• Forum membership has its advantages....

A Trophy Truck / Stadium Truck hybrid for the short desert courses?

Steve Marolda

Well-Known Member
After watching the Laughlin race I wonder if it’s time for a different sort of TT.

You don’t need a truck capable of surviving the 1000 just to get around a groomed watered track a few times. I say start stripping those things down.

Dump all the tools, bags, spare parts, spare tires, jack system, big fuel tanks, seat and co-driver and then take your chances. I mean how do you get a flat tire in wet sand?

I think you could easily remove 1000 – 1500 pounds. Imagine how it would run then!
 

mgobaja

Well-Known Member
Limited power vehicles, shedding the weight is critical at short races, but for trucks, they are often set up to work best with a calculated weight being on the truck all the time.
 

Rcamp99

Well-Known Member
If you think Laughlin was groomed and watered you bumped your head.
Ask loftin, Voss, or the countless others who had to change flats why they run a spare.....
 

EMS702

Rescue 1
Wet mainly because of a massive rainstorm. Ask the UTV guys from Friday if it was that wet. And once those 40 inch tires groove in the track it is not so smooth. Saw a few flats this race. Also some Pro Eagles getting used not just for flats.
 

BajaFand

Well-Known Member
I don’t know about every truck but the Mason’s seem to work better being heavy. I know at the SF250 Andy made sure he had both spares and topped off fuel even though he only had 60 miles to the finish from his last pit and it seems it worked out for him.

I think if this is your goal you would be better off with a short course purpose built car over dumping all of the weight from a car designed to have that weight. Between SNORE, MORE, and BITD we have 5 races per year with this format.
 

MTPyle

Well-Known Member
Some of the 6200 and class 1 are super light and big power and they don’t seem to do as well as a heavy TT

Laughlin was far from smooth. On Sunday it was as rough as any course we have raced and we have raced them all.

We ran qualifying light In our 6100 and it didn’t work. Heavy was better for traction and eating up the rough.

I don’t think a short course truck would survive in Laughlin and it for sure would not be that fast.

Mike
 

Steve Marolda

Well-Known Member
You're right about unsprung weight and it's a problem that feeds on itself. The chassis and control arms have to be built strong enough to control the wheels flying up and down inside the fenders. If you wanted a "dual-purpose" truck, you could remove 1000lbs of sprung weight and that would only require a softer shock/spring setup to compensate.
 

Steve Marolda

Well-Known Member
Here's something else to complicate the matter. The TT's and bikes have about the same power to weight ratio but speed and performance differs greatly depending on terrain. I think the weight of the TT is irrelevant. I think they have just hit upon on the best wheel size/wheelbase/wheel track/power ratio for the terrain they are running on. The bikes can go faster over closer, deeper whoops with their shorter wheelbase but on the big rolling whoops the trucks have the advantage.
 

trailready

Well-Known Member
ADVERTISER
There's some nasty stuff buried in the ground there. At RATR half the unlimited field was stopped on the same corner changing right side tires.
 

ocerrr

New Member
I was planning the same idea of a lightweight and smaller trophy truck for sand bashing and jumping.
the point is to maximize suspension travel, biggest possible polar inertia for horizontal stability, not so easy raising up the tail when take off and lightweight.
there are just toooo many possibilities.
1.maybe twin busa engine. the benefit is chain drive you can maximize rear swing arm angle thus max the suspension travel with shortest wheelbase (lightest chassis). One wheel connected to one engine, single wheel landing torque feedback only driving one engine mass, compared to two engines connected together, one tire will driving two engine and another tire, cause the chain to fatigue much faster. By using a chain drive. there can be 30inch+ rear travel from just a very short wheelbase(2-2.3meter).No cv joint is limiting. weight with driver will be about 700KG,400hp
2. Or car-based engine LS7(compact size and I have one) M48.50 from Porsche cayenne (cheapest for 500hp) M159 from Benz SLS(I have one, no sump at all ,super low)transmision wise, I have only one choise: BMW DCT from E92 M3. no overdrive, 7 gears, multiple wet clutch plate, bite pressure is only a tiny bit higher than current engine output, so any terrain feedback from the wheel is going to slip, so protect drivetrain. and it is short. means longer driveshaft, smaller angle, higher life span. I have no problem controlling DCT.
Nissan patrol 260 rear axle is the best I can find. running weight with the driver will be 1400-1600KG. 500-600hp

What do you guys think?
 

ocerrr

New Member
Oh about TT needs to be heavy, I agree. U need much larger sprung mass than unsprung mass to get that separate from the terrain. and a front and rear distribution: engine front spare tire back. this will be large poler inertia, harder for the same amount of force from the front or rear lift or dive one end keeps horizontal.
Above are fundamental behavior for a TT, I think.
 
Top