Sounds like political BS is keeping this car off of the track, too bad, it looks pretty nice in the pictures.

http://www.speedarena.com/news/publi...cle_7137.shtml

 

An innocent casualty of NASCAR.

 

looks bloated from the side, imo

 

Ah, yes, NA$CAR.
The folks that have done to Road Racing (with the creation of their incredibly ugly Daytona Prototypes....and of course you have to create a series so JC France can race) what they've done to stock car racing with their Car of Tomorrow).
Too bad, I liked this car a lot more than the tube framed GTO-R.

 

Hmmm....

Hope the belt mounting is just a joke to see if anyone is paying attention.

 

Well, I can't see to find a good thick bar at typical harness level.

 

Stunning;

Wouldn't you think with all the 10$ of thou$and$ $pent, and all the info available these days, that they could get the belts right? Simply stunning.

"Yes, we spared no expense in building a state-of-the-art machine." This was before the driver hit a wall at 50mph and broke his back.

 

It's probably not unlike a harness guide bar. Make it out of thinner dia tubing (lighter) to handle the seat belt loads and keep the structural larger diameter tube (the one where the belts are secured) lower in the chassis for a lower cg.

it probably also helps get the bar closer to the back of the seat by keeping the webbing hardware away from the seat. This would also help with how they have the seatback brace mounted so close to the harness bar.

 

I don't think anyone in ALMS wants to run belts any longer than the absolute minimum. If they used something like a 17-7PH alloy the bar could be considerably smaller with equal or greater strength.

 

I think RedlineMan's concern comes from the (apparently incorrect) geometry of the belt passing thru the back of the seat; WAY more than 10-20deg down from horizontal, combined with the positioning of the crossbar directly on the driver's lower spine.
It would appear as though it goes against most accepted (re: Schroth) mounting geometries and instructions.
I'm not sure I'd feel very comfortable with that setup.

Interesting to note the length/angle of the steering column as well.....

 

The harness setup is definitely FUBAR unless there is something we're not seeing in the pic.

Another question, is the fueling port location and inlet angles a hinderence or a good thing?

Bro

 

Hey;

Chris - I think you are giving them too much credit. True we may not see it all, as Bro states. However, I can see nothing under the belt that would be acting to redirect it. It looks like it goes right through the seat holes to me. Even if there were something there, it is not a good setup for other reasons besides.

Long belt paths, insane angle, and loops that are way to loose. I can only hope this is just thrown together, and not complete or final.

Bro - The inlet does look a bit low. I would think it would be hard to hit at that height and angle. Better have a short fueler! It is a handy place to put it though... right in the deck lid. I wonder if - being back there - it would dissengage easier if the driver took off too soon?

Lew - Most people running sedans take the opportunity to set the driver WELL back from the normal position. Weight balance and all. Is that not a FWD car... or AWD? You can see from the rear seat pan and b-pillar that the driver is sitting WELL back.

 

I didn't notice that the first time I looked at the picture, I agree that it looks wrong. Maybe it isn't meant to be the permanent location and someone just put them in incorrectly, the belts are very loosely wrapped around the bar and the car has barely been shaken down. Either way it would be easy enough to fix.

Hopefully this program doesn't just disappear and they come back next year with the new V8's. It must be so frustrating to all of the engineers and techs who work on a project like this only to see it shelved before it ever sees a green flag.