quote:

Originally posted by TOP38:

Ed

All involve did a very nice job!

My only comment that has nothing to do with looks is the placement of the fuel tank! Two reasons, with today power levels front end weight is your friend and in the event of an accident, I want the fuel tank as far away from me as possible. For me, this Trumps (No pun intended, well maybe not!! ) any other possible pro's to locate it behind the driver's seat.

Al, I don't speak for Billy but it's clear his motivation to build this car was for super comp not top dragster and I suspect most every car he builds will be raced in S/C.

quote:

Originally posted by TOP38:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Rietow:

quote:

Originally posted by TOP38:

quote:

Originally posted by WHOMPWHOMP:
And as far as SHOCKS most manufacturers couldn’t keep up with the STUDID ET we are running now in a d a m n bracket race...

This was a good 15 years ago. My buddy had one of his cars and he could set the shocks to full tight and then full loose, no difference. (Racepak shock travel) so the shock was just there for the ride. Got a new AFCO that was built/valved to match for that application and then he could control the rear movement as desired.

Every mono shock deal built out there today likely has a different rear to shock movement ratio, the shock builder needs to know that to valve it correctly. The spring rate used in the single shock will give you an indication of this ratio. My car has a 350lb/in spring but I have seen cars with up to 650! You can't use the same shock in both of these two cases with good results.

BTW Looks are a b-i-t-c-h!

The shock builder needs to know the spring rate. The chassis builder needs to know the ratio in order to recommend a spring for any given power plant/driver (weight) in play.

It's not the distance the shaft moves in and out of the main body that matters, it's the rate of the spring dampened.

Mike, Your kinda right but if you had half a clue you would realize you said the same thing as I did above! The ratio is what determines the spring rate for a given combo! The ratio is also how the forces are applied or better yet, multiplied at the shock from the car running down track.

Oh, and the distance that the shock moves along with rate at which it moves matters!

No sir, I'm 100% correct. The ratio is there so the rear end can have 4 or 5 maybe 6 inches of up and down travel, whatever the case may be in conjunction with a short 4 or 5" stroke damper/shock with 2"-2.5" of shaft showing at ride height. Without the difference in rear end movement to shock travel you'd bottom the shock out. With a single shock, the spring rate is high because your asking one spring to do the work that is normally done by two springs, same for a single shock with a high spring rate is doing the work that is normally done by two shocks. So this is what i'm telling you, the shock builder only needs the spring rate. The spring rate will tell the "shock builder" if one shock is doing the work of two. If so the valving is tighter.

Shock valving has nothing to do with the "shock movement ratio" as you call it. The ratio is for the car builder to determine the length of the damper, according to any given (driver, engine) weight, to not bottom out the shock.

Again the "shock builder" only needs the spring rate info from the car builder or owner, it'll tip him off to whether it's one or two shocks and valving needed.

They try to build these cars so you can't see the dampers, so they end up short stroke. Hence the reason for ratio. Good to see this car has two shocks.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Mike Rietow,

ED I give a credit you did good on pics....

That’s just short of a thank you we’re making progress

quote:

Originally posted by 1320racer:

quote:

Originally posted by TOP38:

Ed

All involve did a very nice job!

My only comment that has nothing to do with looks is the placement of the fuel tank! Two reasons, with today power levels front end weight is your friend and in the event of an accident, I want the fuel tank as far away from me as possible. For me, this Trumps (No pun intended, well maybe not!! ) any other possible pro's to locate it behind the driver's seat.

Al, I don't speak for Billy but it's clear his motivation to build this car was for super comp not top dragster and I suspect most every car he builds will be raced in S/C.

In that case, why use a carbon fiber body?

Cuz their badazzzzz

Sweet ! Super nice car and then ruin it with goodyear lololol

I wonder if Ed still has a little black on his nose from smelling those free tires? He was certainly close enough.

quote:

Originally posted by 1320racer:
That’s just short of a thank you we’re making progress

haha

Last photos...

Ed, nice pics. I’m curious as to the results of the nut pliability test you conducted this weekend with the Torrence clan. The many pictures and undoubtedly many questions you asked should have given a good idea of how pliable their nuts are. We know you used to swing from Kurt Damron’s nuts for years but since he went out of business that has left a void for you that you are looking to fill.

For awhile you were taking about Bill Frederick’s Elite chassis. Have you already conducted a similar nut pliability test on him or is that yet to come? If you’re going to buy a new car you’ll obviously be swinging from the builders nuts for years to come so it must be of utmost importance to pick the most pliable set of nuts to swing from.

That’s funny shyt.

Meanwhile 4300+ views on the way to 4500 about just another pipe rack with a carbon fiber body

Says a broke dyck who has no nuts

I DO like the chrome 1/4 turn fasteners. Lucas Oil Fab Shop and Torrence Racing turning out a nice hotrod!

car number 002 and the first 2021 Undercover is nearly competed and is entered in the upcoming Houston National event.

Is your name on it...

no but maybe #003 which means my current Undercover is for sale turnkey.

Billy was at the D4 race in Houston this past weekend, I wanted to stop and look at it but just never did

T/D OR S/C?

S/C

Goodyear slicks Hmmm