Parting shots re Auto Union

[C M Smith <cmsmith@domain.elided>]

I concede I do not know why Bernd Rosemeyer crashed. In my opinion it had a 
lot to do with the suspension, the torque of the engine, and the rear 
weight bias. Everybody knows he was also "blown off the road" whether due 
to cross winds, driver error or aerodynamic design defects, no one knows. I 
certainly never suggested these factors were not involved.

I do not concede that anyone else does know why he crashed. The only one 
with that kind of information is dead, assuming he was aware of the problem 
before he crashed. To suggest that the observers at the time had a clue is 
absurd. These were the same guys who designed the damned thing. We know 
they didn't know what they were doing. As for the accounts of the day, give 
me a break. Nazi Germany wasn't exactly a free country and the idea that 
anyone would be allowed to publish the true facts in 1930s Germany if they 
pointed to defective design is laughable.

Anyone who attributes the crash to poor aerodynamics or driver error or 
cross winds without also attributing the crash to poor suspension design, 
unwise power levels and less than optimum weight distribution displays 
ignorance of aerodynamics as they pertain to automobile design. To say 
cross winds were the problem is absurd. Last time I checked even pre war GP 
races were circuit races, there's ALWAYS a cross wind somewhere.

A rear engined car (or mid engined in the case under discussion) has an 
inherent aerodynamic problem. The center of gravity is behind the center of 
lateral resistance, aerodynamically speaking. It is difficult to  design a 
front engined car with the same problem, though by no means impossible. 
This makes a rear weight bias car inherently unstable. The faster you go 
the bigger this problem becomes. Think in terms of an arrow flying backwards.

Even modern racing cars have trouble dealing with this problem, though all 
modern open wheelers have minimal side area forward of the cockpit in part 
to address this difficulty. In the 1930s no aerodynamicist was studying car 
aerodynamics scientifically. We had just started to learn about aircraft 
flying at relatively high speeds (for example the laminar flow wing was 
discovered before anyone knew how or why it worked and Mitchell designed 
the aerodynamically sound elliptical plan form Spitfire airfoil 
intuitively, there's no evidence he had the engineering reason for why it 
was correct). Also, we were just learning about how sails work after 1000 s 
of years of empirical design. Only in the late 70's has sailboat 
aerodynamics begun to be properly understood.

Zoooo, to the point of my original post which was to suggest that the Auto 
Union GP cars of the 30's suffered from an inherently bad design. That 
design probably caused Rosemeyer's death. Modern rear engined Porsche road 
cars suffer from similar design defects. That is why the Porsche 911 is a 
highly overrated sports car, objectively reviewed, and should not be as 
popular as it is. It certainly isn't worth the money they charge. Alfa has 
produced far better designs and still does. The Alfa GP cars of the same 
era were superior in design but very much down on power relative to those 
misguided monsters I referred to. This state of affairs was corrected after 
WWII. Auto Union disappeared. Mercedes perfected their front engined design 
and were winning before the awful Le Mans incident which resulted in them 
withdrawing from all forms of racing for many years. Alfa succeeded in 
winning with the 158 and 159 Alfettas. Not until the diminutive and low 
powered Cooper was rear weight bias drivetrain tried again. It was a 
success, followed by rapid development of tires, suspension, and 
aerodynamics to produce the brilliant modern GP cars. The engines funnily 
enough are about as powerful as the engines of the 30s, though more 
powerful engines have been used.

And as a true parting shot: the P3 was definitely a predecessor to the 
Alfetta GP cars but admittedly not a precursor. I usually choose my words 
carefully, though mistakes are made on occasion, naturally.

Cheers all

and let loose those slings and arrows, I love a hot and heavy debate.

Michael


Michael Smith
Calgary, Alberta,Canada
91 Alfa 164L

--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided