02 03 Pinewood Derby Stories and Photos from Maximum Velocity 04 05 15 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 31 32 33

Setting the Gap for Performance

One of the most common questions I am asked is, "How much room should
there be between the car body and wheel hub?" My first answer is,
"Well, our Pro-Axle Guide, Alignment tool, and the Gap Gauge in our
speed kit will set the spacing for you." Then the next question is,
"If I don't have those, what should I do?" My response is then, "Try
using a credit card. It will set a gap that works."

Of course, these responses beg the original question of, "How much
room should there be between the car body and wheel hub?" Or better
yet, "What is the optimum gap?" I have heard and read some distinctly
different opinions on this topic. Several people have said that they
set a fairly wide gap in an attempt to minimize the contact between
the wheel hub and car body (and also to simplify making the needed
observations when performing alignment using the Shim Method). On the
other side, Michael Lastufka's DOE (Design of Experiment) tests showed
that best performance is attained with a small gap.

Which is right? I can understand the thought process behind the wider
gap; less opportunity for contact. But, I also recognize that a wider
gap allows the car more "wander room", thus permitting the car to
travel a greater distance during its trip down the track (remember
that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line).


So, I decided to set up an experiment to measure performance versus
the wheel to the hub gap. One car, one set of wheels, and one set of
axles was used throughout the experiment. Outlaw wheels where used to
minimize the effect of guide rail and track surface contact. Krytox
100 was used as the lube to minimize break-in and maximize the
consistency of the runs.

The following gaps were tested. A set of feeler gauges were used to
set the gaps.

- 0.015 (Approximate width of heavy business card)
- 0.025
- 0.035 (Similar to PineCar Alignment Tool, and Pro-Axle Guide)
- 0.045 (Approximate width of a dime (0.049)
- 0.060
- 0.090 (Approximate width of an axle (0.085)
- 0.120 (Approximately 1/8 inch (0.125)

To minimize experimental variance, the axles were inserted, the heads
were marked at the 12 o'clock position, and the axles never removed
from the car. As each gap setting was made the axle was adjusted and
the axle heads were checked to make sure that the mark stayed at the
12 o'clock position.

In order to minimize the effect of lubricant breakdown, the test was
limited to five heats per gap setting (total of 35 heats). On the
first pass, three heats were run per gap, going from the largest gap
to the smallest gap. Then two additional heats were run going from
the smallest gap to the largest gap. The high and low runs per gap
setting were discarded, and the three remaining runs averaged.


As can be seen in Figure 1, the smaller gaps outperformed the larger
gaps. Note that there is no real difference in performance between
the three smallest gap settings (the difference is statistical noise).
However, as the gap increases, performance decreases in an almost
linear fashion.

Figure 1
Wheel to Car Body Gap Test Results

So what is the bottom line? Clearly the gap setting does affect
performance. For best performance, use a small gap setting (such as
provided by the available gap tools). If one of these tools is not
available, then use a credit card (which is typically 0.030 inches).

Read More at: Pinewood Derby Times Volume 7, Issue 9

A feature article is a regular part of the Pinewood Derby Times Newsletter. To subscribe to this free e-newsletter, please visit:

(C)2010, Maximum Velocity, Inc. All rights reserved.
35 36 37 38