SIR TEST RESULTS

Not that this is relavent to SIR's, but a look at onlinemetals.com doesn't show it in their inventory. Also, the ballpark number I've heard for tungsten block is $75+ per pound, which works out to $22,500 for that 300 lb. sample. If that's cheap, I need to start marketing Jensen parts.

THAT'S HILARIOUS! AND I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE COST OF SHIPPING!
[/b]
Click to expand...


Kinda makes the SIR deal look a little cheaper...... :happy204:
 
Not that this is relavent to SIR's, but a look at onlinemetals.com doesn't show it in their inventory. Also, the ballpark number I've heard for tungsten block is $75+ per pound, which works out to $22,500 for that 300 lb. sample. If that's cheap, I need to start marketing Jensen parts.

THAT'S HILARIOUS! AND I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE COST OF SHIPPING!
[/b]
Click to expand...

From the Tungsten Company (www.tungstenco.com)

Density 1.5x lead, 2.5x steel
Cost 10x lead, 10x steel


I'm sorry, but I don't see a whole lot of sense in using something that costs 10x as much as lead, but will only reduce the volume of the plate by 1/3.
 
Not that this is relavent to SIR's, but a look at onlinemetals.com doesn't show it in their inventory. Also, the ballpark number I've heard for tungsten block is $75+ per pound, which works out to $22,500 for that 300 lb. sample. If that's cheap, I need to start marketing Jensen parts.

THAT'S HILARIOUS! AND I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE COST OF SHIPPING!
[/b]
Click to expand...

If you can afford the Tungsten, you can afford the shipping. Or to hell with the weight for that kind of money go buy a different car that doesn't need weight or a SIR. :D
 
Hmmm, maybe this won't be so cheap. Ron M. got a 100lb block of it for $50 though, but, it was a piece in a shop just lying around. I bought some from our machine shop on campus around about 1998 for $40 and it weighed right at 30lbs - we used it for dead weight in a throwing contraption. Sorry if I've lead anyone astray. Pun intended. Sound like both of us have an investment that has made money!

Maybe Osmium? Tiny bit more dense than tungsten, probably costs more too!

Ron
 
If you can afford the Tungsten, you can afford the shipping. Or to hell with the weight for that kind of money go buy a different car that doesn't need weight or a SIR. :D
[/b]
Click to expand...

Yeah, go get a Jensen. Lightest car in ITS - needs no weight or restrictor. Also needs a lot of work to race, but hey, you won't be part of the entitled crowd with one!
 
Is that like an air bearing?? :D
[/b]
Click to expand...

With Air bearings, you can breath.....

Unobtainium you can't breath......

it's unobtainable :P

I say go with DU.... depleated Uranium.... sure you may glow afterward, but you'll no longer need to light your instruments :lol:

James
 
... I think everyone has to look at the car they are considering building and if it doesn't add up on paper that it may be a contender - then the stupid thing may very well be spending big money to build one and then crying wolf when prod-style comp adjustments are the only thing that will bring it to the podium...

AB
[/b]
Click to expand...

This quote was from a different topic, and would seem to contradict much of what has been said here.

Grafton
 
This quote was from a different topic, and would seem to contradict much of what has been said here.

Grafton [/b]
Click to expand...

Besides the fact that it is out of context and about a different topic... :rolleyes:

...how do you feel it contradicts? I think it actually supports. All of the changes are being done to a 'process'. The process is on paper and has nothing to do with on-track performance. If you look at the specs of a car on paper, and you feel it isn't the best choice, build something else!

The BMW is an exception. It was decided to keep the weight at 2850 and reverse engineer the 'process', hence the SIR (and flat plate from a year ago for that matter).

It would be great if we could just put this to bed asap. We are working on it.

AB
 
jeez dan, you trying to bring this thread back on topic or something? B)
[/b]
Click to expand...

Did I miss something? I thought Jake was suppost to post data from the SIR's they tested? Didn't they postpone posting 1 week due to conflicting data or something like that?
 
(edit Forgot about some testing in the center of the country - was referring to local stuff Jake might have attended like he did the first round). More local stuff is scheduled for the 25th. Then we will look at all the data and recommend the appropriate changes, if any. Then we will lay it all out for you.

Time is critcal, we know.

AB
 
Yup, we did some tesitng this past weekend, and have another test scheduled for this coming Saturday. I haven't forgoten, and will spill soon, but remember, my original post stated I would post whatever the participants were comfortable with me posting. We have gotten a ton of help on this deal from some great guys, and we are getting much closer.

Hang in there.
 
I would post whatever the participants were comfortable with me posting. We have gotten a ton of help on this deal from some great guys, and we are getting much closer.
Hang in there.
[/b]
Click to expand...

It's good that you got some help, we don't want any names! Nobody cares about who, we only care about procedures and realistic data.
I see the Raetech have modified their catalog to include up to 29 mm SIR's. From what I'm hearing I guess 27 mm SIR is useless as tits on a boar hog when installed on a ITS BMW. B)
Hanging
dj
 
Thanks for all your patience. We have more data from Saturday and a con-call Monday night. I hope to have something hashed then. I can't commit to the official notice of the final decision, but it will be ASAP.

AB
 
:D AB,
Who are the actual individuals making the call on the E36 SIR or weight issue? Who's the head of the group? I'm interested in the process you guys/gals use to correct situations. Thanks for your investigation into this matter of the E36.

Thanks Again,
Greg

Thanks for all your patience. We have more data from Saturday and a con-call Monday night. I hope to have something hashed then. I can't commit to the official notice of the final decision, but it will be ASAP.

AB
[/b]
Click to expand...
 
:D AB,
Who are the actual individuals making the call on the E36 SIR or weight issue? Who's the head of the group? I'm interested in the process you guys/gals use to correct situations. Thanks for your investigation into this matter of the E36.

Thanks Again,
Greg


[/b]
Click to expand...

The ITAC will discuss the issue on a con-call with 2 CRB liesons present. The ITAC will make a recommendation and the CRB will make a final decision. I would assume the 3 choices are:

- Keep the 27mm SIR based on tests and data
- Resize the SIR based on tests and data
- Eliminate all SIR/FPR's and reset the E36 weight based on the current new-classification process

AB
 
we have two data points that don't jive with each other. Further testing is scheduled.

AB
[/b]
Click to expand...

lol. yeah, reality didn't jive with your math.

from reading this cluster**** of a thread, you'll be testing multiple sizes now...

but hey, all those folks who told you that this had to be tested first...they were all just biased, right?

ITAC might be the 2nd best thing that ever happened to NASA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top