Gee, I don't know Chris. It sounds like once you consider a development
program, it would be cheaper to just put in cheap shocks and springs.
Or mountain bike shocks where you just change the spring rate with air
pressure changes.
It would be reallly nice to have some real damping that is different for
bump and rebound too.
We all know that works.
Chuck
From: "Chris Eckles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [F500] Longer Suspension Puck Change Denied
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:59:28 -0400
Hmmmm. A logical reason. . . Now, please note that I wrote the MAC/CRB in
favor of this change. And know nothing of the BOD's reasons.
But. . . Aside from the one style of "puck canister", currently (only?)
used on the. . . NovaKar? Tie rod goes through the center of the puck,
contained in a cylinder, washers (of variable size?) on either side of the
puck control (Somewhat? Differently?) rebound and compression (?). Aside
from this one design, this change will cost other canister design users. .
.
what? A thousand bucks a set all around? That's what it would cost me,
and
my guy works cheap. Consider two or three sets to test different designs?
Don't get me wrong - I am in favor of this. But we ARE talking some
serious
money here. Yes, for those that choose to pursue it. . .
Chris Eckles
Atlanta
>> If there is a logical reason . . . I think we are "all ears". We're
just
asking for an explanation and waiting, waiting, waiting . . . <<
________________________________
FormulaCar Magazine - A Proud Supporter of Formula 500
The Official Publication of Junior Formula Car Racing
Subscribe Today! www.formulacarmag.com or 519-624-2003
_________________________________
_______________________________________________
F500 mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe or change options please visit:
http://f500.org/mailman/listinfo/f500
*** Please, DO NOT send unsubscribe requests to the mailing list! ***
