I think this belongs here!!!

John Bitting

Administrator
Posts
11,951
Reaction
2,560
Whats the problem? I think she looks real good in pink.. Oh you mean the jeep thing, that is really weird but hey thats thinking outside the box. Pretty crazy.
 

hoeker

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,004
Reaction
101
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122477>http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=122477</A>

Some are born great, some achieve greatness,
and some have greatness thrust upon them.
 

motoxscott

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,240
Reaction
299
That's some crazy stuff ! It's funny to watch the rock crawlers try and down playing dezert trucks and vice versa on the internet. What they dont realize is that a lot of different ideas and technologies cross over. What you see on a rock crawler now, you might see on a prerunner down the road and vice versa.

I think I used up my "vice versa" quota today, so I'll leave it at that. It does look like fun if you dont mind beating up your CJ.

-Scott
 

jeff

Moderator
Posts
7,422
Reaction
314
've been out to a few pro rock crawling events and they are a ton of fun. Most of my buddies are into crawling and could give a hoot about the desert race scene. It seems that almost none of the crawler guys care about the desert race technology and that almost none of the desert guys care about crawling technology. Look at what Nelson & Nelson have done with their "Tiny" design and it shows that desert guys (and gals) seem to have an advantage just because dez hedz are more open to new designs and pushing technology. Most of the rock crawler guys I've met are pretty stuck in their ways and it's cool to see that sport get an infusion of fresh thinking. That's the kind of stuff desert racing needs - new and unique thinking. In my lifetime there hasn't been anything nearly that "outside the box" in desert racing. It's always been a bigger / /better / faster version of something that already existed.

Aloha
 

sirhk100

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,797
Reaction
678
Yeah, that's kinda why I posted this... It's a completely new idea to me that doesn't remotely resemble anything else out there. If you read through it they're talking about how that may have revolutionized their sport. Only time will tell.

When will something like that be injected into our arena? We've got a massive amount of knowledge on this board (me probably not included). Do any of you guys have this "crazy" of an idea in your head? Can you afford to try it? Are you trying it? I mean, what, we got "main stream" 2 styles of front ends (a-arm, I-beam) and three in the rear (leaf, 3/4 link, cantelever which isn't practiced often) What else is out there? I don't think we've pushed the limits in ideas yet. We seem to focus all of our efforts on fine tuning the geometery of our current ideas which is great in the meantime but whos gonna blow us outta the water with an idea?

Khris

'92 Ford Exploder (AKA Dezert Limo cause it's loaded)
 

elcaprerunner

Well-Known Member
Posts
951
Reaction
3
IMO I think Nye Frank was pretty much thinking outside of the box when he built Dondell's new Trophy Truck. What are the qualities of most TT's out right now? BIG, heavy, wide, 4-linked, and pretty overkill. Seems to me Nye was trying to avoid all of those things when buidling Dondell's truck. It's light, nimble, not too wide, not too overkill, all independant, and also the suspension is designed to roll with the bumps instead of straight up and down. It is mid engine 4WD with a 2-speed powerglide transmission, and who doesn't love that?? I guess the IRS idea isn't really out of the box, but to me it seems it was engineered in a different way than all other all independant cars and trucks we have seen before. Just my opinion though. I also think the way Baldwin's TT and the big Mac TT were designed was pretty out of the box as well, especially the use of torsion bars all the way around with Baldwin's. Maybe all of those trucks aren't "out of the box" as what everybody means, but they are sure as hell different from anything out there. But yes I do agree that in desert racing there hasn't been anything made that is "out of the box" like everybody is saying, seems like our sport is due for something like that.

DIRT'S FOR RACING, PRERUNNERS ARE FOR GETTING THERE!

H.O.R.E.
Hemet Off-Road Enthusiasts
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,429
Reaction
27
I first got involved with Cam's machine (aka "ChainLink") about 6 months ago when a mutual friend took me up there to see it and see if we could sort out what the geometry needed to be for it to have proper Ackerman.

When he dropped the LF off a ~4 foot step w/o affecting the balance of the machine on the first course Saturday morning and the crowd figured out that it was supposed to do that and it was not broken, they went wild. I'm pretty sure that that moment marked a pivotal change in everyone's thinking about what a crawling type vehicle should be. I'm also sure that 2 years from now no one will remember who won last weekend, but they will remember Cameron's incredible creation.

As one guy on POoR put it: "That guy has no box."

TS

I used swerve around my halucinations, now I drive right thru them.
 

sirhk100

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,797
Reaction
678
Which truck is Dondell's? Yeah the use of Torsions in the TTs is definately different and stands out but, it's not really that different then stuff that's been done in the past.

This guy threw everything out the window that had been done before and went a completely different direction. I woulda loved to see that thing crawl in person. I was a crawler long before my interest in racing. Grew up in Jeeps but ours were "normal". Small lift, 33" tires, locked front and rear, cage, winch, on board air, and a hi-lift will get you anywhere. These rock crawlers now are pretty insane and this thing may have just taken it a step further.

NTSQD,

For my own curiosity, What's the drivetrain consist of? How's the steering work?

Khris


'92 Ford Exploder (AKA Dezert Limo cause it's loaded)
 

robert_encinas

Well-Known Member
Posts
460
Reaction
0
in some respects like the one built for maccacren(?) in 95.
without factory money backing up teams and racers you probably wont see that "out of the box" design
for quite some time.
 

JasonHutter

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,752
Reaction
266
We have been mixing it up with some rock crawlers out here and getting them into racing. Kevin Grove, the owner of AOR in Grand Junction has been one of our sponsors for a couple of years now, and his shop is the reason our truck finishes races now. Here is a couple of pictures of Kevin in his truck doing a little of both. If AOR goes to the Jeep Jamboree in Moab this year, we will have our truck and trailer on display for his booth.

Jason



 

Tom_Willis

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,601
Reaction
546
IMHO the next big change will be in the area of visibility. Not night vision, but some sort of radar-ish device to see in daylight and dusk. If a driver is looking thru a device which offers him a true picture of what's in front of him at all times, and the codriver is watching the GPS to call out the course ahead then the speeds can increase. Think about the last 10 car off the line, he's got the potential to run as fast as the first one, if he can see through the dust raised by the 50 vehicles before him.

I live my life one paycheck at a time
 

FABRICATOR

Well-Known Member
Posts
5,147
Reaction
107
It looks like it could put some camber change to good use. If this technology goes much further they won't need wheels anymore; not even Walker Evans'. Chain drive is really something that the off-road racing crowd is closed minded about.

<font color=orange>The best ideas are the ones that look obvious to the casual observer.</font color=orange>
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,429
Reaction
27
Steering is best described as a rocker arm.
Powertrain is a stock Ford 5.0 SEFI, a C4, a Dana 20, and ONE 9 inch diff.


TS

I used swerve around my halucinations, now I drive right thru them.
 

elcaprerunner

Well-Known Member
Posts
951
Reaction
3
Fabricator- I have always thought about having a chain drive system on a truck, but couldn't think of the best way to make it work. When I think chain drive I think of a swingarm on a quad, if you had a chain drive truck would you design the rear end this way or would want to stay more towards a 4-link design? Seems to me that a chain drive is more efficiant than shaft because it robs you of less power and the wheels would be driven together all of the time like a spool ( correct me if I'm wrong). What do you think?

DIRT'S FOR RACING, PRERUNNERS ARE FOR GETTING THERE!

H.O.R.E.
Hemet Off-Road Enthusiasts<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by elcaprerunner on 03/11/03 11:43 AM (server time).</FONT></P>
 

sirhk100

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,797
Reaction
678
Could run linkage like a quad to utilize shorter shocks for weight and space efficency (sp?)? The gearbox would be interesting to see. Some sort of 90 deg. thing with an output shaft out the side with a sprocket attached. Hmmm, the pictures in my head are very funny thinking about this...

Khris

'92 Ford Exploder (AKA Dezert Limo cause it's loaded)
 

shower

Well-Known Member
Posts
72
Reaction
0
There was a chain drive class 10 at the Lovelock VORRA race last year. He still used two cv's, but used cantilevered-horzontally mounted shocks. At full compression or full droop there was minimal angles on the cv. I'll see if I still have the pictures when I get home.
 

FABRICATOR

Well-Known Member
Posts
5,147
Reaction
107
IMHO, chain drives could be superior to anything being used out there right now. Industry knows that chain drives are very efficient. Roller chain drives are used on countless machines and nearly all racing motorcycles. A lot of road graders and other construction equipment are driven by roller chain. Chain breakage on any properly designed machine is rare. High capacity silent chain drives are even more impressive. These drives can be up to 99 percent efficient, which is far beyond gears. They also cushion shock loads instead of transmitting them. They can run with minimal lubrication, and last almost forever. No, this is not the cheap ones like those used in the 203 and other transfer cases but the expensive ones designed for high power and high speed applications with links that roll on each other instead of sliding. The teeth also roll into place on the sprocket teeth instead of impacting with them. With this there is almost no heat build up and efficiency drops very little with increased load. Gears are just the opposite. More load means more heat and power loss. Silent chain drives are used for many high capacity applications including powerful “Superbike” primary drives, turbine powered Indy cars of years ago, and tractor pulls. If more capacity is needed, within the same profile, they can be made wider and wider, almost without penalty. This is not an option with gears. There are possibilities for off-road racing. Chain drive with a solid rear axle is certainly possible but seems like a contradiction in theories. IRS would seem more efficient and of greater advantage. Separate swing arms each with its own chain could provide a lot of travel. A simple center drive, with or without a differential, could be efficiently and reliably driven with either type of chain. For a given capacity, gear drives are generally 2 to 3 times heavier than a chain drive. At best, ring and pinions waste a lot of power, take up precious room, cost a fortune for off-road racing, and are still unreliable.

<font color=orange>The best ideas are the ones that look obvious to the casual observer.</font color=orange>
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,429
Reaction
27
It could, but doing so would negate other design features deemed more important.

What it really needs are for those tires to be siped. The blocks are really hard and traction was an issue.
Oh, and it could stand to lose some weight. That will happen in Gen II.

TS

I used swerve around my halucinations, now I drive right thru them.
 
Top