional build time with monocoques takes time away from the testing which is vital for this competition.
    Sub-500lb cars may also be saving weight in way which they shouldn't (hey, we can save 2 lbs on the car by using inadequate heims, lets do it! etc.)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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