Ill try and go in order
screensnot -You are definitely right, seat time is very important with those cars. The courses are designed to break cars (ours did), and I believe that the driver has a lot to do with if the car breaks or not. We did not beat our car in testing nearly as hard as we should have, and it showed. Live and learn. The team now tries to have the car done at least a month beforehand and train drivers (I think they starve them year round as well
)
CPT Crunch - You may have a point, the rear sprocket carrier was kind of a hokey setup, it had a kind of spline/bore setup that kept the sprocket concentric with the axle. The the carrier was pretty narrow, and it may have been wearing out as the endurance race went along. I didn't go back in the fall semester, so I never got a chance to figure it out. Thanks
John Welden - Thank you. I put a pile of work into that project. In my opinion, I would have to say that the top teams have alot of competition experience. You just seem to learn so much from year to year, the good ideas stick and the bad ones go away. In just my short time (3 years) we got much better/smarter when it came to the competition, I can only imagine what 10 or more years would do. I thought we always brought one of the nicest cars to the competition as far as fit/finish/construction, but that only goes so far with the judges.
2lmaker - Is your boy Rob? If so, I had quite a few classes with him. Haven't talked to him in a while, I should.
Cornilsn - I honestly have no idea who won that year. I can remember Oregon was always near the top though. Their FSAE team is pretty quick as well, no? As a machining based program, we did not have the design capabilities as some of the other schools do, our MO was mostly build something that made sense and looked good when it was done. We did draw some of the suspension and driveline parts up, but mostly for the pickup points for the numbers we wanted to hit.