What's the story with the Nissan Delta Wing at Le Mans?, Strange looking machine Options

[DNHunt]

What could be the advantages and disadvantages? Maybe weight and aero advantages. What would be the front suspension issues?

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads_offsite/www.racintoday.com-598-1339856566.1.jpg)

Dave

[Richard Casto]

I am a fan of the engineering and hard work that went into the concept and in no way was I wishing them any bad luck, but I am absolutely against this being used as an example of how we should be building prototype (or other) race cars in the future.

I think that the broad goal was to be able to use smaller and more fuel efficient engines in the top levels of racing without reducing the size of the spectacle (i.e. speed). If you follow racing at all, there is much talk about "relevancy to production cars" and "green technology" such as hybrids, energy reuse, different fuels, etc. which are all important to auto manufacturers. So the concept with the Deltawing was 1/2 the power, 1/2 the weight, 1/2 the drag but all of the fun. The reduction to three wheels was the big factor on reduction of size (weight and drag). The lower drag allowed a lesser amount of power to generate lap times in the range of heavier and more powerful traditional designs.

But while I think they achieved their goals, I don't think this car is the only or best solution to that problem. Assuming that the problem even exists. The FIA/ACO just released new rules for 2014 and the includes a smaller footprint (including narrower maximum width which decreases frontal area and overall drag) plus I think a lower weight. Additionally they are working on a fuel restriction system with displacement, turbo, etc. being relatively open. In many ways, much like the Group C days of the 1980's. So the 2014 cars will be lighter, smaller and more efficient. Pretty much the same goals of Deltawing, but also being more relevant to road going cars plus keeping tradition alive.

Richard

[ThePaintedMan]

I am a fan of the engineering and hard work that went into the concept and in no way was I wishing them any bad luck, but I am absolutely against this being used as an example of how we should be building prototype (or other) race cars in the future.

I think that the broad goal was to be able to use smaller and more fuel efficient engines in the top levels of racing without reducing the size of the spectacle (i.e. speed). If you follow racing at all, there is much talk about "relevancy to production cars" and "green technology" such as hybrids, energy reuse, different fuels, etc. which are all important to auto manufacturers. So the concept with the Deltawing was 1/2 the power, 1/2 the weight, 1/2 the drag but all of the fun. The reduction to three wheels was the big factor on reduction of size (weight and drag). The lower drag allowed a lesser amount of power to generate lap times in the range of heavier and more powerful traditional designs.

But while I think they achieved their goals, I don't think this car is the only or best solution to that problem. Assuming that the problem even exists. The FIA/ACO just released new rules for 2014 and the includes a smaller footprint (including narrower maximum width which decreases frontal area and overall drag) plus I think a lower weight. Additionally they are working on a fuel restriction system with displacement, turbo, etc. being relatively open. In many ways, much like the Group C days of the 1980's. So the 2014 cars will be lighter, smaller and more efficient. Pretty much the same goals of Deltawing, but also being more relevant to road going cars plus keeping tradition alive.

Richard

Richard, I don't want this to sound like flaming but I respectfully think you missed the point completely. First of all, it DOESN'T have three wheels. Its four. Everyone got it? Good.

The shape of the car should have nothing to do with its relevance to the automotive marketplace. The whole point of the car is to stretch the imagination and truly test manufacturers to see what can be created when we think laterally as opposed to paradoxically. Why do cars look the way they do? Well, because thats whats always "worked". But motorcycles look nothing like cars, yet they aren't necessarily considered irrelevant, correct?

You're right in the sense that a car the shape of the deltawing is largely impractical for a family of four on vacation. But the concept of lowering frontal area to the extreme harkens back to many of the other things born at Le Mans and in sportscar racing which were once considered impractical or even "crazy. Disc brakes, seat belts, fiberglass and carbon fiber construction, fire protection, safer guard rails, HANS devices... the list goes on.

I don't think its the only, or even best solution either. But I don't believe it was intended to be. I think it did exactly what it was intended to do: challenge the status quo and make us think about what is possible.

[Richard Casto]

The reduction to three wheels was the big factor on reduction of size (weight and drag).

One more time ..... it was a 4 wheeled car. Low drag, low weight, and small & efficient engine are all relevant for future "green" considerations.

Oh my... take a breather people. Yes, I know it has four wheels. Sorry for the ongoing typo. I keep thinking "tripod" and end up typing three wheels. Wide/classic rear track, ultra narrow front track. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/beer.gif)

And where did I say that low drag, low weight and small efficient engines are not green/relevant? Isn't that exactly what the 2014 FIA/ACO regulations are saying (but with a classic four wheel configuration)

I am a fan of the engineering and hard work that went into the concept and in no way was I wishing them any bad luck, but I am absolutely against this being used as an example of how we should be building prototype (or other) race cars in the future.

I think that the broad goal was to be able to use smaller and more fuel efficient engines in the top levels of racing without reducing the size of the spectacle (i.e. speed). If you follow racing at all, there is much talk about "relevancy to production cars" and "green technology" such as hybrids, energy reuse, different fuels, etc. which are all important to auto manufacturers. So the concept with the Deltawing was 1/2 the power, 1/2 the weight, 1/2 the drag but all of the fun. The reduction to three wheels was the big factor on reduction of size (weight and drag). The lower drag allowed a lesser amount of power to generate lap times in the range of heavier and more powerful traditional designs.

But while I think they achieved their goals, I don't think this car is the only or best solution to that problem. Assuming that the problem even exists. The FIA/ACO just released new rules for 2014 and the includes a smaller footprint (including narrower maximum width which decreases frontal area and overall drag) plus I think a lower weight. Additionally they are working on a fuel restriction system with displacement, turbo, etc. being relatively open. In many ways, much like the Group C days of the 1980's. So the 2014 cars will be lighter, smaller and more efficient. Pretty much the same goals of Deltawing, but also being more relevant to road going cars plus keeping tradition alive.

Richard

Richard, I don't want this to sound like flaming but I respectfully think you missed the point completely. First of all, it DOESN'T have three wheels. Its four. Everyone got it? Good.

The shape of the car should have nothing to do with its relevance to the automotive marketplace. The whole point of the car is to stretch the imagination and truly test manufacturers to see what can be created when we think laterally as opposed to paradoxically. Why do cars look the way they do? Well, because thats whats always "worked". But motorcycles look nothing like cars, yet they aren't necessarily considered irrelevant, correct?

You're right in the sense that a car the shape of the deltawing is largely impractical for a family of four on vacation. But the concept of lowering frontal area to the extreme harkens back to many of the other things born at Le Mans and in sportscar racing which were once considered impractical or even "crazy. Disc brakes, seat belts, fiberglass and carbon fiber construction, fire protection, safer guard rails, HANS devices... the list goes on.

I don't think its the only, or even best solution either. But I don't believe it was intended to be. I think it did exactly what it was intended to do: challenge the status quo and make us think about what is possible.

See my comment above about 3 vs. 4 wheels. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Actually don’t think I missed the point. I just don’t agree with how they made their point (if that makes sense). I agree that the “shape” of the car doesn’t have as much to do with relevancy. I mean you could go crazy and try to create a version of a Starship Enterprise with wheels and I would say that it wouldn’t have much relevancy, but that is not what we are talking about. It is the “configuration”. Yes, it has four wheels, but it is effectively a three wheeled “tripod” (please don’t yell at me again about using the word “three”). My point is that a configuration like that doesn’t have much relevancy to current or even likely future production cars. I am not sure where the motorcycle comment comes from? You are right, motorcycles are not cars. Some technology goes back and forth (relevant to both), but cars are cars and motorcycles are motorcycles. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

Your other points about lowering frontal area, etc. is absolutely spot on and I agree with 100%. My concerns is that there are a number of people who treat Deltawing as if “it is THE answer”. What I think got tossed out the window for no reason is the traditional four wheel layout that has roughly the same track front and rear. And based upon the 2014 FIA/ACO rules, I would say that the manufactures (who care very much about relevancy and the ability to innovate/differentiate) would agree with me.

I participate in another forum that is 100% motorsports and believe me, the Deltawing has been discussed up and down for MONTHS. People either love it, or absolutely hate it with a vengeance. I feel I fall in between. I can really appreciate the engineering behind it and would even love to see it run in person, but would also hate to see this (tripod configuration) be the direction for the future (even if just for racing). I am pretty progressive on lots of things, but I don’t quite see the need to toss out the classic four wheel configuration that we have today. Yes, the Deltawing is innovative, but is just the wrong solution in my opinion.

Richard

[ThePaintedMan]

Richard,
Okay, now I think I understand where you're going here. And this might even all just be semantics. What I was suggesting with the awful motorcycle analogy is that a motorcyle, its technology, design, etc. is still relevant to transportation. Its just it capitalizes on specific points to achieve a different goal than a "traditional" car. What I see is that the deltawing is displaying similar thinking to this. If i don't need 4 doors to lug kids and groceries around all day, why do I also need a car that has to be shaped in a way that accomodates that? I still think I'm struggling to get my words on paper here, but hopefully you can get my point.

I certainly agree with you that there are a lot of people who think of the Deltawing as the "solution." Solution to what? I don't think there is any one piece of technology that has ever SOLVED any problems outright. However, it is an option, and more options are always a good thing. I don't think it deserves its own class; I heard a lot of people saying that over the past few weeks. Just cause you come up with a new idea doesn't all of a sudden mean that you deserve a class to your own. Hell, if anything, I think that is antithetical, much like a spec class. If the Deltawing is supposed to "prove" anything, shouldn't it have to go head to head with the other, more traditional cars?

If you don't mind me saying, I believe we're using relevant and practical interchangeably here and they're not. The technology and ideas going into the Deltawing are relevant to the current and future automotive arena. What remains to be seen is whether the package and layout they come in is practical.

Good points Richard, I appreciate a discussion like this.

Actually don’t think I missed the point. I just don’t agree with how they made their point (if that makes sense). I agree that the “shape” of the car doesn’t have as much to do with relevancy. I mean you could go crazy and try to create a version of a Starship Enterprise with wheels and I would say that it wouldn’t have much relevancy, but that is not what we are talking about. It is the “configuration”. Yes, it has four wheels, but it is effectively a three wheeled “tripod” (please don’t yell at me again about using the word “three”). My point is that a configuration like that doesn’t have much relevancy to current or even likely future production cars. I am not sure where the motorcycle comment comes from? You are right, motorcycles are not cars. Some technology goes back and forth (relevant to both), but cars are cars and motorcycles are motorcycles. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/confused24.gif)

Your other points about lowering frontal area, etc. is absolutely spot on and I agree with 100%. My concerns is that there are a number of people who treat Deltawing as if “it is THE answer”. What I think got tossed out the window for no reason is the traditional four wheel layout that has roughly the same track front and rear. And based upon the 2014 FIA/ACO rules, I would say that the manufactures (who care very much about relevancy and the ability to innovate/differentiate) would agree with me.

I participate in another forum that is 100% motorsports and believe me, the Deltawing has been discussed up and down for MONTHS. People either love it, or absolutely hate it with a vengeance. I feel I fall in between. I can really appreciate the engineering behind it and would even love to see it run in person, but would also hate to see this (tripod configuration) be the direction for the future (even if just for racing). I am pretty progressive on lots of things, but I don’t quite see the need to toss out the classic four wheel configuration that we have today. Yes, the Deltawing is innovative, but is just the wrong solution in my opinion.

Richard