[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 583: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 639: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
The Merkur Club of America Forums • Anglin's Racer Build and History - Page 13
Page 13 of 14

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:42 am
by anglin
DSPXR4ti wrote:Was all the tire noise because of the very old VR,V700's?...
Yeah, those suckers are really old. They hadn't been used since 2002 and had more than 100 runs on them then.
If you can make that same set up useing the stock TCA Chris Grayson and I can use the mounting points of your hard work.
Grayson and I have talked at length about the design and it seems like the TCA is going to be the deal breaker. It uses spherical rod ends and solid rod ends bearings at the connections. Since the ratio of metal to rubber/polyurethane can't be changed in the SP rules, this means this TCA design is out. You might be able to get away with the solid rod end at the connection between the TCA and the compression strut (it's required to keep the suspension from folding on itself), but I would worry that it would be protest-fodder.

As a first step, I'd like to get a legal TCA designed with adjustments and bushings then move from there. In fact, I was imagineering (David Godfrey word) such a thing last night. Your questions are inspiring me to do some more CAD work on the components.
Can you all send me more pic's of it installed in your XR's.
The pics in this thread appear to be the best pics I have of the installed components. I do have some pics of it installed on the mock-up chassis which may be helpful. I'll dig them up tomorrow and post them in here.

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:47 am
by Grayson
One reason we can't use this setup is because it features rod ends at the inner TCA and compression strut chassis positions.

I wrote this originally, but have since changed my way of thinking. I'm going to quote my original thought just for consideration:
I think a custom TCA will only be legal in DSP if we leave the outer TCA bushing hole "pretty much" similar to stock. The inner TCA part will have to have a plastic bushing, and the ball joint end can be a spherical bearing. Of course, it can be adjustable. Now, one thing that I've wondered is if we can replace the outer TCA bushing with a spherical bearing like RatFink did. The rulebook states that we can replace the TCA with an adjustable TCA. It also states that sway bar bushings are unlimited. Well, if the outer TCA bushing is considered to be a sway bar bushing, then the RatFink mod is legal.

When it comes to divorcing the sway bar and the compression strut functionality, I worry about that a little. The rulebook states that you cannot substitute a sway bar that serves the dual-purpose of being a compression strut if doing so changes the geometry. Thus, if you install a compression strut that moves the ball joint a little forward or a little back from where it was stock, you've changed the geometry and the setup is illegal. Well, where was the ball joint stock? If it moves 0.001", will you get protested? It sounds very gray to me.

I think the A#1 question to have answered first of all is whether or not the outer TCA bushing, where the sway bar attaches to the TCA, is a sway bar bushing. If it is, then I'd like a clarification that we can install a spherical bearing there.
I think when it all boils down, we should use a car with a "normal" strut suspension for inspiration. Basically, imagine that our car, with its combined sway bar/compression strut, offers us no advantage over any other strut suspension. After all, it doesn't. Let's imagine the E46 BMW front suspension. The sway bar end attaches to a tab sticking out of the strut, and is in no way part of the lower arm. The lower arm is shaped like an "L", which is basically a clearanced triangle. Now, if we substitute a front-mount sway bar on our cars, we basically need to replace the TCA and now-missing sway bar leg with a lower arm like the BMW has. This is a solid part that connects the ball joint to the inner TCA point to the rear chassis point. Because of this, I see no reason why we can't run a solid arm that connects those same three points if we run a front-mount sway bar. This leads me to believe that not only is running a spherical bearing in the outer TCA position legal, it's stupid since we can just weld a compression strut to the stock TCA to get a solid lower arm that connects all three points.

I don't know if I'm making any sense here, but what I would offer up to the SEB is a letter seeking clarification of this:

"If we substitute the front sway bar with a front-mount design, which is clearly legal, do you agree that the XR4Ti suspension then reduces to a traditional strut suspension like a Ford Focus or an E46 BMW, where the lower arm is a one-piece unit that connects the ball joint, the lateral point, and the compression point."

Ben - I would encourage you to work closely with me on this before querying the SEB. I'm distinctly interested in this issue, and I would like to draft and extremely well-thought out and professional presentation for submission. Two brains are better than one, and I'm interested in putting a big chunk of time into this. Seeing as you called me tonight, you probably agree. :lol:

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 2:34 pm
by DSPXR4ti
I agree with you whole heartly about you writing the letter.

I like what you said about the TCA's and the front sway bar.
Because if doing so changes the geometry, then only thing is how would they know if you've change the geometry if they didn't know what it was in the first place? then you say "Thus, if you install a compression strut that moves the ball joint a little forward or a little back from where it was stock, you've changed the geometry and the setup is illegal. Well, where was the ball joint stock? If it moves 0.001" ". because I've move the TCA forword to put more Caster in the car with the after market sway bar and some shims, even then whats to say if I buy an after market sway bar it doesn't change the geometry. So like you said It a VERY gray area.

The only thing is if you get the SEB on a band wagon then they may remove everyones tires to check and see if you are with in the rules and yes they do that at the National's.

I think it would be funny to see Ray show up with his CP XR with that front TCA sway bar setup and see if they come running and look under are XR's

Ben

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:36 pm
by Ray
Hahah that setup would be open for my car!

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 6:52 pm
by DSPXR4ti
Hey Ray,

Does that mean your on board for next years National's if you were to get that TCA sway bar set up? RRAAAYYYY.........!

Ben

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:27 pm
by whitelx
DSPXR4ti wrote:Hey Ray,

Does that mean your on board for next years National's if you were to get that TCA sway bar set up? RRAAAYYYY.........!

Ben
Let me know when you come down to San Diego. :)

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:24 pm
by anglin
demonfire wrote:Hahah that setup would be open for my car!
Conveniently, I've started thinking about selling it. :shock:

Not convinced I should yet, but I've got a bunch of cool parts that I keep thinking about getting rid of (RS500 bumper/rear spoiler, intercoolers and aluminum radiators, Cosworth suspension stuff) so it might get posted for sale.

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:28 pm
by anglin
DSPXR4ti wrote:If you can make that same set up useing the stock TCA Chris Grayson and I can use the mounting points of your hard work.
Ben, back to this for a moment. I spent about two hours doing CAD work last night and got a little bit farther with TCA development. Just like with the previous version, the challenge of the new design is in the outboard end.

Posted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:00 pm
by DSPXR4ti
anglin wrote:
DSPXR4ti wrote:If you can make that same set up useing the stock TCA Chris Grayson and I can use the mounting points of your hard work.
Ben, back to this for a moment. I spent about two hours doing CAD work last night and got a little bit farther with TCA development. Just like with the previous version, the challenge of the new design is in the outboard end.
Anglin, I'm thinking that intill Grayson writes the SEB about your TCA design it's going to be a hard sell for DSP class, but for the SM or CP class it works and all your hard work will not go to waste.

I think Ray said he would use it in his XR for testing and then may buy it? if not and the rule get change or doesn't get changed then I would like this set up for my XR.

Ben

Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 8:37 am
by Ray
Anglin,

Do you have any idea if this sway bar setup will hit the market? After looking at the parts up close and personal, i'm nothing but amazed. This has got to be one of the sexiest parts i've laid my hands on. The amount of thought and engineering put into this is absolutely fantastic. I can NOT wait to see how it performs.

And, i think i want one for my car...

Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:17 pm
by anglin
Ray wrote:Do you have any idea if this sway bar setup will hit the market?
A variation of that front suspension will make it to market eventually. Some of the components in that design are cost prohibitive and some aren't as practical as they need to be for public consumption. One of the big hold ups has been my slow progress in getting the mill and lathe up and running. If I can make some of the parts myself, I'll be in much better shape to get some cost out of the suspension.

There are other subcomponents of that design which are going to become available, like track control arms (in a variation of the one you have). It's just a matter of time now.

Thanks for the kind words about it. I think I've got more than 200 hours in design time alone!

Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 7:32 am
by Ray
No problem for kind words, they're true.

Re: Anglin's Racer Build and History

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:00 am
by espacef1fan
Any production progress on this?

Re: Anglin's Racer Build and History

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 3:20 pm
by anglin
Thanks for waking up the thread!
anglin wrote:One of the big hold ups has been my slow progress in getting the mill and lathe up and running.
espacef1fan wrote:Any production progress on this?
Getting the CNC mill and CNC lathe up and running were the hold up a year ago when I last posted in this thread. Since that time I made the decision to relocate to a different state and take a different job. That stopped progress on the mill/lathe dead in its tracks for about seven months. The mill made its first computer controlled moves last August and I've spent the time since then learning how to make programs to run the CNC and worked on a couple small learning projects. (In addition to moving into a new house and doing house updates.) The mill has started making real, usable (and simple) parts recently and those parts have actually won a couple road race events last season. You can check out http://www.mc2racing.com to see some news and a picture of the car (though it's a non-Merkur).

Here's a short video of the mill in action recently.

http://youtu.be/B9BRGaFTdpI

Let's just pretend like you didn't hear chatter at 0:21. That was the first time that particular code cut metal.

The racer is in a garage for the first time since 1998. I've cleaned 13 years of leaf debris out of it and gotten it prepped for projects. I have a couple minor suspension development tasks to do on it soon. This should lead into bigger tasks, like the front suspension development. However, it's just sitting in the garage right now, waiting for me to free up some time to work on it.

Re: Anglin's Racer Build and History

Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:48 pm
by jetrinka
Wow, just read this whole thread. A lot of stuff thats way beyond my understanding as of now but it sure makes me thankful for the guys here who can do this kind of R&D. Lookin forward to more and more updates as well as the learning that goes along with it! :mrgreen: