SX in action
 

got to hold and feel/prod it today
looks good, it is easy to access diffs etc, some clever bits on it, lots of adjustments etc
looked vary smooth and stable on the track today at worksop

How did Mossy and Whitey do with It?

both made the a
si took a round win and qualified 2nd
not sure where in final they came to busy trying to keep mine on all fours

i'll post the link to a video of it as soon is its uploaded ;)

here it is hope the quality ok ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84DLIh64ETs

Good video, shame it was of my worst run of the day lol! You should of posted my 4th round instead, much better.

Was really pleased with the car. Changed it abit throughout the day and every round it got better. Was pleased to be lapping with Rich Lowe as his car always looks quick there.

Good day, and prob Worksop's best track.

Si

The quality of the video on you tube doesnt do it justice it was hard to keep up with it as you may have noticed :lol:

It's harder in my experience to get a car working on multi surface than the dirt tracks I've raced on, given the varying grip levels and bumps.

The Worksop surface is actually very similar to a low grip dirt track, it's just as valid an environment as a dirt track to develop a car :)

I like the track setup and it looks like a fun environment to race in, but i do agree that it will need to be run on an actual dirt track for it to be in its intended surface and race conditions, for more judgement to be done on the vehicle.

just as well we have so many dirt tracks in the uk.
it makes designing building and running the car so awsome on all our dirt tracks,
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

trekkker

I have to agree with Bormac here, we really need to see this car on a dirt track if you're going to convince people outside the UK that it's going to work well.

IMO UK tracks are great for testing a cars strength due to the walls, wooden jumps etc, but you can't use indoor or even grass tracks to test a cars handling ability.

On grass tracks you have very high traction, which allows you to make damper and spring adjustments to improve bump absorbtion without causing too many issues with overall grip levels. This is not the case on rutted-out, low-grip dirt tracks where running a very soft damper and spring setup will improve handling but at the expense of driveability - the car will roll around too much and generate enough downwards pressure on the tyres to get grip.

If you watch that video, you can see that accelerating out of most of the corners is easy, as regardless of grip, the surface is still very smooth. On even a mildly bumpy dirt track the wheels would be constantly skipping over undulations in the surface, which effects grip and handling, but just as importantly, increases stress on the drivetrain when compared to a smooth surface.

As someone who used to run both Schumacher 2 and 4wds in the late 90's - I can tell you that on my (Australia) local tracks, their handling and driveability was not as good as cars like the XX4 for example. This was most noteable on the more "euro designed" cars such as the Cat EC and the original Fireblade.

I'm not knocking the car, I'm seriously looking at getting one, I'd just like to know that Scumacher have tested it on enough surfaces to ensure that it is an "all-round" car, not like some of their past releases.

I was just thinking that most us cars are imperial and most cars from japan are metric but wht is the cat sx? are we imperial still?

A

:lol:

Ash it will be metric, :lol:

Yup - it'll be metric. Most UK design is nowadays, although you will still find some imperial stuff about. Wouldn't be surprised if the diff balls are still imperial size..

All engineering nowadays is metric, Its only in the US that some engineering is imperial, but this is the country that has the world series that is only open to North america:lol:

we started going metric in 1971, year of decimlaisation Ash.... some things are still done in Imperial due to the sheer cost of changing, like distance and speed, but for the most we work in metric, especially engineering.

This is a common misconception, it might have been true years ago when loamy dirt tracks were the norm but when I raced out in Florida late last year once the groove started to appear the grip was higher than a typical grass track. When the groove was fully up it was higher grip than anything I've ever experienced, the Worksop surface is very similar in grip levels to a well groomed dirt track before it grooves.

Re the bumps:- Worksop is a smooth surface, but thats because it's indoors. A grass track getts rutted after it's had a couple of rounds on it at a big meeting, there might not be many jumps usually but it's certainly not glass smooth ;)

Also the Fireblade didn't handle well on our tracks either :p :lol:

And when the grass disappears it gets very slippy:lol:

I want to get one but i'm not sure if i want to pay the asking price. I just checked a uk website (www.e-land.org) and it's really expensive. It costs 349 Uk pounds which is 703 US dollars.

nice vid, seems to go pretty ok there. but did i spot the wing break off at the end there though? shame Schumacher haven't gone with a different design on the wing mount.

I agree that a blue-groove dirt track would offer similar grip levels to grass but there are still a lot of dirt tracks around the world that aren't close to being blue groove.

If you think about the 05 worlds track in Collegno - that's what I'm talking about - very rough and slippery with sharp jagged ruts through the corners.

These style tracks are the biggest test for a buggy's drivetrain in terms of durability and reliability and are also a good test of a cars handling ability - as often the car is sliding into sharp ruts.

I think at somepoint Schumacher need to (if they haven't already) test the car on a rough dirt track - just to be sure that the car does work everywhere ;)

I could have done with the crash back wing mount system on my B44 at worksop on sunday I managed to split a wing mount and split the wing going over that tabletop :)

Remember though these are close production "prototypes" so if they find that the wing mounts are an issue I am sure they could probably re-design them before release :)

I think the only breakage on the two cars that I saw was when Matt managed to rip the front wishbone off before a qualifying run but hey thats could have happened with any car as it was quite a big off :) Watching both cars though they looked as good if not better than anything on the track which simons run in round 4 proved.

Looking forward to seeing a few more in action :thumbsup:

But it was still lapped after a minute or so :lol::thumbsup:

No wonder after my out lap!

Was as quick as Rich after i moved over for him. Regarding the wing mounts, that the first time we have damaged them but to be fair, i couldt of landed any harder on them.

Errr... nope. I'll actually stick up for CRashley on this one. :o

Just got back from a day of design work on a new aircraft not due in service for another 5 yrs. Largest european aircraft manufacturer and we still work in imperial. (though we do seem to mix & match the units, depending on whether we're trying to show something as being a high or low number :lol:)

P.S. DCM, i know you're speaking to ash but that attempt at spelling is awful! :p

Anyways, back to the car with looks only a mother could love... :D

my spelling has ben terrible this week, but I do have all the kids off school for easter lol.

I know aircraft run a mix of imperial and metric, more it is in maintenance, the fact that some fastenners are no longer available in imperial, but, in saying that, any repair drawing I worked from was in metric, nothing in imperial except maybe material thickness.

Bloody rivets, repair drawings with both imperial and metric on!! God how I love not working on aircraft anymore.

Well, I've worked on the fastest passenger jet until recently and that was bloody imperial. Don't ask me what relative sizes the nuts and bolts are as my mind wokrks in metric (most were 11/32 that I needed to use, with a few 3/8ths thrown in for good measure). Still, I suppose you can't complain about it as its 40 years young and still going.

Any guesses as to what it is? :eh?:

Here's me thinking you Ozzys raced around kangaroo's, and here's me not racing on grass tracks with wooden jumps ... (tongue in cheek :lol:)

We have a lot of very different tracks in the UK, some smooth, some bumpy, some with flowing & rolling shapes and jumps, and some with obstacle after obstacle. Then there are surfaces - some tracks are completely high grip, some have a big variety.

Id be confident in any car going well on rutted dirt or blue groove if it is a good allrounder on English outdoor tracks. I will reserve judgement until I have seen it go on other tracks than Worksop, as lets be honest - Simon & Matt are quick drivers and they'd be in the top 10 at Worksop with a Cat XLS even today.

Chris

Concorde?

Well, when flying it was the fastest, but now it's been retired, leaving The Queen Of The Skies.

Anyone else for a guess?

Cessna Citation X....... easy. *edit* - I'm confused. Concorde roughly that age, and was retired just 2-4 years ago I assume now, but fastest civilian aircraft for the last 14 years is the Citation X (M 0.82, damn efficient too. I would love to get the aerofoil co-ordinates for that plane!). If you mean fastest commercial, I am guessing a 747 as that's only a few mph off the Citation X IIRC?????

As for Gaz_Stanton, what? Largest aircraft manufacturer in Europe by far is EADS, so I am assuming you are talking about the XWB. It's being designed in metric, as with all Airbus. What part of the aircraft are you talking about?

Of course sub systems for the aircraft which are sub contracted out (which there are an awful lot of) are designed to that companies standard. But Airbus design in metric using the Airbus system to define components, which is a mix between BS and ISO/DIN. I am really interested to know what was designed in imperial :S

I f'kin hate imperial. 98% of the worlds countries use Metric, why can't the states just wake up. Change sucks, I know, but it's soooooo much better. I also love the way the Americans refer to it as English units too.

XWB yep. Although the CAD monkeys mostly use metric the aircraft is a mix of both. Eg some std pipework and equipment is only available in imperial sizes and with the $ price we're putting a lot more workpackages out to dollar zones. Plus a lot of the engineers have been around the various aerospace companies where imperial is the norm so often work in old money. You just have to be fluent in both.

Indeed, knowing both is a pain though. I'm glad aerodynamics is my thing. Mainly working with coefficients, no units, hurray! :D

How's the XWB looking?

It's those pesky Koalas you have to worry about and the digeredoo's used for track edging ;) :lol:

Ahem, well done Glypo for noticing my deliberate mistake (about fastest passenger jet). Didn't realise the 747 was so quick. The Queen Of The Skies is the majestic (and still flying the originals from 1966-68) VC10.

Still, you live and learn :D

:thumbsup: :lol:
Got any pictures of the tracks you race at, or link to pictures? Not for the purpose of this thread, I am interested in general really.

First one round the Emu and back:lol::thumbsup:


http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im.../BN15273_8.jpg