Questions for the chassis engineering gurus
 

So I'm watching Sebring and the special Speed had on the other day about the Acura P1 car and they talked about how revolutionary that it has the same size tires front and rear.

So the questions are: Why is it so ground breaking and why wouldn't other builders do it? What are the pros and cons.

It was pretty interesting that they built the entire car in a computer and Brabham was "driving" it last year on a super high-tech simulator. When he took the real car out on the same track, he was only .1 second faster per lap! :eek:

Most race cars have wider wheels at the back as they have more weght in back and need more tire to transmit the power. I guess the acura is more balanced although it's hard to believe that they don't need more tire to transmit the power. The rear wing also puts more load on the rear tires.

First time anyone opined that my Buick Century was "revolutionary."

I think the ACO limits the ultimate rear tire size but front size might be more flexible. Bigger tires in front means bigger body work which means more drag but I guess the engineers figured the increased grip would offset that. Just wondering why other manufacturers haven't done the same.

It's beyond me why they Buick never entered the Century in the ALMS series ;)

After watching the playback of the Sebring race, I think I found Acura's reason. They said they get 10% greater contact patch on the front so what they give up on straight line speed, they'll make it up in the corners. It gives them an almost 50/50 weight balance and they hope to do really well at the tighter street courses that make up a lot of the ALMS circuits.