Search results

It's even worse on the MX-5 link you posted, as it's even easier to visualise on a double wishbone setup: Now, if you have massive amounts of camber gain/loss built into your suspension, you can get a jacking effect there, but on a strut (and 99.9%) of setups, you'd have more variation from...

^'this is why we don't bother too much with aero on the racers bar flat floor and a barn door of a rear wing optimised to work at low reynolds numbers - the average speeds are only 50-60mph, so you need massive amounts of wing that will work at low speed to make a significant difference.

Wider track often means you miss a lot of the tramlines put into the road by other traffic, especially over speed pillows, etc. Very easy thought experiment - say your bottom wishbone is 10 inches long, and your car sits 6 inches off the floor at ride height. If you then put 10 inch spacers on...

You've got your pivot points wrong there. Try a load of tripe yourself, if you're going to correct someone at least know where you should be applying the forces. Your travel never changes, even if you put metre wide spacers on the car. All you're doing is changing the leverage trying to bend...

It's wrong though, with a Mc strut your pivot against the spring is the bottom balljoint, not the wheel. Spacers will generally reduce roll slightly from the wider track, but it's bugger all in the scheme of things. Not removed the bumpstops have you? Should generally be sitting on them under...

Okay, poly alternative for the small end too - single piece press, so it's a little more robust than the two piece solutions:

Okay, the original plan for the small end using a spherical bearing isn't going to work - too much variation in housing sizes - so back to plan B and polybush it, should have a prototype ready for testing next week.

Better off with intake noise to be honest, most backboxes just give you that droning noise that sounds like a fat man farting down a trombone.

Oh they'll go in with a vice, you just need to make sure you're bearing on the outer lips with a large socket or similar

Prototype fits great in both housings, plenty of preload in both, lips are perfect. It's a little tricky to press in so I'll might make a tweak or two after testing but so far, so good.

There you go, that's that one looking a bit more like: 's one of the V6 ones on the newer shell (never liked this shell tbfh, this car now has a Mini shell sat over it instead) In fact, this one: Inside: A v6 car naked: Then all the racks, diffs, etc, we machined ourselves...

Ah, that one's an old car, we used to build them for customers. That one was our demo car years ago and got sold on pretty quick, There's a Nissan powered one in the background of some of the pictures of the other buggy too if you flick back through the thread.

No, there's no ideal angles, everything is driven by your driveshaft and CV angle limits really, and then what suspension system you intend to package. That's the 5.0L V10 out of one the old M5's,

Ran a few more deflection tests and tweaked things to keep the overall shape similar to a Renault OE bush for radial loads, and thinned the bush down but increased the insert size to keep the axial/twisting forces more in line with the renault design (keeps all the harsh vibrations suppressed...

Less mental? We don't do less mental. Only more mental:

? Guilty!

I need to accomodate them all really, just in case.

Bit 'o' late night rendering whilst working on CAM toolpaths...

I got the one from Oss (thanks!) and a new cheapo ebay one - pressed the bushes out, etc - unfortunately there seems to be a fair variation in size between the two - the holes aren't very round in either and the cheapo is 1mm bigger on the small end and between a 1mm smaller and 1mm bigger on...

You've just got so little room to play with on a hatch for underbody stuff without chopping portions of the shell away or widening things away from the sills. As Kev says, with what you have available for working with for diffuser expansion, etc, you have to be running pretty low, and more...

RC8's are very biased toward mechanical friction rather then chemical interface layers, same with most carbon lorraine pads, they'll scrub discs clean in no time. It's why they're quite hard on discs.

It's not a myth, it really depends on the pads, some of the chemical interface layers don't play nicely with each other - DS2500 for example is notorious for leaving pad build up on top of other pads films, unless the discs are new or scrubbed before fitting.

You can't compare friction graphs between manufacturers, they all use different test sequences, pressures, velocities, etc, to get their figures. Hell, they're only a rough guide between compounds for the same manufacturer too. The fact that all the Hawk graphs drop to zero friction coefficient...

As someone else said, rear bumper cutouts are a waste of time without fitting a flat floor and diffuser - it looks like you're dragging a parachute around, but because there's no flow path through there you actually end up with a stagnant pocket of air in front of it around all the rear wheel...

Dunlop Bluereponse are really comfortable and very quiet - probably the quietest tyre I've used - but they're not as good handling/grip wise as such as the conti's, michelins, etc. They're not bad by any means, just not up there.

Yes please, I'll send it you back when I'm done with it ;)

It's common there if you turn in too early, all the sap from the tree's gets dragged down to that corner so if you're off line the grip falls off sharply.

Eesh, I started at 18psi the last time I went, and that was in November with frost all morning :D Different car mind, but still.

It wasn't 3rd gear that was the problem, he turned in way too early.

Okay, so I just want a couple of those first ones then for measuring, thanks. Anyone want a brand new 1.2/1.4 mount now I've found it out? :D