Front Wheel Drive Roadster?

[4-barrel Mike]

Now I get what you said, J.D.

[NathanStewart]

The question was about roadsters, not mod or rear engine mod roadsters. Is it against the rules or not? If it's against the spirit of the rules (a good argument for that could be made), shouldn't that be made explicit?

The spirit has no implication here.  FWD is allowed.  Sounds like a total pain in the ass for little potential gain.  Kinda goes along with doing something just for the sake of being different. 

What I'd like to see is a FWD rear engine mod roadster.   

[Sumner]

I think the large success from copeland has not only been the fwd but the many, many hundreds of pounds of down force the nose of his car makes. I don't see how'd you do that in a roadster. Worth a try if its on your dime. 

Besides the aero down force you have the weight of the engine and drivetrain over the drive tires where it is needed.  You don't have to put weight into the forward part of the car to get the center of gravity ahead of the center of pressure (it is already there).  This means you can build a lighter car that has traction and can accelerate faster with less weight and this becomes big at speeds over 250 where you start to eat up the track so fast,

Sum

[jdincau]

There are several front wheel drive modified roadsters currently running. I do not believe anyone is running a gas/fuel roadster in that configuration. The rules regarding engine setback, overall body length and driver positioning make packaging problematic.

[Stan Back]

Hmmm . . .

Says you can have 25% set-back -- but you don't have to.

Says you can put the driver back to the rear axle (I think) -- but you don't have to.

But pushing that stock (?) grille shell instead of an air ramp might be the problem.

[NathanStewart]

Sum - your point was my point as well as to why copeland has done well. It's the downforce aero in conjunction with the fwd. plus he swore off rwd after his first car (which was rwd) spun and flipped and caught fire.

JimD - there is someone from the east coast running a fwd roadster. There's a pic of it in this years sw program.

Stan - exactly, without the fancy downforce aero nose to help plant the tires fwd doesn't seem to offer much in a regular roadster.

[tortoise]

. . . without the fancy downforce aero nose to help plant the tires fwd doesn't seem to offer much in a regular roadster.

But if Sum's right, (and he is), and somebody makes it work, it would very likely get outlawed, like 4wd was. 

[jl222]

  A regular 4 link which enables different weight transfer wouldn't work, but what about mounting a 4 link from front axle and  a pivot rocker arm at end of normal 4 link bars with bars going forward from top of rocker and compressing front of car?

              JL222

[Richard 2]

On Copeland's car the majority of the front wedge shape is a water tank. lots of weight there.

[sockjohn]

Sum - your point was my point as well as to why copeland has done well. It's the downforce aero in conjunction with the fwd. plus he swore off rwd after his first car (which was rwd) spun and flipped and caught fire.

JimD - there is someone from the east coast running a fwd roadster. There's a pic of it in this years sw program.

Stan - exactly, without the fancy downforce aero nose to help plant the tires fwd doesn't seem to offer much in a regular roadster.

Maybe my memory is fuzzy, but I am fairly certain more than one fwd car has managed to spin at Bonneville. 

Maybe somebody else can confirm or deny, or maybe can find them on youtube and get the back story as to the suspected cause of the spin.

I could see how a fwd roadster would have some advantages, but don't see how it would be enough of an advantage to make the risk of it getting banned after all the work to build it.

[John Burk]

Danny Boy may have gotten into trouble before they added the overrunning clutch . Front wheels pulling is pretty stable . Fronts pushing under deceleration or locked up isn't .

[NathanStewart]

. . . without the fancy downforce aero nose to help plant the tires fwd doesn't seem to offer much in a regular roadster.

But if Sum's right, (and he is), and somebody makes it work, it would very likely get outlawed, like 4wd was. 

It's my understanding that the 4wd roadsters were outlawed because the majority of them handled poorly and were deemed unsafe-er than a regular rwd roadster. I don't believe they were outlawed because they had an unfair advantage.

I won't be holding my breath while somebody attempts to make this work for fear of asphyxia. Fun to think and talk about though.

[Dynoroom]

. . . without the fancy downforce aero nose to help plant the tires fwd doesn't seem to offer much in a regular roadster.

But if Sum's right, (and he is), and somebody makes it work, it would very likely get outlawed, like 4wd was. 

It's my understanding that the 4wd roadsters were outlawed because the majority of them handled poorly and were deemed unsafe-er than a regular rwd roadster. I don't believe they were outlawed because they had an unfair advantage.

I won't be holding my breath while somebody attempts to make this work for fear of asphyxia. Fun to think and talk about though.

If I recall correctly there were three 4 wheel drive roadsters. One crashed the other two set records, one still holds 3 records AA/BFR, AA/BGR, A/BGR set as far back as 1992 with the latest set in 2004. Didn't seem to handle too bad getting those records. But I DO remember some of the comments regarding getting rid of them, like "Henry Ford never built 4 wheel drive roadsters". But of course we all know Henry built tons of blown fuel hemi roadsters......
By the way Nathan, wana know who the quote is from?

[Buickguy3]

   Here's a view of Copland's car.
   Doug 

[Stainless1]

Looks like that car could have some interesting data logs.  Really good looking workmanship... no wonder it is fast... probably will be our first 400 MPH door car