Having decided to go with a 2inch taller chassis than the book dimensions I am trying to remember how to do trigonometry to re-calculate the angles
and lengths for the front L sections.
I worked it all out, cut the one of the uprights and tried it for size and realised it was wrong as I had forgotten the three dimensional effect when
calculating it all. I can see what needs changing but to save me the bother, has anyone else done the calculations for the lengths and angles which
they are prepared to share with me? Please - I will work them out if need be, but would appreciate anyone else's experience!!
[Edited on 13/5/05 by andyps]
[Edited on 15/5/05 by andyps]
I wrote a PDF which is I posted on my site. It's here if you'd like a look.
<edit>When I did mine I made it lean 1" further to the rear. Took two attempts to get a nice joint.</edit>
[Edited on 14/5/05 by Chris_R]
if you look at a mcsorly 442 it has all answers because its 2" taller but also 4" wider its the way i have gone i also belive it suits the
sierra rear track better as a sandard book chasis is based on a escort
good luck dave
I did look at the McSorley plans for his 442 as I hoped this would solve my problem, but unfortunately the widths are differnet to the book which is
the dimensions I am working to - I want the smaller car, but am going taller to make engine installation easier.
I will probably end up with the trial and error method - run out of time again today unfortunately.
Mr Mk's is 14" deep if memory serves me right and they have no problems fitting allsorts under the bonnet.
Then there is the Caterham which is maybe the lowest of the lot and they do ok.
I am building to the book, but with H tubes 2 inches taller which should make an overall chassis height of slightly under 15 inches - as some MK's need bonnet bulges I hope this should make mine OK to fit the enormous 2.0 DOHC I have without leaving much sticking out of the top!
Doing that changes more than you think.....
You can use simple pythagoras and trig in 3 dimensions, by combining two perpendicular sets of dimensions. Last time i did this was at high school, so
i cant really remember quite how to do it. I'll see if i cant remember in the morning!
David
quote:
Originally posted by flak monkey
You can use simple pythagoras and trig in 3 dimensions, by combining two perpendicular sets of dimensions. Last time i did this was at high school, so i cant really remember quite how to do it. I'll see if i cant remember in the morning!
David
Andy,
Do it like me with round top and bottom and just lean it back!
Should be easy to work out the height using a piece of wood and leaning it back!
Just a thought,
Pat...
Try this.
quote:
Originally posted by Avoneer
Andy,
Do it like me with round top and bottom and just lean it back!
Should be easy to work out the height using a piece of wood and leaning it back!
Just a thought,
Pat...
brain fade as the sun has been out but going taller will change angle of uprights that carry wishbone brackets, making pivots closer together and top
'bones too short......but like i said the sun has been out so who knows what i am talking about
Thanks for that one - a consequence I hadn't considered but if I go ahead with my thoughts for suspension might not be too much of a problem.