Here's the plan . . . we pick a Mater with HUGE P/S cred (someone who has actually worked on and/or driven a P/S) and have him call Del West Engineering - (800) 990-2779. Should be easy enough to get a quote on developing pneumatic systems for three makes of P/S motors. Then we'll have numbers to crunch to see how much money this can save. -
Any volunteers? -
Jim,
Do you think Del West Engineering will be interested in developing a system for P/S motors to run on cars in races in an organization that is ruled by an iron fist, and has THIS language in its rulebook:
"Valvetrain must incorporate conventional automotive coil spring design. Pneumatic-type valvetrains are prohibited in all classes"
Why would they? Who would they sell them to? Nobody's allowed to use them on ANY car in competition.
For what logical reason did NHRA do this?
THAT was supposed to be the purpose of my discussion of this; not whether pneumatic springs are better, or, even cheaper. I think the F-I situation pretty much proves that when metal springs won't do, the air springs are the next step.
I wasn't even contending that they'd work better... just last longer... a LOT longer, I'd guess.
But the question I posed was, "WHY are pneumatic springs outlawed in all classes of NHRA drag racing?"
I still have no idea... Warren Johnson probably knows, though. Maybe he'll tell Alan something at Brainerd that we can chew on in this forum...
I hope so!
PS: I am not sure that filling them with nitrogen instead of simple, compressed air, would be necessary, but, what do I know...
I'm sure that the F-I systems have to maximize all the technology that can ensure that these "air" springs will work for many, many, miles without significant performance degradation, and utilizing an inert gas like nitrogen might help, but for an engine that is under power for less than 8 seconds, plain old compressed air might work just as well.