|
|
|
#1
08-05-2012, 11:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
the best Ferrari chassis until F355
Recently I spend a lot of time with a certain Dino owner.(I was invited to participate in race as his 2nd driver).
We talk a lot, mostly about cars, about Ferraris, and his Dino of course. There was an interesting situation, He told me that Dino was the best Ferrari chassis until F355. Honestly I havent been driving too many Ferraris(He also), so I asked Him why ? and what makes Him so sure in this case ? Dont misunderstand me if You have similar opinion, I dont have strong opinion on this matter, and I dont try to undermine this, I'm just curious how it really was. Of course He told me many interesting stories, about Dinos creation, but to me as an engineer, numerical comparisons speak the best way. Unfortunately, despite this He wasnt able to quote specific data. Because somehow inside I want this to be true, I started my own search on the network. And here we get to another interesting situation ... ... namely, its very difficult to get specific figures about Dino. So I'm wondering, maybe You can help to settle all this somehow. I tried to find cross weight balance, center of gravity height, results of aerodynamic tests, results of serious road tests, etc... Unfortunately, I found not much, but interesting : Weight distribution F/R: ~ 41/59 [%] Lateral acceleration: 0.84 to 0.87 [g] (at 100-ft radius) Suspension flexibility F/R: 0.3/0.3 [mm/kg] Stopping from 60mph: ~ 42.7 m Stopping from 80mph: ~ 83.2 m If You have something please add more, I think it might be an interesting experience. And I think I might be possible to prove this"old man's"words in a scientific way. greetings Damian 
|
|
#2
08-06-2012, 12:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I found on information that the project was based on aerodynamic studies.
Nice but I wonder why I cant find any details. So the next question is do You know about any publication that contains results of these tests ?
|
|
#3
08-06-2012, 02:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Meh, its just one guy's opinion. There was a great many Ferraris produced in the twenty years seperating the two. Did Ferrari "forget" how to design a chassis for 20 years? Was not the 348 chassis nearly identical?
I think what you're hearing is the 355 was the next Ferrari he liked.
|
|
#5
08-07-2012, 07:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
At beginning, I'm very happy that this discussion has begun.
Shark01, well its very hard to map the nature of our discussions. U see I talk to an old inconspicuous man, and I feel that this is more like religion for Him. I feel like I'm talking with Master Yoda, and I like this climate a lot. I feel a internal duty to help this story to be more reliable. I know for sure He would be pleased if I supplied Him with more numeric arguments. The car itself surprised me very positively, in my opinion she doesnt look on such quick car, as it really is. OK acceleration maybe a little disappointing, but when she already disperse ... ... so she has that something, You know the potential (to compete with newer models I mean). And unfortunately I cant agree with You in two issues: 1) Yes Ferrari know how to build a proper car, but this doesnt mean that He always will be able to do this on the same extent. I am an architect by profession, and I assure You that not all of my projects is equally successful. What's more, I think it's normal. 2) And it seems that it isnt the opinion of just one guy ... After your post I pasted on google "Dino the best Ferrari chassis until F355" The results surprised me a little, anyway seems that He isnt alone. In any case, its very difficult to judge all this. I believe it would be very difficult to figure out indisputable criteria. But I'm still looking for these numbers, in hope that I will be able to compare them relatively with other models. And again someware inside I feel that Dino will falls well in this competition. Now Miurasv Thanks, this represents slightly our second reference point. Though still I would prefer the numbers.
|
|
#6
08-07-2012, 08:08 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
You've probably read the following: 348: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_348
355: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_F355 When the 355 was launched the press reaction to it was sensational. Everybody loved it. Reaction to it was like it was a brand new car and that there wasn't that much of a connection to the 348 such was the leap forward in its ability not least of which was the extra power and much was made of the 5 valves per cylnder engine. Clearly much work had been done in all aspects of the car. Last edited by miurasv; 08-07-2012 at 08:20 AM.
|
| Non-Sponsor Ads |
|
|
|
#7
08-07-2012, 08:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
When these cars were first built and designed most car designers didnt know too much about polar moment of inertia (PMI). Most cars of this generation were front engined and had a high PMI ( the point around which your car's mass will rotate when cornering)
The small underpowered Cooper climax cars showed how a nimble rear engined car could outperform much bigger and powerful cars. Ferraris expedition into designing the Dino, its first rear engined car, was therefore a journey into the unkown. I doubt you will get much data but the reason why the dino outscores all other is due to its Low PMI and as a consequence its nimbleness and improves cornering. If you can work out the Centre of gravity, centre of rotation and mass then you have a chance of answering some of your ideas. Quite why the 355 is better is possibly due to better construction of chassis technology then anything else. However not all rear engined cars are good by default, the TR is a classic example of a donkey on wheels and mass being positioned in the wrong place Tony
|
|
#8
08-07-2012, 08:31 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Some good info about the chassis improvements of 355 over 348 here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/news/defa...?storyId=22293
|
|
#9
08-07-2012, 08:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Miurasv
Yes, of course I was there. But thanks, its good idee to collect these data in one place. Only as TonyL writes we need to look deeper for more details. (edit but this F355 BUYING GUIDE is nice find, thanks) Now Tony You're right it is difficult to get accurate data. But I am viewing technical drawings from workshop manual book exactly at the moment. And what is important, it seems to me that I can figure out a lot from them. (roll center for example) Therefore the question is, is the center of gravity height known factor for someone from the local community ? (I hope so) I can use my skills and perform a 3D model, then establish a number of parameters in reverse engineering programs. But to do that I'd needed a decent technical drawings ... We will see, maybe we can achieve something together, it seems that we have a lot of people here (on ferrarichat.com)
|
|
#10
08-07-2012, 09:10 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Sorry, I see your interest is in the Dino and why it has such a good chassis, and not in the 355.
Dino: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dino_(automobile) Carfolio.com info: http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...car/?car=37070 Last edited by miurasv; 08-07-2012 at 09:18 AM.
|
|
#11
08-07-2012, 09:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Murasv is not quite so. Bcause if only F355 is "more successful" than Dino, it is good to know its parameters too. U know to meet the upper limit.
Athough it probably is a large simplification. Anyway, I started with Dino, but of course I'm also interested in F355. I am researching just in reverse order. In part because, for me it began with the Dino. When it comes to performance, they need to be examined quite the same way for all compared chassis. So for me it's just a matter of time, when in my crosshairs will appear F355. I think it's a good idea, if You start from the F355, and I from Dino, we should meet somewhere half way, maybe even faster than searching for the same information. I think so.
|
|
#12
08-07-2012, 09:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
BTW its pity that carfolios aerodynamics fields are empty.
|
| Non-Sponsor Ads |
|
|
|
#13
08-07-2012, 01:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Working out X & Y Centre of Gravity is fairly easy, the Z computation is a little more difficult as you need to know much more info which i dont have.
Perhaps 3d modelling can help I think Autocad has a function that can do this?. X WBCG is around 37.82" from front axle Y WTCG is around 20.47" from outer tyre (driver side) Z ? Tony
|
|
#14
08-07-2012, 01:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank You Tony its a very good start !
Could You please write where did You get this information ? Did You checked cross weight or something like that ? Im asking because my dream is to know the load on each wheel separately. And were these measurements made with the driver ? (if yes what was height and weight of the driver) and of what amount of fuel ? I prefer SolidWorks, but Acad with counterparts plugins can do a lot also.
|
|
#15
08-07-2012, 03:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
damusto
These were calculated on dry weights (2380lbs) with a front rear split of 41% 59% Wheelbase at 92.3" I did, many years ago assist a friend with car racing and got involved in suspension tuning. Got a old book about race car tuning which gives some basics on this. Z can be calculated but i am not very good with resultants and vectors!! We used corner scales to check this. At a guess i would ay the dino COG is above the handbrake area. Tony
|
|
#16
08-08-2012, 11:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OK thanks a lot Tony
(If You have any information to be converted, I gladly take care of it (I am not afraid of vectors)) I started building 3d model, it looks like I really sucked in this whole story. The frame drawings could really facilitate my work. As well as significantly raised the accuracy. Could someone please share their scans?
|
|
#17
08-09-2012, 07:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Not really sure what you are trying to do, constructing a 3d model is all very well but it will only tell you the most basic things unless you go into real data input.
If you measure corner weights it may help you understand more about setting up the chassis. In the old days before computers etc we set up the cars by simple methods and rather crudely too. One of the biggst leaps in chassis tuning is laser alignment, i recently had my dino put on these machines and the transformation was incredible. Any good tyre dealer with this equipment sould be able to help with many factors of setting up the car. Tony
|
|
#18
08-09-2012, 01:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Kevin
|
| Non-Sponsor Ads |
|
|
|
#19
08-09-2012, 01:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
first, I really liked Dino, therefore I will make model and I will be using it as a decoration in my architectural visualizations. (this is plan minimum)
If I will get good starting materials (blueprints etc) And I will concede that the model is sufficiently accurate. I will arrange a series of aerodynamic research like on this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=dYVTXk_y7ic Then as You wrote, a very important thing - real input data. And if I will get the relevant balance weight after introducing the data to my model. I will be able to make many more measurements (Moments of inertia, chassis stiffness, CGH etc - thats my maximum plan) Unfortunately at the moment, drawings that I have are quite rudimentary, and not too accurate. But who knows maybe I ll get something else. PS question related with my frame drawings, is GTS version significantly different from GT ?
|
|
#20
08-09-2012, 04:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Guys I wanted to ask what a story with Dino gearbox.
I read somewhere in web that this is ZF box, designed for, and with, Porsche. If I recall righ it was signed as a ZF S5 18/3. Hoever it seems to me this is nonsense. First is the FIA homologation where we can find only manufacturer and it is Ferrari.(clear black on white) Second here is how ZF 18/3 looks like: http://montreal.break-left.org/wp-co...3_zf_img_8.jpg And in my opinion it doesnt look like Dinos at all. Could someone throw more light on this please ?
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
