[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: Coils of fire

On Mon, 2 Jun 1997, Stephen Williams wrote:

> 	1.  Love this coil-over debate.  Has anyone noticed the subtle
> change in the posts?  Post me privately if you think you have caught
> it--first person to get it right gets a six-pack from almost anywhere in

Hmm, I have mostly ignored this whole debate - maybe I should look into it...

> 	2.  Regarding the use of the word "engineer".  There would be
> nothing to prevent me from answering the phone "Bruce Aukerman, engineer;
> Ph.D; Pope; Brain surgeon; etc."  Where you run into trouble is when you
> hold yourself out as something you are not and seek to earn money doing

Indeed, although I know some people who are more qualified _practically_
than many engineers I know, I still take exception to anyone claiming to
be an engineer who does not go through the schooling required to call
himself by that title.  It just isn't fair to those that have gone through
the time, pain and expense.  It usually shows up on a resume though, so
its not a big deal...  I can see it now at an interviw - "Hmmmm, you claim
to be an engineer, but all I see here is one semester of community
college."   :-)   OTOH, if one has enough practical experience to back up 
a claim of "engineer" then usually, interviews are not really required, 
or at least they take a rather different tone.

> 	3.  On the coil-over debate.  Other than packaging, why is it used
> on some race cars, not on others?  Thinking here of the Riley-Scott
> designed race cars which do not use coil-overs *anymore*.  At one time

I have seen a couple R-S cars up close, and talked to couple 
techs/engineers who worked on them.   R-S takes great pains to make their 
cars simple to work on, and simple to build.   In the real racing world, 
that can mean 5 different shock changes in a test session instead of 
three.   That can make the difference between winning and losing 
sometimes.   Right Eric?

	I remember them telling me that the Chevy Intrepid GTP car was 
designed so that the engine could be pulled without removing the 
transaxle.   It meant that they had to make a small compromise in engine 
placement, leaving enough room ahead of the engine to move it forward off 
the trans input shaft, but it meant that they could R&R an engine in 45 
minutes!   The Nissan/Jaguar teams took at least that amount of time to 
just remove the engine/tranny combo.

> 	Dr. Bruce -- a big fan of Dr. John's [but he ain't no real
> doctor:)]

Dr. G