Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cbosgd.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!wivax!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!hou5f!hou5a!hou5d!hogpc!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!we13!ihnp4!cbosgd!cad From: cad@cbosgd.UUCP Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Racing, Fiberglass and 55 MPH Message-ID: <67@cbosgd.UUCP> Date: Mon, 27-Jun-83 14:37:04 EDT Article-I.D.: cbosgd.67 Posted: Mon Jun 27 14:37:04 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 30-Jun-83 03:13:39 EDT Organization: Bell Labs, Columbus Lines: 72 The point was raised recently that fiberglass car bodies offer little protection to passengers in an accident. A counter- point was made saying that Formula I and Indy cars have mostly fiberglass bodies and their drivers frequently (but not always) survive tremendously horrific crashes. There is some truth to both views -- but not alot. Fiberglass bodies panels do not offer as much protection as, say steel panels. This is obvious. However, in a accident, most of the force is absorbed in the chassis of the vehicle and the design of this is what is critical. The Corvette, a car known for its fiberglass body, still has a strong steel chassis under that covering and therefore can still absorb (and dish out) damage quite well. Formula I race cars do provide a counter example, but not exactly as mentioned. In Formula I racing, reducing the weight of the vehicle is a critical factor in increasing the speed. The steel chassis (or monocoque) was abandoned long ago as too bulky. A number of things have been used since, namely aluminum, layered fiberglass and most recently, carbon fiber. The last is perhaps the most dramatic advance in automotive materials in recent years. It is considerably lighter than steel but stronger as well. I am not a materials expert so I cannot say exactly what the carbon fiber process entails, but it has been shown to be a considerable improvement on the sturdiest composite fiberglass currently in use. Unfortunately, it is more expensive than fiberglass right now, but perhaps with better production techniques the cost will come down. As to the strength of carbon fiber monocoques, last year's grim examples give proof to the claims of strength. The Ferrari 126C racing car was made of composite fiberglass with aluminum bracing. In several horrific crashes the car was seen to disintegrate quite badly around the driver, especially in the front around the legs of the driver. In Gilles Villeneve's case, when his restraint system failed and he was thrown from the vehicle, carbon fiber would not have saved him. However, when his teammate Didier Pironi crashed a few weeks later at Hockenheim shattering both legs so badly amputation was briefly considered, a stronger monocoque may well have meant the difference between walking away and being carried off close to death. This was dramatically demonstrated at the next Formula I race in Holland when Rene Arnoux slammed head-on into a earthen wall at 170 mph after having a wheel sheer off. He was badly stunned by the impact and bruised an ankle, but shook it off and was walking by day's end. His car, a Renault RE30, has a completely carbon fiber chassis with lightweight fiberglass body panels. (Ironically, Ferrari went on to win the constructors championship despite having one driver killed and another grievously injured.) Automobile racing is a dangerous business but very often useful products are developed. I think the research that has gone into carbon fiber and other strong lightweight materials is one of those benefits that racing pays back to the automotive industry. Perhaps someday all our vehicles will be built of sturdy materials and have workable safety equipment in them so that we need not fear taking to the roads. Until then, buckle up, drive slowly, and get your speed thrills on the track. ---> Chuck A DeGaul <--- P.S. As long as they continue to market vehicles that cannot protect their passengers from injury (and large cars are not the answer, you Caddie owners) then I'm all for 55 mph. I'm for 45 mph for that matter. P.P.S. Some years ago, a big automaker built a new prototype. It was expensive, built to withstand a 50 mph crash, last 30 years, and was pretty much as safe as you could want. They could not see the profit in building a vehicle that might be the only car you'd ever have to own, so they cancelled research on it. Anyone remember this?