LocostUSA.com
http://www.locostusa.com/forums/

Locost critique ....
http://www.locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=13705
Page 3 of 3

Author:  horizenjob [ May 31, 2012, 2:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

I thought Pat's attitude was unfortunate. He mentions his mates turned to cannibus and abandoned the project, but it doesn't occur to him he might have been the cause! :rofl:

So far as I'm concerned if someone wants to build a Locost and put a picnic basket on the back and drive around the countryside instead of racing for a national championship, I think that's great!

Quote:
I really didn't know Pintos were great handling cars. Back in my day, they were a joke. I don't know, maybe they changed them.


I've looked at Miata, Subaru and Pinto parts so far, there are models in my SketchUp project that you can overlay on one another or try using. The Pinto parts are available in different pin heights and different KPIs from multiple sources. The various associated parts are widely available like ball joints, bump steer adjusters, hubs in different bolt patterns, rotors of many sizes, varieties of calipers and adapters. You can go from a $29 integrated hub and rotor to probably $1000 for high tech alloy parts per corner.

So far I'm actually using the Pinto parts. The Miata part is very similar but has about 1" less distance from the steering axis to the wheel mounting surface. That's probably good because you get a bigger choice of wheel offsets to play with. The Pinto part with the 2" drop pin puts the lower BJ closer to the ground which is good. You can't easily modify the Miata part for this because the mounting boss is at a 27 degree angle, so you can't just weld an extension on the bottom like a Spitfire upright.

I'm trying to leave the jury out on these things until a few cars are built, these are just my observations so far from trying to use the units I mentioned in a model.

Edit:
I had a little diatribe here, but Justin said it better!

Author:  carguy123 [ May 31, 2012, 2:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

I think you guys are missing the boat here. He's supposedly working with people who will become the engineers that will be designing future cars that will have to perform safely in a wide variety of circumstances.

Locosters are building one offs that just have to be good enuf to do what we want them to do in a limited environment for a limited amount of time with lots of scrutiny by it's builders.

I have no doubt that FSAE could allow the compromises we use daily and end up with a faster driver because they had more time behind the wheel but that's not the purpose of the exercise. The noodling of how to design the car is the main purpose. These guys are supposed to be learning about the right way to do things not how to compromise.

We're talking apples and oranges who just happen to be building cars.

Author:  horizenjob [ May 31, 2012, 2:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

I would like to back up Andrew's comments too. There seems to be an underlying attitude that something about using more modern materials also equates to the modern designer being smarter then the older designers. People are not smarter now then they were a hundred years ago, and they aren't really better educated either. There are many things that are better understood now.

I am not so sure about spending time at the beach, that's what racetracks are for. It is a good point though that a quicker initial build gets you a working model into real use development sooner and longer. That's a winning formula and a very important lesson for an engineer. I would call that "Designing for Development".

Author:  horizenjob [ May 31, 2012, 2:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

Perhaps the FSAE judges are useful as a student engineer's first experience with management. "when you're at the bottom looking up, all you see is - well let's just say butts.

Author:  geek49203 [ May 31, 2012, 2:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

What I **hope** such exercises with students will do is:

1. Teach them how to make do on a budget, using brains instead of dollars. That is the skill that kids used to hone on tree houses and crystal radio sets and soapbox derby cars, before (respectively) zoning laws, cheap iPods and company-sponsored kits negated the need to actually think when you have no cash. Part of the "charm" of this locost exercise is figuring out how to actually make the "junk" that you have work -- anyone can buy a kit with lots of money. Isn't part of the goal here to chase down Vettes in autocross and then tell them that they've spent more in tires and rims than you've spent on your entire car?

2. Teach students how to actually build something. As I understand it, the average engineering student spends 3 years in college doing hardcore math, and more time after that in various other classes, mostly w/o actually building something. Many of us here are not engineers, but we **can** take one look at something and instinctively "know" that it isn't right and won't work. Such was the difference I saw at times between the high-level engineers at GM and the "techs" who had to actually build and test a design. (BTW, one kept stamping designs with "PPD" when they asked why they failed -- later top management wanted to know what "PPD" meant, and he replied that is was "p*ss poor design".)

Author:  GonzoRacer [ May 31, 2012, 4:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

Yo-
There's a story they tell about the 1972 Miami Dolphins. At one of the first "team meetings" prior to a game, they watched game films of their upcoming opponent. I forget who the opponent was, but just for convenience, let's say Buffalo. When the coaches had finished going over all the details of their opponent's defense, looking at their patterns and tendencies and discussing the personnel on the field, one of the coaches caught Larry Csonka nearly napping. Wanting to wake up the big fullback, he yelled, "What do you think, Zonk?" And Csonka yelled back, "AWWW, F*CK BUFFALO!" It became a litany, every game, they'd ask the Zonk what he thought of that week's opponent and he'd tell 'em. Miami went undefeated...

OK, do I need to go on any further to describe my feelings towards Pat Clarke and his cute little magazine article?

:cheers:
JDK

Author:  Driven5 [ May 31, 2012, 7:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

carguy123 wrote:
...We're talking apples and oranges who just happen to be building cars.
And this is where it seems that Pat's criticisms of Locosts "missed the boat" as well.

Author:  john hennessy [ May 31, 2012, 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

i own a 34 roadster body, i once had a locost chassis under it, i decided that it was a pritty looking body but thats where it ended.

i know my car is different from all the other locosts and indeed all the other cars in the known universe, people ask me "what is it" or "how old is it" "or "why is there only one exhaust", i tell them that it's new, it's the only one ever built, its 130 hp and will pass california emmissions, this stops them in their tracks!

at a car show, you see lots of hotrods, but if you have a brookville body and an ls motor with a 5 speed and air ride you probablly will win a trophy, likewise, if you have an original 32 with a flat head and a lincoln tranny and stock frame rails boxed with a quick change rear end in brown primer you may also win a prize but my prize comes from driving it to and from work, and knowing it will probablly out run both those cars in a straight line, corners well, no contest, that original 32 with the dropped beam front end and drum brakes is gonna toast me and the brand new brookville, he'll just let some air out of his suspension and corner like it's on rails, NOT!

i used to teach foundation in engineering at a college in england, we built a locost by the book, some of the students didn't know what a hack saw was when they started the course, the rest of the faculty tried to place as many obstacles in the way of that car build as they could think of, it was known as "that f-----g car" but i would go in on weekends and ensure that the project did not fail as that wasn't an option.

when the car was finished, boy did they use it as publicity, but we never built another and i got my hours cut to 4 a week and the other tutor got his cut to 1 hour a week, moral of the story, college tutors don't like change and we sturred it up a bit, so i guess their vengance was sweet, to them anyway.

didn't bother me though i just went back into industry at twice the money doing morgans.

at the end of the day when all is said and done, what Pat was describing as the "modern mid engined style car" is a pipe dream, the world is past that, ask my son, he worked for lola composites building the latest stuff for f1 indy and le mans, if it aint composite, it must be a fred flintstone car.

apart from the rear engine, formular fords are still built like a locost, and my front engined locost has a rear weight bias of about 40-60 so it doesn't matter where you put the engine, front or back.

i am a firm believer in fsae as a starting point but if you put one of my ex-students in the mix, they would have a good idea of where to start if there were some tubes on the shop floor!

Author:  john hennessy [ May 31, 2012, 9:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Locost critique ....

Marcus, it's perfectly good to use pinto spindles if they work in the application you have decided upon,

driven5, i don't think i am being hypocritical at all, what is is what is, the critisizm started in the article.

locost, hotrods and clubman racers are completely different.

locost builder are looking for a special somthing in their cars that hotrods don't have.

hotrodders are waiting for someone to look at their car and comment on how much it must have cost.

most clubman racers just want to drive the thing fast and get it sorted by a professional.

i fancy that if you took any one of the more knowledgeable members of the locost community and asked them to build a car with no paper or plans, just make it up as you went along, and compared that to a fsae car in performance, the locost guy would make us all proud.

carguy123, modern cars are nothing if not a compromise.

this has nothing to do with which or what is best, the guy slagged off the locost community and i think i should send the boys round to put him straight, "big lou, are you busy for the next couple of days"

we call him big lou after the louiseville slugger, when you are hit with either the effect is the same.

Page 3 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/