SCG 003 and SCG 003C (formerly known as "P 33")

The 4C does look good, I just think it would have looked a little better with headlights that are a bit more like the concept.

Edit: I'm having strong feelings of deja vu... have we talked about this before? ​

All the best,
Andrew.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Interesting for sure!

 

What happens to the rim when low profile tires find a pot hole?

 

I was wondering that too. I gather carbon fibre is strong but brittle.

lol Well, that's certainly one way of looking at it.

Would you run a slightly taller tyre on a carbon fibre wheel than you would on an alloy one?

All the best,
Andrew.

 

My experience in these matters is extremely limited, but in the MINI clubs one of the things I picked up was that the larger diameter wheels with lower profile tyres generally tended to give sharper handling but that the breakaway characteristics of those tyres were more severe. The smaller diameter wheels were far better at maintaining tyre grip over the rough surfaces of the UK's country roads. However, there is an element of not comparing apples to apples there, because even in cars with identical suspension systems and using the same brand/model of tyre, the larger diameter wheels also had greater width and so the overall grip was always higher anyway. I also acknowledge that your cars will undoubtedly have far more developed suspension systems, so perhaps the give in the tyre isn't required for maintaining stability when cornering on less than ideal surfaces.

Interesting discussion though.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

I guess the roads in New York are in a bit better condition than those of Scotland.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

I agree on brake rotors but am not so sure that is always true with slick tires. Not arguing, but I think the behavior of a radial slick tire carcass may benefit from some degree of sidewall height and certainly can be made to perform when, as in F1, rules prohibit larger diameter rules. Also, when shopping slick competition tires you don't often see bigger than 19", unlike street tires and I wonder if that is in part driven by the need for some sidewall flex to help maximize the contact patch. Also, I think a larger diameter tire requires a heavier wheel (all things being equal) and larger moment of inertia, so I think the overall vehicle dynamics and performance do not necessarily improve indefinitely with bigger diameter wheels.

 

I think you're correct in your assumptions.

 

It is my understanding that part of the reason behind wheel/tire size regs in F1 is to keep the cars from having an unobtainable level of maximum grip. I am open to correction here, as I don't remember where I heard this exactly.

In other words, I have read that it is possible to develop a wheel/tire size combo that would allow more grip than a driver could physically access, as the G load on the driver would be too great.

 

I may have it wrong, but the aim of this project doesn't appear to be a practical car to go to the mall.

Jim is looking for solutions that will contribute to create something that is unsurpassed in areas of handling and stability at speed. If that is the area of focus, other areas of use will inevitably be compromised, which is quite logical.

If you drive your Testarossa on New York roads to a point where the frame gets so tired it breaks, you have a different outlook on things than most. If, from that outlook, you decide that you need to construct a certain car, it will be special, geared towards what is important to you and likely not for everybody. You make compromises that are acceptable to you and live with them. There won't be space for the pram in the boot.

You end up in extreme territory. The rims on a Veyron are discarded after 10.000 or 20.000kms? Cost for a set of new ones is higher than what most spend on buying their entire car. Silly? Perhaps, but the procedure and design serve a purpose. It can at all times be defended, until a rim comes along that is good enough to do away with this practice. At that point, boundaries have been moved and progress is made.

IMO Ferrari dropped tha ball when not further pursuing tha Mille Chile direction. Jim picks up the baton?

Best,

Jack.

 

This is surely true but I suspect the best compromise for current race cars is around the 18-19 inches or whatever is most commonly used today, we still don't get to see racers with 22" and ultra-low tire profiles (25-30) as we're getting used to see in street cars.

Also, I don't think an extreme wheel/tire combo would reach to the grip point where a driver could'n physically stand... you really need very high G's to reach that!

 

Cheers as well. Friday night, nice glass of Pinotage.

Off topic, but yes, there's a page:

http://www.facebook.com/MaseratiKhamsin435?ref=hl

Look in the albums, there are descriptions with every photo. The site is just meant to document what I am doing with her, which is preserving rather than anything else. When I'm done, we'll drive the socks off her!

Best,

Jack.

 

Sure enough a human could endure a 3 or 4 G lateral accelleration. It becomes a different matter when there is a sequence of such occurrences, in either direction. It becomes even more difficult when it comes combined with all the other senses and actions required to drive a car fast around a track.

There is only so much a human brain can reliably compute, and current F1 speeds are close to it.

Best,

Jack.

 

Thanks Jim! Glad you like it.

Best,

Jack.

 

superb news! are you launching both the stradale and corsa version at the same time?

2015 Geneva? if not what's first? also thinking of commissioning a RMR sports coupe in the future via Touring after finishing the DV

must work hard to fund it though!

Looking Forward