Anybody know how he is getting away with such an extreme angle and why he did it this way??

Forgot the pics
http://www.trailtoys.com/2003_uroc_farm/images/pict3647.jpg
http://www.trailtoys.com/2003_uroc_farm/images/pict3648.jpg

so he gave up on the IFS?:confused:

Is that the same rig that had IFS/IRS:confused:

Maybe he did it for more ground clearance in the middle:confused:

Originally posted by convertiyota
why he did it this way?? My guess would be clearance under the center.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Yes, same truck from what I gather. He gave up the independent suspension and went with 60s.

WTF!!

tiny did the same thing.

Are they both offset.
maybe he wants the similar benifits as nelson&nelson have with "tiny"

Why? It's not like he doesn't have the resources to do it "right".

Originally posted by 64rovr
tiny did the same thing.

yeah, but Tiny's driveline doesn't look like that. I think The diff's on Tiny's rig are so offset so that they line up with the t/c outputs, ya know, with the mid engine mounted to one side and all.

Originally posted by 64rovr
tiny did the same thing.

Not really. Tiny has the entire drivetrain mounted BACKWARDS and at an angle, so the front output of the Atlas goes to the rear axle, that is why his rear axle is offset. Tiny doesn't have a driveshaft angle like Walker's truck, not sure what is up with that. :confused:

IFS was tried out a while back with Shannon Campbell, and Randy Ellis, I dont think it ever worked as well as solid axle, because as you can see every one is going back to 60's.

Originally posted by Jeepmangled87
IFS was tried out a while back with Shannon Campbell, and Randy Ellis, I dont think it ever worked as well as solid axle, because as you can see every one is going back to 60's.

It is because people have not spent the time or recourses to give it a fair chance and let it evolve. They build it, their geometry doesn't work so they assume the whole idea doesn't work.

Maybe IFS doesn't work but i want to see someone give it a real chance before throwing in the towel

Originally posted by JS-Economos
Why? It's not like he doesn't have the resources to do it "right".

what wrong with the way he did it? I don't see anything, yeah shitty angle but best clearance possible.

I think they have worked it out. That's why they're going back to the solid axle.

IFS/IRS suspensions don't give enough contact pressure side to side when flexing - because they're independant of each other.

Notice there is very little vertical separation.

Keep the compound angles under 42* and that 1410 driveshaft will hold up to that all day long.....especially with it being as light as it is.

No one screams when guys have vertical angles like that.....

Good idea....keep the diffs out of the way, just don't drive it over 25 mph.....

the offset diff gives a pretty good advantage on the so well know diff hangers... since his front output is on the left, they made it the same for both ends... similar to tiny yes, but they did it because it works...

the one issues i personally saw him have with the setup is, as you can see in the pic, teh DL hit's teh upper link... i saw it sitting on teh road going to the site saturday mornign with teh front end of the DL laying in the dirt...

the belly clerance didn't increase, and it looks as if they re-used all teh IFS link mounts... to the point the IFS would bolt back in fairly easily for further R&D, i don't think it's gone for good, just for this year ;)

he also ditched the 2.2 ecotech in favor of a 4.3 :D

He dropped the rear driveline on saturday morning on the way from the competitor parking to the event site not sure if it was related to the extreme angles causing damage

Sorry fellas but that's BLING BLING BOOTIE FAB!!!! at it's best.
There is no way he is going to run that for long! My guess is he did a quick fix to get the rig back to where he could drive it in the next comp before the final mods. are done. If not then I just lost a lot of respect for his shop, especially after they did such a great job on that IFS/IRS system they made...no really I liked it, I think he should have just tweaked it some more and learned how to drive it! I mean that's got to be a completely different driving style to learn.
OH WELL- I guess this just goes to proving live axles are better for comp's:rolleyes:

looks like ground out 1410 to me - that's about a 30 degree angle sideways- we could have got ol walker 41 if he wanted something clean- Jess :D

wow! i thought my compound angle was bad! mine is offset a few inches as well..running a cv at the t-case and standard 1310 at the axle..no problems to date.
greg

I guess by putting the pumpkin by the tire it gets lifted over stuff... rather than being in the center of the axle and the pivot point of articulation. I never thought about that.

Interesting.

Originally posted by BustedRig
Sorry fellas but that's BLING BLING BOOTIE FAB!!!! at it's best.
There is no way he is going to run that for long! My guess is he did a quick fix to get the rig back to where he could drive it in the next comp before the final mods. are done. If not then I just lost a lot of respect for his shop, especially after they did such a great job on that IFS/IRS system they made...no really I liked it, I think he should have just tweaked it some more and learned how to drive it! I mean that's got to be a completely different driving style to learn.
OH WELL- I guess this just goes to proving live axles are better for comp's:rolleyes:

I totally agree,
holy shit that thing could side hill like crazy. if anyone saw him on b3 at the moab arca event you'll know what I mean.

I think it needed tweaked. and maybe some transfer links to do some force on the articulated side. but I think that would fall in the line of adjustable suspension.?? dunno

he was sure asking jon a TON of questions though, I think he really wants to figure out how to win this shit hehehe..

he should just think of all us crawlers trying to baja race LOL

I wish he wouldof built it like I told him - cause I ain't got enough money to do it.

oh yeah F off newbie:flipoff2:

Let it ride

I always like the "hide and watch princible" He could have centered the pumpkin but he has nice brackets welded to the tube instead of the pumpkin, lets see how it works.

Big shock.. he is going back to what works.. A solid axle. As far as the axles.. Its bootie fab to me. He's got the money to build it right. Thats just my opinion.
Scott

Originally posted by jalapeno
I guess by putting the pumpkin by the tire it gets lifted over stuff... rather than being in the center of the axle and the pivot point of articulation. I never thought about that.

Interesting.

Something Land Cruisers have been doing for over 40 years :D:D:D

Yeah and who started the whole 606060606060 theme on here, yeah that's right FJ40 guys getting rid on that shit! and putting in centered diffs with stronger t-cases:flipoff2: I'd love to have an FJ-40 if it weren't for that rear axle, only thing I see they are good for is swapping into Sami's.

From what I have gathered from reading info. He went back to solid axles b/c he didn't have the time to dial everything in with IFS/IRS. He does have everything in his hands for IFS/IRS but It probably needs to be worked a little more in the off season.

Originally posted by NCxj
From what I have gathered from reading info. He went back to solid axles b/c he didn't have the time to dial everything in with IFS/IRS. He does have everything in his hands for IFS/IRS but It probably needs to be worked a little more in the off season.

yep, after talking to his crew at tech inspection that is kinda the same impression I got...they wanted to get something that works and develop the IS later...the only problem I see with how its setup is up travel but a bumpstop can solve that...I bet he did it so he wouldn;t have to redo the entire under carriage of the truck...

Originally posted by jalapeno
I guess by putting the pumpkin by the tire it gets lifted over stuff... rather than being in the center of the axle and the pivot point of articulation. I never thought about that.

Interesting.

Makes great sense. I can't believe the people calling this booty fab don't see it.

The man has plenty of money to build an axle with any pumpkin offset he wants. This was done for a functional reason and it is not booty fab. I'll bet he enjoys that extra 2-3" of clearance in his axle center.

I'm calling BOOTIE FAB too. W.E. is a good driver, that's about it, everyone thinks they are these great high tech fabricators and designers, they are not, they hacked their desert cars and CORR cars together and they really hack their rock crawlers together. They are at the bottom of the list of workmanship and design in the desert race scene. They don't put any design into thier cars, they just start cutting and bending tube, most of the people on the PBB put more into the design and planning of their $10K rock buggy than they put into a $200K trophy truck. Antisquat? antidive? rollaxis? they don't plan are design these, they build it, drives like shit, cut it off, build it again, still drives like shit, cut it off............and so on, Walker's good driving skills can usually compensate for a bad handling car. Please don't copy or imitate what these guys do, you will have to keep changing just like they do.

The reason for the anle is thatthe IFS diff and t case output was in the center. Rather than rebuild the whole rig, they opted to just put a driveshaft in at an angle. I don't see a problem with it if his joints can handle the combined angle.

i like the idea of the offset rear to match the front. makes picking likes alittle easier knowing both pumpkins are inline with eachother. i don't really like the angle the d/shaft is at but as long as it doesn't bind who cares. i wish AA built an atlas with an offset rear output. that would be cool. just my op.

Originally posted by GOAT1
I'm calling BOOTIE FAB too. W.E. is a good driver, that's about it, everyone thinks they are these great high tech fabricators and designers, they are not, they hacked their desert cars and CORR cars together and they really hack their rock crawlers together. They are at the bottom of the list of workmanship and design in the desert race scene. They don't put any design into thier cars, they just start cutting and bending tube, most of the people on the PBB put more into the design and planning of their $10K rock buggy than they put into a $200K trophy truck. Antisquat? antidive? rollaxis? they don't plan are design these, they build it, drives like shit, cut it off, build it again, still drives like shit, cut it off............and so on, Walker's good driving skills can usually compensate for a bad handling car. Please don't copy or imitate what these guys do, you will have to keep changing just like they do.

In regards to the Trophy truck comments...

REALLY? Is this true? I don't believe it. Not saying that I know, but I am a sceptic. I can't imagine anyone with big BIG $$ that would get into a hack job POS and drive at 130MPH (?), maybe 140MPH across 1000 miles with their life in their hands (then win the race at that). Again, I don't know it all but 2+2= what again?

Maybe I am missing the point. Maybe you are speaking of the W.E. team specifically, not "Baja Teams" in general. When I was in Baja last year, I only saw kick ass engineering.:D

Originally posted by JW
Is this true? I don't believe it. Not saying that I know, but I am a sceptic.

Really? A sceptic? As in Sceptic tank:confused: :flipoff2:
He wasn't saying the fab work is hack. He was saying the design going into the suspension geometry was hack.
Me? I think they just wanted to bolt something in there to keep competeing while they work on the IS stuff. I think it's cool to see him doing stuff like this. Who else would have run a DS like that:confused:

I was really looking foreward to seeing that full Independant setup run. I guess it'll be another year. I do understand moving the pumpkins to one side though. Rovers have been doing that for years too and it's nice to know that you can track both pumpkins over the same spot and clear rather than worrying about the front in one place and the rear in another. It seems to me that moving them as far to the side as possible will allow him to clear the most in the middle and use the tire to lift the pumpkin. The problems I see are 1: Weight distribution. He could see interesting performance differences by putting that much weight all on one side of the axles. This probably won't really show up since they're never truely balanced anyway. 2: Torque steer/shaft flex. The axleshafts will wind up differently causing strange handling. Of course, since this thing isn't a road rig and all rock rigs have strange handling, this shouldn't affect him either. So.. Only thing I see happening is a possibility of breaking more short side axleshafts because they can't twist enough to absorb shock loads. We'll see!

-John

Originally posted by JW


In regards to the Trophy truck comments...

REALLY? Is this true? I don't believe it. Not saying that I know, but I am a sceptic. I can't imagine anyone with big BIG $$ that would get into a hack job POS and drive at 130MPH (?), maybe 140MPH across 1000 miles with their life in their hands (then win the race at that). Again, I don't know it all but 2+2= what again?

Maybe I am missing the point. Maybe you are speaking of the W.E. team specifically, not "Baja Teams" in general. When I was in Baja last year, I only saw kick ass engineering.:D

I am not talking about safety, if any thing their trophy trucks were way overbuilt and heavy, a good friend of mine rolled one about eight times and walked away. My point is that they have a name and history in offroad racing, that doesn't mean they are great designers and fabricators it means WE won a few races. The trucks they won most of their races in are far from the trucks that win races today. If you compare the cars WE builds to what Robby, Porter, Mike Smith, or Kudela builds, they don't compare.

As far as what you saw in Baja, it is really "kick ass fabricating" more than it is "kick ass engineering"

Originally posted by TRD
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

thanks once again for your informed opinions!

Originally posted by bigdude


Makes great sense. I can't believe the people calling this booty fab don't see it.

The man has plenty of money to build an axle with any pumpkin offset he wants. This was done for a functional reason and it is not booty fab. I'll bet he enjoys that extra 2-3" of clearance in his axle center.

There is no extra clearance, on flat ground but on rocky stuff it sure helps. But I agree its not booty fab. Its something he wanted to try.

Originally posted by BustedRig
Yeah and who started the whole 606060606060 theme on here, yeah that's right FJ40 guys getting rid on that shit! and putting in centered diffs with stronger t-cases:flipoff2: I'd love to have an FJ-40 if it weren't for that rear axle, only thing I see they are good for is swapping into Sami's. You are a touchy, insecure little girl judging by your sig line.
Cruiser's rule, and sissies who forget their passwords are fawkin newbies! :flipoff2:

Originally posted by GOAT1


I am not talking about safety, if any thing their trophy trucks were way overbuilt and heavy, a good friend of mine rolled one about eight times and walked away. My point is that they have a name and history in offroad racing, that doesn't mean they are great designers and fabricators it means WE won a few races. The trucks they won most of their races in are far from the trucks that win races today. If you compare the cars WE builds to what Robby, Porter, Mike Smith, or Kudela builds, they don't compare.

As far as what you saw in Baja, it is really "kick ass fabricating" more than it is "kick ass engineering"

Umm OK, I don't have much engineering experience under my belt so I can't really deny that. But, I still need to hear more to be convinced that their engineering is poor.

"The trucks they won most of their races in are far from the trucks that win races today."

then

"As far as what you saw in Baja, it is really "kick ass fabricating" more than it is "kick ass engineering""

I understand your first quote to say the trucks of today are something great. Then your second quote says their engineering is not so good. Which is more of you explaining that it is all fabrication skills. I still don't buy it. Again, I am not claiming to know everything but I am giving more "engineering" credit to the guys building the trophy trucks that are running Baja TODAY. The fact is they are engineering the trucks they are building, we simply disagree about what degree of engineering skill they have. I say convince me, what designs are poor and could use great improvements (this is an engineering question). Again, I am not trying to discount you or your knowladge, just giving credit to the guys that are doing this for a living. So please enlighten me.:D

EDIT: I just don't see how a truck can achieve these speeds and not be engineered correctly. If that is the case, why wouldn't the team owners invest, and WIN (or at least raise the bar). We know they have the $$, right?

Originally posted by JW


Umm OK, I don't have much engineering experience under my belt so I can't really deny that. But, I still need to hear more to be convinced that their engineering is poor.

"The trucks they won most of their races in are far from the trucks that win races today."

then

"As far as what you saw in Baja, it is really "kick ass fabricating" more than it is "kick ass engineering""

I understand your first quote to say the trucks of today are something great. Then your second quote says their engineering is not so good. Which is more of you explaining that it is all fabrication skills. I still don't buy it. Again, I am not claiming to know everything but I am giving more "engineering" credit to the guys building the trophy trucks that are running Baja TODAY. The fact is they are engineering the trucks they are building, we simply disagree about what degree of engineering skill they have. I say convince me, what designs are poor and could use great improvements (this is an engineering question). Again, I am not trying to discount you or your knowladge, just giving credit to the guys that are doing this for a living. So please enlighten me.:D

EDIT: I just don't see how a truck can achieve these speeds and not be engineered correctly. If that is the case, why wouldn't the team owners invest, and WIN (or at least raise the bar). We know they have the $$, right?

I guess it comes down to someones definition of what engineered means, very rarely does an actual engineer have any envolvement with the design of these trucks. All of the things we talk about here like roll axis, instant centers, antisquat, antidive, basically any suspension dynamics are not used in the developement of many trophy trucks. It's basically a few fabricators that have built a few trucks before and it's put everything where it fits, or we put this suspension link here last time, so lets put over here this time and see what happens, or we made this out of .120 wall last time and it broke so we'll make it out of .188 wall this time. Not very many people consider suspension frequencies or the chassis polar moment of inertia, does it make sense to hang 80 gallons of fuel off the ass end so the car hands totally different when full or empty of fuel. While most of these trucks seem to be truely amazing, the could be even better if they had a little actual engineering in them. There are few trucks that were actually engineered down to the last nut and bolt they are the Baldwin's and Macpherson's that were designed by Kudela. They are truely spectacular and are no comparison to what most of the field is.

Originally posted by GOAT1


I guess it comes down to someones definition of what engineered means, very rarely does an actual engineer have any envolvement with the design of these trucks. All of the things we talk about here like roll axis, instant centers, antisquat, antidive, basically any suspension dynamics are not used in the developement of many trophy trucks. It's basically a few fabricators that have built a few trucks before and it's put everything where it fits, or we put this suspension link here last time, so lets put over here this time and see what happens, or we made this out of .120 wall last time and it broke so we'll make it out of .188 wall this time. Not very many people consider suspension frequencies or the chassis polar moment of inertia, does it make sense to hang 80 gallons of fuel off the ass end so the car hands totally different when full or empty of fuel. While most of these trucks seem to be truely amazing, the could be even better if they had a little actual engineering in them. There are few trucks that were actually engineered down to the last nut and bolt they are the Baldwin's and Macpherson's that were designed by Kudela. They are truely spectacular and are no comparison to what most of the field is.

I thought most rockcrawlers were built on a similar theory.... Tiny must be the level of the last three names you mentioned of the rockcrawling world

Is Walker's new solid axle rear stearing? My guess from the picture is that it is not. The IS rig was not rear stear.

Originally posted by mtlehman
Is Walker's new solid axle rear stearing? My guess from the picture is that it is not. The IS rig was not rear stear.

no it does not have rear steer...I dont think it could with the pumpkin so far to the driver side in the rear...

Originally posted by BJ On Roids


I thought most rockcrawlers were built on a similar theory.... Tiny must be the level of the last three names you mentioned of the rockcrawling world

Nelson built Tiny, they built some of the top trucks back in the hayday of offroad racing in the the early 90's, I dont know what they have built recently though as far as off road race cars.

Originally posted by GOAT1


I guess it comes down to someones definition of what engineered means, very rarely does an actual engineer have any envolvement with the design of these trucks. All of the things we talk about here like roll axis, instant centers, antisquat, antidive, basically any suspension dynamics are not used in the developement of many trophy trucks. It's basically a few fabricators that have built a few trucks before and it's put everything where it fits, or we put this suspension link here last time, so lets put over here this time and see what happens, or we made this out of .120 wall last time and it broke so we'll make it out of .188 wall this time. Not very many people consider suspension frequencies or the chassis polar moment of inertia, does it make sense to hang 80 gallons of fuel off the ass end so the car hands totally different when full or empty of fuel. While most of these trucks seem to be truely amazing, the could be even better if they had a little actual engineering in them. There are few trucks that were actually engineered down to the last nut and bolt they are the Baldwin's and Macpherson's that were designed by Kudela. They are truely spectacular and are no comparison to what most of the field is.

OK, well I guess I can sorta see your point. Most of the teams are settling with R&D as opposed to true engineering on a PC or drafting table. Neither one of these practices is really great without the other. I am starting to buy it. Thanks for that perspective. ;)

Originally posted by Toygeek
Something Land Cruisers have been doing for over 40 years

Yah and they stole the design from Land Rover. All Rovers have inline offset diffs. It makes a lot of sense off road.

Originally posted by red90rover


Yah and they stole the design from Land Rover. All Rovers have inline offset diffs. It makes a lot of sense off road.

Toyota didnt steel that design from land rover. Landrover and toyote both stole that desigh from Jeep:flipoff2:

OK well jeep stole it from American Bantam:flipoff2:

Originally posted by Gordon
OK well jeep stole it from American Bantam:flipoff2:

I knew some one was going to bring that up :D

OK, maybe I got in here a little late but on the left rear side, when in extreme uptravel, wouldn't the driveshaft contact the upper link?? am I missing something or am i just a fawking n00b.

Q

who cares where the idea came from. These guys have offset the diffs way more than toyota or landrover ever did. Cool ideas though.

Originally posted by Cue-Ball
Wouldn't the driveshaft contact the upper link?? am I missing something or am i just a fawking n00b.The upper link moves upwards too. ;)

If anything, it'd contact when articulated... but I'm sure they tacked the links in place and cycled it to make sure it'd clear before calling it good. Wether you feel they are properly engineered or no, the guys doing the fabricating on the WE rigs clearly know how to bend, notch, and weld with the best of them, and I'm sure they thought of that too. :)

Originally posted by Cue-Ball
OK, maybe I got in here a little late but on the left rear side, when in extreme uptravel, wouldn't the driveshaft contact the upper link?? am I missing something or am i just a fawking n00b.

Q

Nah you didn't show up too late, you just failed to read all of the posts. Namely the one where DSI mentioned back on page 1 this very same thing. :D

Originally posted by GOAT1


I guess it comes down to someones definition of what engineered means, very rarely does an actual engineer have any envolvement with the design of these trucks. All of the things we talk about here like roll axis, instant centers, antisquat, antidive, basically any suspension dynamics are not used in the developement of many trophy trucks.



I read I am a week or two late (to potentially help you learn something to keep you out of embarrassment, because you never know whom you might meet in person someday)?


GOAT1,

I understand your history of off-road racing is limited, so it may surprise you to learn that WE was one of the first driver/racer/fabricators to employ a respected suspension Engineer to assist in the design off-road racers. You may have heard of Herb Adams?

This was before the competition between Class 1 buggies and Class 8 trucks became so close (and so expensive) that SCORE responded by formulating Trophy Truck. I reserve comment that the association of a recognized and successful Engineer and WE improved the product (you would need to ask WE). The involvement of actual Engineers (even famous racing arena Engineers) in off-road racing has been much more common than you may expect. When factory sponsorship funding was offered there were many Engineers ready to exploit the windfall (and raise the bar of competition).

I just though you might be interested to know the recent crop of enthusiast Engineers are not the first to apply their knowledge to off-road Motorsport.

Happy Trails!

Originally posted by Ed A. Stevens




I read I am a week or two late (to potentially help you learn something to keep you out of embarrassment, because you never know whom you might meet in person someday)?


GOAT1,

I understand your history of off-road racing is limited, so it may surprise you to learn that WE was one of the first driver/racer/fabricators to employ a respected suspension Engineer to assist in the design off-road racers. You may have heard of Herb Adams?

This was before the competition between Class 1 buggies and Class 8 trucks became so close (and so expensive) that SCORE responded by formulating Trophy Truck. I reserve comment that the association of a recognized and successful Engineer and WE improved the product (you would need to ask WE). The involvement of actual Engineers (even famous racing arena Engineers) in off-road racing has been much more common than you may expect. When factory sponsorship funding was offered there were many Engineers ready to exploit the windfall (and raise the bar of competition).

I just though you might be interested to know the recent crop of enthusiast Engineers are not the first to apply their knowledge to off-road Motorsport.

Happy Trails!

Yeah there was a few engineers envolved with off-road racing back in the day of factory sponsorship, why not? there was alot of money floating around. Even Carrol Smith did some work in off-road racing. My envolvement in off road racing is limited to the last few years so I was speaking about present developement. I have heard that WE has used some engineers, but when was that? 10 years ago. I know a few people who have worked for them since then that tell quite a different story about their recent design and development.

Some of the best cars where thoroughly designed by engineers: PPI/Ivans TT, Macpherson TT and 7, the three Baldwin TT's and so on, actually none of these trucks are running today except for the occasional Baldwin entry. In my previous post I said "very rarely " are engineers involved with the trucks, not that they never are or were. Go out to a Score or BITD race and you will see maybe 1 or 2 cars that were engineered, that would make it what, 2% of the entire field.

Goat1 I can respect your opinion on the engineering, or possibly the lack thereof in many arenas of motor sports. I have absolutely zero desert racing experience, that said, if what I have seen locally from many of the old S.C.O.R.E teams here is any example, they would support your comments at least to a point. But what I am interested in is the concept that you can properly engineer a rock buggy? The obvious stuff aside (proper construction techniques etc) how could you engineer a rig for the completely void of all normal terrain a suspension/chassie/drive-train could face in a competition? Without the R&D (try it and see) plan of attack, what would an engineer use as a basis for design? WE’s particular recent approach aside, I wonder how many different design buggies one could look at, stare at, plug into a engineers mind, and still end up building a rig that is not competitive, or at the very least a step above the rest? Again I am not a rock crawler, I find the sport as a whole a great past time, I imagine if someone wanted to foolishly bank roll my introduction to competition rock crawling I wouldn’t turn it down, after all I can drive anything in my mind. That said, if I was standing in a shop, with a pile o money and equipment and had to build something….I don’t know if I could begin to fathom a “best” design for the type of terrain seen in competition crawling. To me the most intriguing thing about the buggies I have watched competing, is the out of the box thinking associated with the advancement of the sport by those with new ideas that seldom follow practical mechanical design, at least in some areas. Another thing I have watched is the obvious compliance in design to the drivers style more than anything else.

NoRM

Originally posted by GOAT1

<snip>

Some of the best cars where thoroughly designed by engineers: PPI/Ivans TT, Macpherson TT and 7, the three Baldwin TT's and so on, actually none of these trucks are running today except for the occasional Baldwin entry. In my previous post I said "very rarely " are engineers involved with the trucks, not that they never are or were. Go out to a Score or BITD race and you will see maybe 1 or 2 cars that were engineered, that would make it what, 2% of the entire field.



I agree there was considerable innovation when the factory team and the Baldwin Homes funding was ample, although the Herbst and KenMex funding still exists (and some others) and the competition and designs are still good.

Look a little closer and talk to the drivers and crew on teams (even the buggy class teams) and you might find more Engineer enthusiasts than you believe participate.

Technology and an education in the principles of design are topics that are learned, they do not need constant hands-on attention by an expert with credentials. Just because WE or Bob Gorden do not have a degreed Engineer working on the staff, today (and maybe they do), the lack of a degree does not demand a poorly engineered design as a byproduct of the homeschooled fabricator. Some of these folks learn well, and do not forget design principles that complement their driving style. They also talk to old friends (some of whom may be enthusiast Engineers that are willing to critique the designs).

This implied demand for an inferior design from a non-degeed fabricator may not be your intended point, but this message is what it appears to communicate. Is this your message (that only engineers can design, innovate, and fabricate effectively)?

Get past the fixation of Trophy Trucks (or Evan's spec-class trucks) and you might find there is considerable engineered innovation in the lower profile (although larger participation) off-road race classes. A keen eye can see differences in design and fabrication in the buggy classes as much as in the truck ranks. Much the same can be said of rockcrawling as well, where designing around a factory frame is more of a challenge in engineering innovation than a clean sheet buggy. The results may not look idealized from an engineering standpoint, but the innovation is obvious (and enlightening).

I was trying to save you potential embarassment, if you were to challenge some of the old school racers, that they are ignorant of engineering and ignore engineering trained designers. There are quite a few engineers who race and fabricate, that do not look or talk like a CalTech (or CalPoly) graduate engineer.

Maybe I am off base, I have never won my class in a major off-road race (2nd, but not first).

Happy Trails!

Pinball-

again this depends on your definition of engineering. I am an engineer. I think the definition of good engineering is you look at all the data available and then come up with the simplest design that meets the requirements. My current Boss doesent agree. He thinks you should design in a vaccuum(serriously) He does not want to look at competitive products or how other people solved similar problems. He is what is refered to as an Ivory tower engineer. Those are the guys that give engineers a bad name.

An engineer can look at one of Mike Smiths creations (I use him as an example cause his stuff is winning) and see how to make it weigh half as much and be stronger and easier to fabricate. The hard part is stopping there. Most engineers want to go do something totally over the top and innovative, that will revolutionize everything. I am guilty of this myself to a degree. Then the other thing that the ivory tower engineer doesn't do well is the test and tune part. The typical engineered car gets built overbudget and halfway through the race season. Usually it is more beneficial to get it done, tested and tweaked than build some totally new revolutionary system.

There is a place for engineering in desert racing and in rock crawling, but there is not a place for every engineer. Only those that know when it's time to engineer and when it's time to fabricate or use what works, can be of true benefit to a race team. All the engineers in motorsports that I know fit this criteria or they don't last long. In Industry and on this board it is a whole different story.

Ed-

Goat1 is more invovlved in desert racing than you think. He is pretty much aware of who is doing what on all the major desert race teams. If he want to post his experience I will leave that to him. In addition to being a good engineer he is also one of the best fabricators I know.

You bring up a good point that there are a lot of engineers in the lower/hobby classes. The ones I know of have not done a whole lot of engineering or a whole lot of winning either. I am sure there are better examples out there though.

Is there an "Engineers class" in desert racing, like formula V was to road racing? The Score rules didn't leave a whole lot of room for inovation when I last saw them, I understand they have changed more to wheel travel limits than to a stock pivot points limitations.

OK, I was simply stating the fact that most of the off-road race cars are not actually designed or influenced by a degreed engineer, that's it. That doesnt mean they are unsafe or poorly designed. Mike Smith, Porter, Gordon, Jimco build the best cars out there. Do they employ engineers? no, but they build fast cars using learned basic design principles, nothing wrong with that. Do they need engineers? probably not, they seem to be doing just fine without them, the level of competition and technology is not there yet.

And I have talked to the crews, drivers and fabricators of many of the top teams, this is what I am basing my information on.

Some of the old-school racers (Nye Frank, Nelson, Bob Gordon come to mind) still build the best stuff because the have learned what works and what doesn't. But some of them are just that old school. When you look and the desert racing "engineering" to rock crawling cross over look at Nelson's Tiny, from an engineering and fabricatings stand point Tiny is simply awesome, what WE builds give me a puzzled look on my face. I dont think Nelson is an engineer, but he "gets it".

Originally posted by Gordon

Ed-

Goat1 is more invovlved in desert racing than you think. He is pretty much aware of who is doing what on all the major desert race teams. If he want to post his experience I will leave that to him. In addition to being a good engineer he is also one of the best fabricators I know.


Here, this should give you a pretty good idea.

Geez, talk of bootie fab and shit. You gotta be kidding me. Those of you who talk this shit probably haven't ever met walker's fab guys or seen their work. The shit they do is seccond to none. Their worst weld is better than your best. I love how people talk shit with their heads up their asses

Originally posted by CA_YJ
Geez, talk of bootie fab and shit. You gotta be kidding me. Those of you who talk this shit probably haven't ever met walker's fab guys or seen their work. The shit they do is seccond to none. Their worst weld is better than your best. I love how people talk shit with their heads up their asses

having good welds doesn't change something from being ghetto fab, it is just nice looking ghetto fab

Originally posted by TRD


having good welds doesn't change something from being ghetto fab, it is just nice looking ghetto fab

So you speak from experience right...you've seen walker's rig up close and talked to Randy and the other fab crew....I'd start flaming now, but its not worth my time:flipoff2:

Originally posted by CA_YJ


So you speak from experience right...you've seen walker's rig up close and talked to Randy and the other fab crew....I'd start flaming now, but its not worth my time:flipoff2:

I know how flaming you are :flipoff2:

This applies to everything, not jsut walkers ring. Good welding is imporatant but it does not make a rig the best shit ever, a combination of engineering and good fab does that, not just one or the other.

Yes i have seen walkers rig. I think independant suspension can work but i think his was shitty, i think the whole this was shitty.

When you throw a suspension together without a calculator that's bootie fab, when you have been building competition rigs for over 20 years and you cut your rig up and install a new suspension half way through the season, take it out and win an event that is called adaptation. They have more skills than you will ever have...if you did it is would be bootie fab, when they do it, its called pro fab. Big difference there Alice.

You calling walker's rig bootie fab is a downright joke. His team was building race trucks when you were shitting in your diapers.

Originally posted by TRD


having good welds doesn't change something from being ghetto fab, it is just nice looking ghetto fab

That is true. TRD didn't say he has talked to the teams, he was stating fact!

dude take your tongue outa walkers ass....:flipoff2:

lighten up, he is just saying even professionals make mistakes. he might have been building race tucks but how long have they been building rock crawlers? seems like just about everyone is still pretty new to it. it is pretty easy to make mistakes on something that your new at. or let me guess walkers builders were just born all knowing
:flipoff2:

I just think when you are a newbie to the offroad racing world as 99% of us are compared to that team, for us to judge their fab skills is just stupid

Originally posted by CA_YJ
I just think when you are a newbie to the offroad racing world as 99% of us are compared to that team, for us to judge their fab skills is just stupid

I never questioned their fab skills, i question their design and engineering skills. THEY ARE 2 DIFFERENT THINGS.

Actually you did, but whatever. Its easy to criticize, but you seem like you don't know Randy or his background in racing. Design skills, they built the whole front suspension in a week. I am going to make a few assumptions here.
1. You have not seen Walker's rig with the tires and skins off. The steering alone was a work of art. the links alone had a ton of design work in them. They were made out of .090 wall cromo and didn't bend.

You don't even know the guys, how are you questioning their design skills??

how does knowing them change anything :confused:


until you figure out the difference between design and fab i'm done posting

You design first then you fab...


BTW design doesn't consist of a napkin and crayons.:flipoff2:

Originally posted by CA_YJ
Geez, talk of bootie fab and shit. You gotta be kidding me. Those of you who talk this shit probably haven't ever met walker's fab guys or seen their work. The shit they do is seccond to none. Their worst weld is better than your best. I love how people talk shit with their heads up their asses

I actually know a few of walkers fab guys very well. A good friend of mine and a few others I know worked as a fabricators for Randy and Walker for a few years. He keeps in touch with Randy and always knows what they are up to. HE told me it was hacked before I even saw it and now that we have seen it, I would have to agree with him. I believe the entire car was built in a few weeks. Randy showed him the blueprint of the car, it was a sharpie sketch on the shop floor. He has told me that over the years this is how they build most of their cars, they aren't engineers but have learned how to make things work by trial and error.

Randy and his crew are good fabricators, but they dont take this rock crawling thing as serious as building a race car. Compare the construction of their rock crawlers to their race cars and the difference is very apparent. Every rock crawler they have built has been built quick and dirty, you can tell by the construction and welding, it's pretty sloppy, but more than adequate for this sport. While the fabrication is sloppy compared to top notch off-road race standards, they are still way above the rest of the rock crawling field and any thing you (CA_YJ) could do. They can and have built some pretty nice race cars, but even their best fabricated race cars don't compare to the likes of Mike Smith's crew, Porter, and what Robby Gordon's crew builds, that shit is simply awesome. I think Randy and crew are capable but probably have niether the time or money to spend on those type of projects, they are smart, they spend their time and money making snow mobile shocks and bead lock wheels, that's where the money is.

True they didn't have complete plans for this buggy. I was a bit surprised when Walker said that they built it as they went along but most of us could never do that. They have built so many trucks in the past they know where to start and what to expect. That rig may have been built fast, but it was not thrown together. It had plenty of though in it.

http://www.thejeepsite.com/blings/images/DSCN6506.jpg