swhiteh3 Posted February 15, 2005 Share Posted February 15, 2005 Plenty of race cars use centrally mounted fuel cells. It's rather common. Any formula car anywhere generally has the fuel cell behind the driver. Heck, the seat is usually just a thin piece of aluminum which is called a bulkhead, and that puts the drivers skin just inches away from the fuel tank. A bulkhead can be designed to be as effective as you want it to be. Putting the fuel cell in the trunk is an advantage in a sprint-race format car such as all of ours because it puts more weight on the rear axle. The MOI argument is a moot point in our cars, since directional change so far outweighs the tire loading due to MOI. The only cars that really concern themselves with MOI are cars that can already achieve their desired F/R weight distribution, such as WRC and Formula cars. The only other "advantage" to a centrally located fuel tank in a race car is handling neutrality with a variable fuel load. But we're not going through 25 gallons of fuel at a time, and for that reason this is hardly a concern for us. If you want to talk safety, then you need to be objective. Fuel tanks are being moved forward in production cars largely for safety reasons. A fuel tank is much less likely to sustain a leak during a rear impact if it is placed safely within the wheelbase of the car. Hanging it our over the rear axle makes any impact to the rear of the car a potential fire hazard. I'd say that the Fox/SN95 location is better for performance, while the S197 position is better for safety. Of course, since no bolt-in fuel cell is available for S197s yet, that needs to be taken into consideration. I'd say that, from a competition and stability perspective, the S197s should be required to follow the 12" rule. Sure, that's a little competitive disadvantage for them, but they'll have other advantages, like track-width and front geometry. However, since no fuel cell is available that needs to be take into consideration..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilson7 Posted February 15, 2005 Author Share Posted February 15, 2005 Fuel Safe is willing to build a tank but needs a stock tank to look at first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swhiteh3 Posted February 15, 2005 Share Posted February 15, 2005 Mark- The guys at Ford Racing might be willing to supply one for a little while. Want me to coordinate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilson7 Posted February 15, 2005 Author Share Posted February 15, 2005 I'm already working it from another angle as I have a spare one. One important point to consider is that the current rules don't require a fuel cell (although I'd never race without one) so it's not manditory that the cell go in the back. There's also nothing that says the cell can't protrude through the floor into the passenger compartment as long as it's covered. The original Boy Racer was done this way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilson7 Posted March 19, 2005 Author Share Posted March 19, 2005 I'm going to revive this thread again because I was looking at some pictures of the new Ford Boy Racer and realized it doesn't appear to be legal from another prospective. Based on the pictures I found there are two rear down tubes from the main halo which form an "X" and then attach to the shock tower area. Reading 15.6.11 it appears that the REQUIRED bars must extend straight back with no more than 105 degree angle or less than a 70 degree angle with the main hoop when view from the top. The example cage also shows the rear down tubes running almost straight back with the diagonal being optional. This would seem to indicate that if a Boy Racer showed up with a rear "X" with no additional tubes that it wouldn't even pass tech! Now it would appear that with a fuel cell located more than 1 foot from it's original location(15.4.1) and the rear downtubes forming an "X" that the Boy Racer wouldn't be able to come out and play. Comments anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdkline Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 To all, It appears that no one cares if the 05 is legal in AI. It has been over amonth since I have gotten a response from national. I have e-mailed and called looking for answers. The last response I received was on Feb. 15 saying that they would get back to me. Our car is done with the exception of the tin work and that should be finished this week. We are going racing, but I guess not in AI. Barry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizlbits Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 It appears that no one cares if the 05 is legal in AI. It has been over amonth since I have gotten a response from national. I have e-mailed and called looking for answers. The last response I received was on Feb. 15 saying that they would get back to me. Our car is done with the exception of the tin work and that should be finished this week. We are going racing, but I guess not in AI. Barry, I have confirmation that moving the tank behind the axle in the 05 Mustang is legal. The 12" tank rule will be ammended for the 05 Mustang in a interest of safty (allowing fuel cells to be mounted behind the axle). Please try not to distrube the floor pan too much while making the change. I don't know all the questions you asked, but JWL will be posting offical ruling on this and maybe other items soon. I hope this helps. If you have other questions you can direct them at me if you would like, since I think you'll be racing in my region (Midwest) anyway. I would like to know what questions people are asking and the rulings they are getting so I don't get blindsided when everyone shows up at the track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizlbits Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Based on the pictures I found there are two rear down tubes from the main halo which form an "X" and then attach to the shock tower area. Reading 15.6.11 it appears that the REQUIRED bars must extend straight back with no more than 105 degree angle or less than a 70 degree angle with the main hoop when view from the top. The example cage also shows the rear down tubes running almost straight back with the diagonal being optional. This would seem to indicate that if a Boy Racer showed up with a rear "X" with no additional tubes that it wouldn't even pass tech! I am pretty sure if someone had enough money to buy the highly overpriced "Boy Racer" that they could afford to have someone weld two f***in down tubes in it to make it legal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilson7 Posted March 21, 2005 Author Share Posted March 21, 2005 Chris, Thanks for responding! I am in no means trying to cause trouble here but why would we allow someone to violate the moving the gas tank rule more than 12" when we don't even require a fuel cell to begin with? The reasoning behind using the stock fuel tank (I believe) was that at least the stock fuel tank has gone through some form of crash testing and therefore should be ok. Moving a fuel cell to the back of a car to a location where it was never intended could have some pretty severe crash implications. Just curious. If you'd like to discuss this offline let me know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizlbits Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Thanks for responding! I am in no means trying to cause trouble here but why would we allow someone to violate the moving the gas tank rule more than 12" when we don't even require a fuel cell to begin with? The reasoning behind using the stock fuel tank (I believe) was that at least the stock fuel tank has gone through some form of crash testing and therefore should be ok. Moving a fuel cell to the back of a car to a location where it was never intended could have some pretty severe crash implications. Just curious. The directors sided with Barry in that IF he wants to put in a fuel cell, he may. It is pretty much a safty thing, there is no competative advantage to having the cell behind the axle. It is actually a disadvantage, minor, but still. I agree (and so do the other directors) that I wouldn't want a fuel tank right behind me in a race car. I personally would want it as far away as possible. Nothing against you Ford engineers out there, but I trust MY FABRICATION, and fuel cell behind the axle WAY before I trust a Ford engineer to save my butt with a tank in front of the axle. -Sorry guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 there is no competative advantage to having the cell behind the axle. It is actually a disadvantage, minor, but still. I agree (and so do the other directors) that I wouldn't want a fuel tank right behind me in a race car. I personally would want it as far away as possible. Nothing against you Ford engineers out there, but I trust MY FABRICATION, and fuel cell behind the axle WAY before I trust a Ford engineer to save my butt with a tank in front of the axle. -Sorry guys. Chris I don't understand how you can consider moving a large weight (132lbs when full) rearward by 15 inches in a front heavy car. That will certainly mover the CG and WT distribution rearward. How is that not a competitve advantage when compared to an 05 with the fuel cell in the stock location? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizlbits Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Chris I don't understand how you can consider moving a large weight (132lbs when full) rearward by 15 inches in a front heavy car. That will certainly mover the CG and WT distribution rearward. How is that not a competitve advantage when compared to an 05 with the fuel cell in the stock location? Forget I said that. I should have stated: Moving the fuel tank behind the axle is legal on an 05 Mustang. - Period I don't feel like debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 21, 2005 Share Posted March 21, 2005 Forget I said that. I should have stated: Moving the fuel tank behind the axle is legal on an 05 Mustang. - Period I don't feel like debate. Good move, unless the space/time continuum has changed you'd lose that debate..... before you get your panties in a bunch take it easy it's a statement made in humor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilson7 Posted March 21, 2005 Author Share Posted March 21, 2005 Believe it or not I believe that Scott W. provided some actually tech on this subject...... Plenty of race cars use centrally mounted fuel cells. It's rather common. Any formula car anywhere generally has the fuel cell behind the driver. Heck, the seat is usually just a thin piece of aluminum which is called a bulkhead, and that puts the drivers skin just inches away from the fuel tank. A bulkhead can be designed to be as effective as you want it to be. Putting the fuel cell in the trunk is an advantage in a sprint-race format car such as all of ours because it puts more weight on the rear axle. The MOI argument is a moot point in our cars, since directional change so far outweighs the tire loading due to MOI. The only cars that really concern themselves with MOI are cars that can already achieve their desired F/R weight distribution, such as WRC and Formula cars. The only other "advantage" to a centrally located fuel tank in a race car is handling neutrality with a variable fuel load. But we're not going through 25 gallons of fuel at a time, and for that reason this is hardly a concern for us. If you want to talk safety, then you need to be objective. Fuel tanks are being moved forward in production cars largely for safety reasons. A fuel tank is much less likely to sustain a leak during a rear impact if it is placed safely within the wheelbase of the car. Hanging it our over the rear axle makes any impact to the rear of the car a potential fire hazard. I'd say that the Fox/SN95 location is better for performance, while the S197 position is better for safety. Of course, since no bolt-in fuel cell is available for S197s yet, that needs to be taken into consideration. I'd say that, from a competition and stability perspective, the S197s should be required to follow the 12" rule. Sure, that's a little competitive disadvantage for them, but they'll have other advantages, like track-width and front geometry. However, since no fuel cell is available that needs to be take into consideration..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdkline Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 Guys, I am going to apologize for ever adding fuel to this fire. What brought me into AI in the first place was that AIX was going to be extreme. CMC is bone stock,AI is stock with more omph, and AIX is balls out anything goes short of a tube frame(remember that?) If the body is regognizable and the frame rails are still there an AIX car should be anything goes. I do not even agree that the firewall shouldn't be touched in AIX. The exhaust is always dragging on Mustangs, just think what could be done with the exhaust run through the firewall on the right side and outthe rocker ala trans-am. THERE'S TO DAMN MANY RULES! That said ,when the car finally makes it to the track if any AI competitor feels that the car is not legal, I will run unlimited. Goodnight Gracie Barry Kline Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
95CobraR Posted March 22, 2005 Share Posted March 22, 2005 THERE'S TO DAMN MANY RULES! Yes! All you need is an engineer and a lawyer to be confident you are within the rulebook. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 (edited) Forget I said that. I should have stated: Moving the fuel tank behind the axle is legal on an 05 Mustang. - Period Chris, there has been no technical bulletin posted in regards to your above statement. Without that tehcnical bulletin and a revision to the rules is your statement currently true? Any thoughts? respectfully, BPT Edited April 1, 2005 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 (edited) double post, erased. Edited April 1, 2005 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWL Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Brian- This is my fault as I addressed this issue with an S197 owner who asked the question and simply forgot to post this. A Tech Bulletin is now up on the forum addressing this point. If you know of any safety violations, please bring this to the attention of the local tech staff so that they can address the concerns you have. -JWL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilson7 Posted April 12, 2005 Author Share Posted April 12, 2005 05 Mustang wins on it's first outing on the track! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.